Hi Blogspot friends! :)
Today there is some good news and bad news. The bad news is that I am closing down the TruthForFree Blogspot page. I just haven't had time to keep it updated along with all the other sites I manage (not to mention my full time job).
The good news is that TruthForFree.com has a new re-designed website that now features its very own WordPress Blog that everyone can subscribe to!!! You can subscribe to posts also if you like (feel free to use the form shown at the top of this page or visit the new site directly). So, the blog lives on, only now it will be updated more frequently and will function within the main website directly.
I will leave this page up for awhile to direct folks to the new Blog. Please point your browsers to:
http://www.truthforfree.com
Friday, June 4, 2010
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Starting A Church
Article copied exactly as printed from source:
http://www.theexaminer.org/volume1/number2/v1n2a12.htm
 Without controversy, the most controversial subject in the Bible is "the church." This is what most of the fussing is about both between "us" and the denominationalists, and between us and us. In one way or another everybody argues over the Church; not Christ, but the Church. But the longer I linger around Church-anity the more I come to realize that much of this controversy is based on incorrect or unclear concepts. As I perceive the situation, there are two basic "Church" concepts, loose in the land. First, is the popular concept, the one traditionally accepted by the majority of people. It is the notion that "the Church" of the Bible is a religious institution, albeit a divine one. Whether you talk to Catholics, Methodists, Mormons, Baptists, "Christians only" in the Christian Church, or "the only Christians" in the Church of Christ, this is their mental picture of "the Church." When they use the word "Church" they are referring to the religious organization with which they are affiliated. Naturally they believe their Church is holy, a divine institution set up or established by Almighty God Himself, therefore one to which all Christians should belong. Then there is a not-so popular concept of the church, that revealed in the New Testament and slowly being recognized by more and more thoughtful readers. According to this view, the "church" is a New Testament term describing people, particularly God's people. By definition "ecclesia" (the Greek word found where the English word Church appears in most versions) denotes a "called out" group of people; in the case of the "church" of Christ it refers to the called out followers of Jesus of Nazareth. These two views are diverse. On one side, the "Church" is always thought of as if it were an entity separate and apart from the Christians who belong to it, preach it, promote it, support it, love it, etc. On the other hand, the "church" is simply thought of as a people related to one another in Christ. The church is the body of Christ which we (if we are Christians) ARE! (1 Cor. 12:27). My purpose here is not to explore all the differences between these two concepts. This would require a book I do not have time to write. All I want to do is make us aware that the traditional concept has some frightful holes in it. In an effort to make this clear, I want to ask you to do a little "supposing" with me. Briefly, I want us to suppose that we are about to "start a Church." For the purposes at hand, "starting a Church" is a good place to start doing some real thinking on this subject. When we speak of "starting a Church" what do we mean, ordinarily? We do not mean what a young couple means when they speak of "starting a family." We understand that a family is started when little babies are born. But a Church is "started" when newborn babes in Christ are born. No, no! Starting a Church in a community and starting the family of God are two entirely different processes. For, according to popular understanding and usage, a large number of God's children can live in a place yet "the Church" not be there at all. In fact, it is God's born again children who supposedly are obligated to get together and start the Church! So (and we all understand the terminology perfectly well) when we today speak of "starting a Church," what we mean is that the Christians who live in an area should get together and form a religious organization that bears the official title of "Church." Keep in mind that the "Church" that these Christians will "form" is not the church they already are, but is one that they will somehow create. This "Church" is perceived to be an institution that has to be "set up" before it can exist; an organization that must be organized before it can operate. It is not a matter of disciples living together in a community, or even assembling together in the name of the Lord, for that matter. In our day it takes MORE than this to make a bona fida "Church." In order for a Church "as such" to exist it is simply imperative - someone has to "start it." Right here is the first surprise. Believe it or not, the New Testament does not anywhere, in any way, discuss the procedure or practice of "starting a Church." This seems a little odd, since we talk about it all the time. If there is not a Church of Christ in a certain city we say "someone should go there and start one." If a lot of Christians live on the north side of town we say "that would be a good place to start a Church." If a new church shows up in town we are immediately curious to find out "who started it." While such talk is familiar to us it is foreign to the Scriptures. The nearest thing in the New Testament I can find to this kind of terminology is in Acts 16:5 where it says, "So were the churches established in the Faith, and increased in number daily." Notice, however, that this passage does not speak of "establishing churches;" it speaks only of establishing (strengthening) them in the faith. Can you think off-hand (or on-hand either) of ANY instruction in the New Testament on the proper program for starting a Church? Can you think of any historical instance where Christians went through the process of "starting" one? Before you answer, remember, preaching the gospel in a community and baptizing those who believe is NOT the same thing as "starting a Church" there. A Church, according to the popular concept, is something that those who have heard and obeyed the gospel will need to "start" later on, as soon as they can. And this involves more than just meeting together, or assembling, the first time. As we shall see, again according to traditional teaching, the Christians in a community can assemble with one another for an extended period of time without "starting a Church." Now if none of the problems are showing up in your mind yet, then maybe it is time for us to start supposing. Let us suppose that I, my wife, and my son John, you, your wife and your son John, along with two other couples have just been transferred to a strange town where the gospel has never been preached. We are all baptized believers, brothers and sisters in the family of God, members of the body of Christ. We are all Christians. We have all arrived in town. But according to the popular concept of what a Church is, the "Church of the Lord" has not arrived yet. For as yet no local "Church" has been "set up." Therefore at this time the community is thought still to be un-Churched. Alas, there is "no Church anywhere in town." So you and I and our Christian associates need to get together and discuss this situation. Suppose we do this. We get together and talk about how important the Church is, how every community needs one, how if we Christians don't start one perhaps no one ever will. We discuss the feasibility of starting a Church, the probability of success, the possibility of failure, etc. Now for some reason we do not discuss this situation in terms of "starting a family of God" in our new-found town; nor do we talk about the need to "start the body of Christ" there. We speak only in terms of "starting a Church." Strangely enough, we somehow understand that God's family and Christ's body are already represented in our community; the town just does not have "the Lord's Church" yet. And it will NEVER have "the Lord's Church," we think, unless someone like us starts one. So we feel the need to "get a Church started right away." Please bear in mind that in our discussion we are contemplating much more than the practice of assembling together with one another as fellow Christians. As a matter of fact, the little group is assembled at the very moment of the discussion, as we will be later on. But starting to assemble does not start a Church. Whether or not to "start a Church" is the very item under consideration. We are already assembling, you see, but we may or may not "start a Church." In any event, after lengthy discussion we agree. Yes, that's what we should do, "Let's start a Church." But right off there are several questions that come up, in my mind at least. Let me put them in yours. First, WHAT is this that we are about to start? From what I know, all the spiritual relationships mentioned in the New Testament already exist between us. We are already members of Christ, we are already members of the body of Christ, we are already members one of another. We are already holy brethren, part of the same brotherhood of believers. We are already meeting with one another in Jesus' name. So what, exactly, are we getting ready to start? What is going to exist once we get through? According to the contemporary way of looking at this matter, the thing that will exist once we complete our plans is a divine, blood-bought INSTITUTION that Jesus died for! Evidently THIS is what we think we are about to produce. But wait just a minute. I thought Jesus built the Church. But Jesus is not building this one. We - you and I and our Christian friends - are going to bring this one into being. We are the ones, literally, who will cause it to exist as in independent entity. We are arranging for its formation and formalization. Yes, Jesus Christ is responsible for us and our faith, and in this sense we are the church that He built; but "the local institution" is something that WE are going to erect. Undoubtedly this is a different sort of Church. We are already members of the "church" that Jesus built, are we not? But we are not yet members of the Church we are about to build. It does not exist yet. Once it exists, after we "start it," we will, I presume, be members of TWO Churches. This is all very interesting. The second question is, WHY are we going to set up this institution later to be christened a "Church?" Did Jesus tell us to do this? Did he tell anyone to do such a thing? In the Great Commission He told the apostles to go into all the world and "make disciples" of all nations. Is this enough? Or do we need to go into all the world and "form Churches" also? Remember, according to popular preaching, we can "make disciples" all day long in a community yet "the Church" (as such) will NEVER BE THERE until someone decides to start one. Let me repeat the question. Why should you and I undertake to do this? The answer usually given is that you and I as Christians cannot please God outside a local religious organization; we cannot serve God without a local Church "through which" to function. Although, admittedly, we Christians are indeed "the church" in some sense, we are not the Church in the required way to do what God wants done. But, let us suppose a little further. Suppose after talking it over we Christians decide to postpone for a month or two the decision to "start a Church." (We may get transferred again in a few weeks and would not want to start a Church and then go off and leave it unattended.) Are we now "Church-less?" Are we helpless, unable to serve the Lord? What is it the Lord would have us do in the community where we have moved that we, as disciples and because we are disciples, cannot do in the meantime, before we get around to forming an official Church? Can we do good to all men? Yes. Can we let our little light shine? Yes. Can we teach our new neighbors the gospel? Yes. Can we baptize them? Yes. Can we continue to glorify God in word and deed? Yes. Can we gather together in my living room (or yours) in the name of the Lord? Yes. Can we have a prayer together? Yes. Can we sing hymns together? Yes. Can we put some money together to help a brother who has come down with a case of bad luck? Yes. We can, I suppose, do all these things without the benefit of the yet-to-be-formed Church. On the Lord's Day can we remember the Lord's death by eating bread and drinking fruit of the vine? Uh, oh. Here we have hit a stump. "Wait a minute," someone says, "we cannot commune apart from a Church." This is "one of the main reasons" the Church needs to be established here - so we can eat the Lord's Supper. Think about this seriously. Did the first Christians on Pentecost, somewhere between Acts 2:41 and 2:42, have to stop and start a local Church before they could "continue in the apostle's doctrine" by breaking bread? Is this what we really believe? Are we actually prepared to say that Christians who find themselves outside the precincts of a religious institution cannot remember the Lord's death on the Lord's Day? What about those Christians who, like Paul much of his life, spend their life on the run? Do they take "the Church" with them wherever they go? Do they quickly form a new one at each stop? Or do they forget about communion altogether? Also, consider this. Jesus gave his disciples two great "ordinances": baptism and the Lord's Supper. Why is it that we Christians, before we "start a Church" and therefore in the absence of one, can practice baptism to our heart's content, but without the presence of a "local Church" we cannot practice communion, not even once? Why is one "ordinance" different from the other? Does "the local Church" have custody of communion but not baptism? All this is very strange to me. So I ask again, why are we required to "start a Church" in the first place? What is it (make a list) that we as fellow disciples of Christ cannot do in the absence of one? But all the above questions are easy compared to the last one. Suppose that after a month or two we have another meeting and decide to go through with the proposal to start a Church. Now the question is, HOW do we go about doing this? Some may think this is easy. If we want to start a scriptural Church all we have to do is appoint some elders, ordain some deacons and hire a preacher. Presto! The organization is now organized, the "Church" is now formed; it now exists. But once more let us do some supposing. Suppose there are none in our group "qualified" to be Elders, none willing to serve as Deacons and no one wants to be the Minister? What then? We still want to start a Church. But how are we going to do it? Some kind of action must be taken that will make a "Church" among us where heretofore there has been no "Church." Here is the intriguing part. Everybody who is anybody agrees that a legitimate institutional Church (one recognized by the Lord himself as being "HIS divine institution" authorized to do "the work of the Church") can indeed exist and operate as the approved "functional entity" WITHOUT having a staff of Elders and Deacons. This is known as being "scripturally unorganized" as opposed to being "scripturally organized" or "unscripturally organized." Let us look at this supposed situation very, very carefully. It is not an unheard of situation at all. Here we are a group of Christians intent on starting a Church, yet in the beginning we are not going to have ANY biblical officers; no Elders or Deacons. We are not going to have an Eldership or Deaconhood. Then HOW, pray tell, are we going to "form" this Church-entity? We have decided to start the proposed Church, but how shall we proceed? This is the question. Suppose we have one more meeting, say on Wednesday night, and decide that Sunday is the day. We will start "the Church" this coming Lord's Day. This means two things: there will be no Church in town till Sunday, but there will be one after that. Fine. But the question lingers. Come Sunday, how, oh how, are we going to pull off this feat? Sunday arrives and we all show up at the place where we have agreed to meet. There is no Church there, unless one has miraculously materialized since Wednesday night when we had our last planning session. So here we are, a group of disciples gathered together, but as yet no "Church" is present. We have a brief prayer together; but still there is no "Church" among us. We sing a few hymns together; but we don't have a "Church" yet. We have a Bible lesson; still no "Church." Now we are in trouble. We are getting perilously close to Lord's Supper time, and without the presence of "the Church" we dare not, as mere disciples, commune. Somehow we need to bring "the Church" into existence before time to commune. Can it be done? How shall we accomplish this? Does some brother at some point in the proceedings merely arise and ANNOUNCE the "Church" into being? Does someone make the pronouncement, "NOW there is a divine institution in this good town!" So a moment ago there was just a group of Christians present; now we have a scriptural Church! Hallelujah! A moment ago we, the Lord's disciples, were assembled here, but without a "Church." We are all still present, but now a "Church" is here also, one that we are henceforth obligated to sustain and support. In the beginning God said "let there be light" and there was. Is this how it is done? Is the Church of the Lord (in an institutional sense) merely SPOKEN into existence? This must be how it is done. For in our supposed situation "the Church" certainly was not "organized" into existence, because it was not given ANY kind of organized structure. The Church we have started evidently exists only because someone has SAID it exists. Can just anybody announce one of these "divine institutions" into existence; or does it require special credentials and/or authorization? We need to know all this in case we really want to "start a Church" some day. To come to the bottom of all this supposing, let me ask one more question. Once we have finished the task of starting this new Church (however we managed to accomplish it), what do we have? It looks to me like we have a very, very, very mysterious "Church." We are told these days that the disciples in a community do not in and of themselves constitute the Lord's church. The Church is something ELSE, besides them, something they form or create. What is this entity? Of what does it consist? In the case described above, where there are no Elders, Deacons, or Preachers, the Church seems to exist only in our minds. It is an organization, but without any officers or agents; it is an institution, but without any institutional framework; it is a corporate body, but without any corporate structure. What we have is a group of disciples who are meeting together, PLUS something else. Because we have "started a Church" everyone seems to think there is also hovering around the premises a divine (functional) entity, complete with a set of assigned duties or works that the aforementioned disciples could not in its absence perform. Again I ask, of what does this mythical "Church" consist? Apparently we have successfully completed our mission of "starting a Church." But, what do we have that we did not have before we started it? Before we started our Church all we had was a group of Christians, brothers and sisters in the family of God. Now that we have established a "Church" all we have is the same group of Christians. Of WHAT, then, does this mysterious "local Church" consist? It does not consist solely of the Christians; we had them before we started it. It does not consist of Church officers; we don't have any, scriptural or otherwise. It does not consist of a church building; we do not have one of these yet. This Church does not appear to consist of anything you can lay your hand or mind on. Frankly, I am at a loss. I fear that "the Church" we have started may be a figment of our imagination. To some readers perhaps all of these questions will seem too silly to ask. To me they serve to raise some serious doubts about the traditional concept, the institutional Church. In fact, the whole Church system as it is presently preached and practiced generates confusion and controversy. This itself ought to raise our eyebrows if not our curiosity. Is it just possible, do you think, that we may have a few chinks in our "Church" concept? Frankly, I believe it is time for all Christians to look again at the ecclesia of the New Testament, and see it in a more scriptural and simple light. Hopefully the pages of this journal will encourage efforts in this direction. |
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Pondering Easter and Beyond
by David Yeubanks
The Easter Holiday has just come and gone as I write this article and I was thinking about how many of us are so familiar with tradition that sometimes the obvious just flies right over head. Hang with me here for a moment because I'm gonna cover a couple of thoughts leading up to my main point.
Everyone is familiar with "Good Friday" and "Easter Sunday" (or if you're really an enlightened Christian you'll refer to this day as "Resurrection Sunday"). Most Christians are at least vaguely familiar with the fact that Easter hasn't always been a "Christian" holiday but has pagan origins. We'll leave that detail aside for now as it doesn't have a lot to do with the perspective I am going to share here (and, besides, that topic has already been handled more adequately on other websites and books than I am even able to touch). Let's start with a couple familiar passages of Scripture where Jesus lets his followers know some details about his death and resurrection as it will occur:
Matthew 12:40 - "For as Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, so I, the Son of Man, will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights."
Matthew 20:18-19 - "We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life!"
This event (specifically noting the time table) is reiterated by the apostles in the New Testament after His death and resurrection (and is a significant detail that rests at the heart of the Gospel message):
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 - For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance : that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.
I am reminded of an old song by the Christian artist, Carman, where he sings, "It may seem like Friday night, but Sunday's on the way." The point of the song is well-taken, but the logicality of this statement (when compared with, not just Scripture, but plain ol' common sense) is obviously out of whack, don't you think? Let's see... Friday night to Sunday morning (the traditional "Easter" doctrine)... If I use the available fingers on either hand (and the widely popular 24 hour time system that most of us are familiar with), I come up with a sum total of a day and a half! I must have added something wrong... Let me take a quick look at my calendar instead.... Hmmm... It says "Good Friday" is on, well, Friday... and Easter is on... look at that... Sunday morning. Ok, at best, that's two days (and two nights), but the Scripture says THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS, not a day and a half... not two days... not two days and half of a third. Clearly, something doesn't add up. Either Jesus did not die on "Good Friday" and He did not rise from the dead on "Easter Sunday" or the Bible is telling us lies. I know I'll be called crazy for going against tradition here, but I'm gonna go with the Bible on this one... and that seems to plainly suggest that (if we assume He arose on Sunday morning) Jesus could not have died on Friday nor could He have risen on Sunday (that is, if we assume He was buried in the tomb on Friday). SO WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ANYWAY?
To answer this, I am first going to share a brief article by an unknown author, which is just brilliantly stated. I will resume my commentary following this article... Enjoy!
Matthew, in the twelfth chapter of his Gospel and the fortieth verse, reports Jesus as saying: "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale ("Sea monster," R. V. margin), so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." According to the commonly accepted tradition of the church Jesus was crucified on Friday, dying at 3 P.M., or somewhere between 3 P.M. and sundown, and was raised from the dead very early in the morning of the following Sunday. Many readers of the Bible are puzzled to know how the interval between late Friday afternoon and early Sunday morning can be figured out to be three days and three nights. It seems rather to be two nights, one day, and a very small portion of another day.
The solution of this apparent difficulty proposed by many commentators is that "a day and a night" is simply another way of saying "a day," and that the ancient Jews reckoned a fraction of a day as a whole day, so they say there was a part of Friday (a very small part), or a day and a night; all of Saturday, another day, or a day and a night; part of Sunday (a very small part), another day, or a day and a night.
There are many persons whom this solution does not altogether satisfy, and the writer is free to confess it does not satisfy him at all. It seems to him to be a makeshift, and a very weak makeshift.
Is there any solution that is altogether satisfactory? There is.
The first fact to be noticed in the proper solution is that the Bible nowhere says or implies that Jesus was crucified and died on Friday. It is said that Jesus was crucified on "the day before the Sabbath" (Mark 15:42). As the Jewish weekly Sabbath came on Saturday, beginning at sunset the evening before, the conclusion is naturally drawn that as Jesus was crucified on the day before the Sabbath, He must have been crucified on Friday. But it is a well-known fact, to which the Bible bears abundant testimony, that the Jews had other Sabbaths beside the weekly Sabbath which fell on Saturday. The first day of the Passover week, no matter upon what day of the week it came, was always a Sabbath (Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:7; Numbers 28:16-18). The question therefore arises whether the Sabbath that followed Christ's crucifixion was on the weekly Sabbath (Saturday) or the Passover Sabbath, falling on the 15th of Nisan, which came that year on Thursday.2 Now the Bible does not leave us to speculate in regard to which Sabbath is meant in this instance, for John tells us in so many words, in John 19:14, that the day on which Jesus was tried and crucified was "the preparation of the Passover", that is, it was not the day before the weekly Sabbath (Friday) but it was the day before the Passover Sabbath, which came that year on Thursday. That is to say, the day on which Jesus Christ was crucified was Wednesday. John makes this as clear as day.
The gospel of John was written later than the other Gospels, and scholars have for a long time noticed that in various places there was an evident intention to correct false impressions that one might get from reading the other Gospels. One of these false impressions was that Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples at the regular time of the Passover.3 To correct this false impression John clearly states that He ate it the evening before, and that He Himself died on the cross at the very moment the Passover lambs were being slain "between the two evenings" on the 14th Nisan (Exodus 12:6, Hebrew and R. V. margin). God's real Pascal Lamb, Jesus, of whom all other Pascal lambs offered through the centuries were only types, was therefore slain at the very time appointed of God.
Everything about the Passover lamb was fulfilled in Jesus. (1) He was a lamb without blemish and without spot (Exodus 12:5). (2) He was chosen on the 10th day of Nisan (Exodus 12:3), for it was on the tenth day of the month, the preceding Saturday, that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem was made, since they came from Jericho to Bethany six days before the Passover (John 12:1-- that would be six days before Thursday, which would be Friday), and it was on the next day that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem was made (John 12:12 and following verses), that is, on Saturday, the 10th Nisan. It was also on this same day that Judas went to the chief priests and offered to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:6-16; Mark 14:3-11). As it was after the supper in the house of Simon the leper, and as the supper occurred late on Friday, that is, after sunset, or early on Saturday, after the supper would necessarily be on the 10th of Nisan. Further more, they put the exact value on the lamb that Old Testament prophecy predicted (Matthew 26:15, compare Zechariah 11:12). (3) Not a bone of Him was broken when He was killed (John 19:36, compare Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 34:20). (4) And He was killed on the 14th Nisan between the evenings, just before the beginning of the 15th Nisan at sundown (Exodus 12:6, R. V. margin).
If we take just exactly what the Bible says, viz., that Jesus was slain before the Passover Sabbath, the type is marvelously fulfilled in every detail, but if we accept the traditional theory that Jesus was crucified on Friday, the type fails at many points.
Furthermore, if we accept the traditional view that Jesus was crucified on Friday and ate the Passover on the regular day of the Passover, then the journey from Jericho to Bethany, which occurred six days before the Passover (John 12:1) would fall on a Saturday, that is, the Jewish Sabbath. Such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath would be contrary to Jewish law. Of course it was impossible for Jesus to take such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath. In reality, His triumphal entry into Jerusalem was on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday. This was altogether possible, for the Bible elsewhere tells us that Bethany was a Sabbath day's journey from Jerusalem (Acts 1:12; compare Luke 24:50).
Furthermore, it has been figured out by the astronomers that in the year 30 A. D., which is the commonly accepted year of the crucifixion of our Lord, the Passover was kept on Thursday, April 6th, the moon being full that day. The chronologists who have supposed that the crucifixion took place on Friday have been greatly perplexed by this fact that in the year 30 A. D., the Passover occurred on Thursday. One writer in seeking a solution of the difficulty suggests that the crucifixion may have been in the year 33 A. D., for although the full moon was on a Thursday that year also, yet it was within two and half hours of Friday, he thinks that perhaps the Jews may have kept it that day. But when we accept exactly what the Bible says, namely, that Jesus was not crucified on the Passover day but on "the preparation of the Passover," and that He was to be three days and three nights in the grave, and as "the preparation of the Passover" that year would be Wednesday and His resurrection early on the first day of the week, this allows exactly three days and three nights in the grave.
To sum it all up, Jesus died about sunset on Wednesday. Seventy-two hours later, exactly three days and three nights, at the beginning of the first day of the week (Saturday at sunset), He arose again from the grave. When the women visited the tomb just before dawn the next morning, they found the grave already empty.4 So we are not driven to any such makeshift as that any small portion of a day is reckoned as a whole day and night, but we find that the statement of Jesus was literally true. Three days and three nights His body was dead and lay in the sepulchre. While His body lay dead, He Himself being quickened in the spirit (1 Peter 3:18) went into the heart of the earth and preached unto the spirits which were in prison (1 Peter 3:19).
This supposed difficulty solves itself, as do so many other difficulties in the Bible, when we take the Bible as meaning exactly what it says.
It is sometimes objected against the view here advanced that the two on the way to Emmaus early on the first day on the week (that is, Sunday) said to Jesus in speaking of the crucifixion and events accompanying it: "Besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done" (Luke 24:21), and it is said that if the crucifixion took place on Wednesday, Sunday would be the fourth day since these things were done. But the answer is very simple. These things were done just as Thursday was beginning at sunset on Wednesday. They were therefore completed on Thursday, and the first day since Thursday would be Friday, the second day since Thursday would be Saturday, and the "third day since" Thursday would be Sunday, the first day of the week. So the supposed objection in reality supports the theory. On the other hand, if the crucifixion tool place on Friday, by no manner of reckoning could Sunday be made the "third day since" these things were done.
There are many passages in scripture that support the theory advanced above and make it necessary to believe that Jesus died late on Wednesday. Some of them are as follows: "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40). "This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days" (Matthew 26:61). "Thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save Thyself" (Matthew 27:40). "Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while He was yet alive, After three days I will rise again" (Matthew 27:63). "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be killed, and after three days rise again" (Mark 8:31). "They shall kill Him, and when He is killed, after three days He shall rise again: (Mark 9:31, R. V.). "They shall scourge Him, and shall kill Him, and after three days He shall rise again" (Mark 10:34, R.V.). "Destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands" (Mark 14:58, R. V.). "Ah thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save Thyself!" (Mark 15:29). "Besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done" (Luke 24:21). "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three days? But He spake of the temple of His body. When therefore He was risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said" (John 2:19-22).
There is absolutely nothing in favor of Friday crucifixion, but everything in the Scripture is perfectly harmonized by Wednesday crucifixion. It is remarkable how many prophetical and typical passages of the Old Testament are fulfilled and how many seeming discrepancies in the Gospel narratives are straightened out when we once come to understand that Jesus died on Wednesday and not on Friday.
FOOTNOTES:
1 - From the chapter of the same title in the book, Difficulties in the Bible, by R. A. Torrey, published by Moody Press. Copyright 1907 by Fleming H. Revell Co., now in the public domain. Footnotes included here were not part of the original article, provided by A. Brouillette. (Revised 4/9/2003)
2 - The other Gospels also support the assertion that Jesus died on the day of the preparation of the Passover: Matthew 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:42.
3 - The other gospels all state that Jesus died on the day of the preparation of the Passover, yet contain references to the disciples preparing their passover on the "first day of the unleavened" (Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7). Since the Jewish day began at sundown, the day of the preparation would have begun at sundown Tuesday and ended at sundown Wednesday. Apparently, the disciples prepared and ate their Passover early, on Tuesday night. It is interesting to note that the Gospels take special care to mention the preparation of the Passover by the disciples, perhaps because it was prepared and eaten before the ordinary time. Also, Jesus made the particular comment that he fervently desired to eat this passover with the disciples before He suffered (Luke 22:15). Was He explaining to the disciples why they were eating the Passover early?
4 - It appears that Mary actually came to the tomb thrice: once, when it was still dark (John 20:1), at which time she saw the stone moved, and the empty tomb, and then went to tell Peter and John; a second time, when Peter and John ran to see the tomb, then left Mary there, weeping (John 20:11); and then again, at sunrise (Mark 16:1,2), when she returned, perhaps catching up with the other women who had not yet heard the news. Mary was the first to see Jesus, which was during her second trip to the tomb (John 20:14-17), but could not touch Him at this time for He had not yet ascended. Perhaps, she did not recognize Jesus at first because it was still dark. On her third trip to the tomb, at sunrise with the other women, an angel confirmed Mary's testimony, and gave them directions to tell the disciples that Jesus had risen. As they ran to tell their news, Jesus met them (Matthew 28:9), and now Mary and the others were able to touch Him.
How is that for a bit of a mind-blower? Interesting to say the least, wouldn't you agree? It would certainly appear that our traditions have led us astray on the most important happening in history... but I wonder if there is another truth (i.e. an analogy of sorts) to be drawn from this event... In fact, that's really why I brought all of this up... It's not so much that I think it matters all that much what day a person chooses to celebrate the Lord's resurrection (or even whether or not they choose to formally celebrate it at all), and it's not that I'm concerned that Easter egg hunts are getting more press than Jesus or that paganism is the source of so-called Christians holidays, and it's not so much that I think it's all that important to know the precise day Jesus gave His life or the exact moment He rose from the dead. But I do find it interesting how the wise inventive explanations of man, which sometimes are so far-fetched from actual logical sensability, end up becoming religious icons of sorts (cherished and revered traditions) - to the point where they are just accepted and never questioned.
The first time I mentioned to a friend (just for the sake of discussion mind you) the notion that Jesus, most likely, did not die on Friday or rise on Sunday they laughed at me as if I was the crazy one. It's become that ingrained in our heads...
But my point extends beyond Easter, for certainly this is not the only tradition that holds virtualy no biblical weight. There are many other traditions so many Christians hold dear, but which have no real foundation in Scripture. They may use Scripture passages as "proof-texts" but the results are manipulated by a dismissal of proper context and definition. Many Christians have been influenced by this kind of eisogesis; where religious thinkers force their concepts (which are tainted by their own religious agendas and opinion) into the text rather than simply drawing meaning out of it (the way the authors simply presented it).
The whole modern concept of "church" is one glaring example. Christians have placed this thing called "church" at the center of their very existence. In fact, often times, their very lives are built around it. Yet the Bible never once speaks of starting one, building one, or attending one! In fact, if someone spends enough effort studying the matter, they will discover that the word "church" did not and does not even exist in the original Greek text of Scripture, but was added later by translators and purposely manipulated to justify an emphasis on religious edifices. William Tyndale (who published the first English Bible) even left the word "church" out of his translation because it did not reflect the proper meaning of the Greek word "ecclesia", which actually refers to a people who have been called out of the world and into the family/congregation of God (thus his choice to use the word "congregation" in place of church). Tyndale - whose heart was to magnify the truth, glorify Jesus Christ, and put the Scriptures back into the hands of common folk - was reviled against... primarily by religious authorities. In fact, they were so offended at his work that they confiscated his books, destroyed them, and then burned him at the stake!
Many times Christians come to similar conclusions about things like the definition of "church" because it's become a part of established tradition for more than 1,700 years. And, usually, the mere mention that "church" (as it is commonly understood) might be unbiblical and irrelevant in terms of necessity for spiritual growth is met with even more intense opposition than a subject like what day Jesus rose from the dead.
We could throw other long-held religious traditions into this mix as well; such as monetary tithing, the office of senior pastor, worship leaders, denominationalism, and even water baptism. I can already feel some of you squirming at the very mention of such things. I'm sure some of you will write me and ask, "What do you mean by water baptism not being required?" or "What you mean tithing's not biblical?" The devil is in the details as they say. There can be no doubt that our religious traditions have, many times, twisted our understanding of these things against the way the Bible actually portrays them. If you're interested in subjects like this, may I invite you to check out some of the articles available on my primary website: http://truthforfree.com. But be fair warned that, often times, even just questioning these kinds of things can land you in hot water with religious traditionalists who don't like having their long-held doctrines shaken. But for all those who are genuinely interested in truth, shaking can only cause that which is false to be exposed so that such things which are true will become even more plainly evident.
Hebrews 12:27-29 - Now this, "Yet once more," indicates the removal of those things that are being shaken, as of things that are made, that the things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear. For our God is a consuming fire.
Don't be too alarmed that I mention these things (such as tithing, church, the office of the pastor, keeping holy days, etc.), especially if you are one that believes they are important to practice. My intention is not to offend you or rattle anyone's faith or even to suggest that things like attending churches, giving tithes, or sending your kids to Sunday school is somehow sinful (unless the Lord convicts you that you do not need them and then you hang on regardless of His instruction). By all means, follow Christ! Certainly these things may hold meaning for some at various stages of their walk with God (just as they did for me at one time) and even if some level of ignorance exists among those who engage in these things, it matters little at present so long as the heart is pure and truly fixed on knowing Jesus. Some of these activities, despite their lack of origin in the Scriptures, may contain elements of beneficial truth, encouragement, or genuine Bible-centered education. The Lord is certainly able to forgive our stumbling, work correction and heal us of our misconceptions as well as free us from the legalisms we sometimes tie ourselves up with. He works continually for our good day by day, as we submit ourselves to His instruction. I hope you will just accept this encouragement: to stay pliable in His hands, open to instruction by His Spirit, and maintain a readiness to leave behind whatever things he quickens your conscience about.
I share this encouragement for those who may already be struggling with these perspectives on Christianity that I am sharing. If that describes you, you might want to just leave it at that and not read any further. Some folks will have no problem understanding the analogies I make in the next few paragraphs and so I write this for their benefit, but if this article already is troubling you, please don't read any further. Be blessed in God and just continue to seek His heart with all your might. May God's love keep you and His wisdom guide you as you move closer and closer to His heart. I pray this for all of us... and certainly for myself as well.
Now, getting back to the Easter topic for just a moment (for anyone who is still awake), isn't it interesting that, pretty much, the whole religious world celebrates Easter on a Sunday morning? In fact, Easter Sunday is also one of the most highly attended church services of the year... and yet the Bible itself seems to indicate that Jesus did not even rise on Sunday! So, what happened on Sunday morning? Well, some really nice folks (who very much believed in the real Jesus) attended a little structure (a tomb), with full intention to anoint a dead body. Hmmm... Maybe Sunday is as good a day as any to attend church? After all, it wouldn't be the first time that people gathered where it was believed that four walls were thought to hold the body of Christ!
Oh dear, did I just say that? (the rest of you who know what I'm getting at are like, "High five dude!" haha). I've often heard Christians say upon coming out of the church system, "Church just seemed so dead to me." Now that I think about, it makes sense. Tombs are intended to hold dead things. These followers of Jesus in Scripture certainly believed in Him. They believed He was the Messiah. They believed He was God robed in human flesh. They believed in His power, His authority, His message... (and I'm sure in His long hair and neatly groomed beard and mustache too)... Yet, on the most important day of all, they came to anoint a dead body. They were not really expecting a risen Lord, even though He told them this would happen. EVEN THOUGH THEY REMEMBERED THAT HE SAID THIS! Are you catching my analogy? Doesn't it strike you a little curious that "church day" (Easter and beyond) is, in a sense, "tomb visiting Sunday" for almost the entire Christian world? They often act like He's still "in there". One of their biggest slogans is W.W.J.D. (What Would Jesus Do); which is the way people talk about someone who isn't there to show them Himself (such as a dead person who is fondly remembered)! They come hoping to see "the body" anointed, but they don't really expect it to live outside the walls. They have simply entombed the Lord again! How tragic!
The good news is that we see an exodus of sorts happening today... where literally millioins of people are coming out of that tomb because they have discovered that He really is not there. I am reminded again of the Bible account and what the two men standing near the tomb said to the women as they approached. O that their message would ring into the ears of blinded Christians everywhere today:
Luke 24:3-8 - Then they went in and did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. And it happened, as they were greatly perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments. Then, as they were afraid and bowed their faces to the earth, they said to them, "Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen! Remember how He spoke to you when He was still in Galilee, saying, 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.'" And they remembered His words.
PRAISE GOD!!! They remembered His words! Would to God that believers in Jesus today would remember His words! Can you remember some of those words? Can you recall even the very analogy Jesus Himself used regarding His death and resurrection?
John 2:19 - Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Imagine the offensiveness of such a statement to the religious of Jesus' day. The Temple was their primary holy place. It housed (so they thought) the very presence of God. So much reverence these people had for their system of worship, but you can imagine how it offended them when Jesus also told them:
Matthew 23:38 - "And now look, your house is left to you, empty and desolate."
Wow! EMPTY? DESOLATE? Sounds like Jesus has absolutely no regard for their holy place anymore. He knew that He was the One come to fulfill all things in Himself. Every type and shadow up to this moment all focused on HIM alone! The Scripture never says that attending church is the hope of glory. No! It says something far more significant:
Colossians 1:26-27 - This message was kept secret for centuries and generations past, but now it has been revealed to his own holy people. For it has pleased God to tell his people that the riches and glory of Christ are for you Gentiles, too. For this is the secret: CHRIST LIVES IN YOU, and this is your assurance that you will share in his glory.
But isn't it interesting that, after Christ had risen, even when they went inside the tomb and did not find Him there, they could not simply conclude that there was no reason for Him to be there at all... but it says that they were greatly perplexed. How many of us, when our eyes began to open to this same revelation, we were greatly perplexed? And even others who observe our testimony, they too are often greatly perplexed. Notice what the others thought of the women when they returned after visiting the tomb and boldly declared, "HE IS NOT THERE!"
Luke 24:9-11 - So they rushed back to tell his eleven disciples-and everyone else-what had happened. The women who went to the tomb were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and several others. They told the apostles what had happened, but the story sounded like nonsense, so they didn't believe it.
Even when Jesus appeared to the disciples Himself, they didn't even know it was Him and they gave this testimony:
Luke 24:22-26 - "Yes, and certain women of our company, who arrived at the tomb early, astonished us. When they did not find His body, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said He was alive. And certain of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but Him they did not see." Then He said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?"
Mark 16:14 - Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen.
Isn't it much the same today for those of us who have "seen" the Lord, risen in glory? We have a revelation that is so exciting and true that we want others to believe our testimony; that Christ does not lie dead in a tomb on Sunday morning (while we come to show off our "anointings"). He is alive!
Of course not every group that may gather in a building should be automatically regarded as ignorant, and that is not the point. But this revelation runs deep! If Christ really finds His home within our hearts, then of what significance is any other form of "home" that He might dwell in? No church building could ever be "the House of the Lord" for such is but an image made with hands and, if we are not careful, such things can ammount to idolatry! We live in HIM and have our being in HIM. And we are drawn together by ONE Holy Spirit into ONE Family of brothers and sisters. There are not many bodies of Christ - there is only ONE! The building then is nothing.... the holy days, insignificant.... the little religious practices we often deem so important.... expired and unprofitable. Though, for many, these things are still intimately tied to their understanding of what it means to be a Christian and such revelation may actually strike as offensive and hard to grasp. That's ok. The Lord loves us all and is leading us, step by step, to higher places in Him. I am still on the path myself and I know there is much ahead that I have not grasped either. But it's good to be free and to walk with others on this journey, though many of us are at different places... still we walk together in HIM. As long a Christ remains central, the details will work themselves out.
Just some ranting thoughts I had today... Probably not too profound, but then, it would be great to hear some of your responses and thoughts - whether in agreement or contrast.
In His grip,
Dave
Everyone is familiar with "Good Friday" and "Easter Sunday" (or if you're really an enlightened Christian you'll refer to this day as "Resurrection Sunday"). Most Christians are at least vaguely familiar with the fact that Easter hasn't always been a "Christian" holiday but has pagan origins. We'll leave that detail aside for now as it doesn't have a lot to do with the perspective I am going to share here (and, besides, that topic has already been handled more adequately on other websites and books than I am even able to touch). Let's start with a couple familiar passages of Scripture where Jesus lets his followers know some details about his death and resurrection as it will occur:
Matthew 12:40 - "For as Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, so I, the Son of Man, will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights."
Matthew 20:18-19 - "We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life!"
This event (specifically noting the time table) is reiterated by the apostles in the New Testament after His death and resurrection (and is a significant detail that rests at the heart of the Gospel message):
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 - For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance : that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.
I am reminded of an old song by the Christian artist, Carman, where he sings, "It may seem like Friday night, but Sunday's on the way." The point of the song is well-taken, but the logicality of this statement (when compared with, not just Scripture, but plain ol' common sense) is obviously out of whack, don't you think? Let's see... Friday night to Sunday morning (the traditional "Easter" doctrine)... If I use the available fingers on either hand (and the widely popular 24 hour time system that most of us are familiar with), I come up with a sum total of a day and a half! I must have added something wrong... Let me take a quick look at my calendar instead.... Hmmm... It says "Good Friday" is on, well, Friday... and Easter is on... look at that... Sunday morning. Ok, at best, that's two days (and two nights), but the Scripture says THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS, not a day and a half... not two days... not two days and half of a third. Clearly, something doesn't add up. Either Jesus did not die on "Good Friday" and He did not rise from the dead on "Easter Sunday" or the Bible is telling us lies. I know I'll be called crazy for going against tradition here, but I'm gonna go with the Bible on this one... and that seems to plainly suggest that (if we assume He arose on Sunday morning) Jesus could not have died on Friday nor could He have risen on Sunday (that is, if we assume He was buried in the tomb on Friday). SO WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ANYWAY?
To answer this, I am first going to share a brief article by an unknown author, which is just brilliantly stated. I will resume my commentary following this article... Enjoy!
--------------------------------------
Was Jesus really three days and three nights in the heart of the Earth?1
Matthew, in the twelfth chapter of his Gospel and the fortieth verse, reports Jesus as saying: "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale ("Sea monster," R. V. margin), so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." According to the commonly accepted tradition of the church Jesus was crucified on Friday, dying at 3 P.M., or somewhere between 3 P.M. and sundown, and was raised from the dead very early in the morning of the following Sunday. Many readers of the Bible are puzzled to know how the interval between late Friday afternoon and early Sunday morning can be figured out to be three days and three nights. It seems rather to be two nights, one day, and a very small portion of another day.
The solution of this apparent difficulty proposed by many commentators is that "a day and a night" is simply another way of saying "a day," and that the ancient Jews reckoned a fraction of a day as a whole day, so they say there was a part of Friday (a very small part), or a day and a night; all of Saturday, another day, or a day and a night; part of Sunday (a very small part), another day, or a day and a night.
There are many persons whom this solution does not altogether satisfy, and the writer is free to confess it does not satisfy him at all. It seems to him to be a makeshift, and a very weak makeshift.
Is there any solution that is altogether satisfactory? There is.
The first fact to be noticed in the proper solution is that the Bible nowhere says or implies that Jesus was crucified and died on Friday. It is said that Jesus was crucified on "the day before the Sabbath" (Mark 15:42). As the Jewish weekly Sabbath came on Saturday, beginning at sunset the evening before, the conclusion is naturally drawn that as Jesus was crucified on the day before the Sabbath, He must have been crucified on Friday. But it is a well-known fact, to which the Bible bears abundant testimony, that the Jews had other Sabbaths beside the weekly Sabbath which fell on Saturday. The first day of the Passover week, no matter upon what day of the week it came, was always a Sabbath (Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:7; Numbers 28:16-18). The question therefore arises whether the Sabbath that followed Christ's crucifixion was on the weekly Sabbath (Saturday) or the Passover Sabbath, falling on the 15th of Nisan, which came that year on Thursday.2 Now the Bible does not leave us to speculate in regard to which Sabbath is meant in this instance, for John tells us in so many words, in John 19:14, that the day on which Jesus was tried and crucified was "the preparation of the Passover", that is, it was not the day before the weekly Sabbath (Friday) but it was the day before the Passover Sabbath, which came that year on Thursday. That is to say, the day on which Jesus Christ was crucified was Wednesday. John makes this as clear as day.
The gospel of John was written later than the other Gospels, and scholars have for a long time noticed that in various places there was an evident intention to correct false impressions that one might get from reading the other Gospels. One of these false impressions was that Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples at the regular time of the Passover.3 To correct this false impression John clearly states that He ate it the evening before, and that He Himself died on the cross at the very moment the Passover lambs were being slain "between the two evenings" on the 14th Nisan (Exodus 12:6, Hebrew and R. V. margin). God's real Pascal Lamb, Jesus, of whom all other Pascal lambs offered through the centuries were only types, was therefore slain at the very time appointed of God.
Everything about the Passover lamb was fulfilled in Jesus. (1) He was a lamb without blemish and without spot (Exodus 12:5). (2) He was chosen on the 10th day of Nisan (Exodus 12:3), for it was on the tenth day of the month, the preceding Saturday, that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem was made, since they came from Jericho to Bethany six days before the Passover (John 12:1-- that would be six days before Thursday, which would be Friday), and it was on the next day that the triumphal entry into Jerusalem was made (John 12:12 and following verses), that is, on Saturday, the 10th Nisan. It was also on this same day that Judas went to the chief priests and offered to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:6-16; Mark 14:3-11). As it was after the supper in the house of Simon the leper, and as the supper occurred late on Friday, that is, after sunset, or early on Saturday, after the supper would necessarily be on the 10th of Nisan. Further more, they put the exact value on the lamb that Old Testament prophecy predicted (Matthew 26:15, compare Zechariah 11:12). (3) Not a bone of Him was broken when He was killed (John 19:36, compare Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 34:20). (4) And He was killed on the 14th Nisan between the evenings, just before the beginning of the 15th Nisan at sundown (Exodus 12:6, R. V. margin).
If we take just exactly what the Bible says, viz., that Jesus was slain before the Passover Sabbath, the type is marvelously fulfilled in every detail, but if we accept the traditional theory that Jesus was crucified on Friday, the type fails at many points.
Furthermore, if we accept the traditional view that Jesus was crucified on Friday and ate the Passover on the regular day of the Passover, then the journey from Jericho to Bethany, which occurred six days before the Passover (John 12:1) would fall on a Saturday, that is, the Jewish Sabbath. Such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath would be contrary to Jewish law. Of course it was impossible for Jesus to take such a journey on the Jewish Sabbath. In reality, His triumphal entry into Jerusalem was on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday. This was altogether possible, for the Bible elsewhere tells us that Bethany was a Sabbath day's journey from Jerusalem (Acts 1:12; compare Luke 24:50).
Furthermore, it has been figured out by the astronomers that in the year 30 A. D., which is the commonly accepted year of the crucifixion of our Lord, the Passover was kept on Thursday, April 6th, the moon being full that day. The chronologists who have supposed that the crucifixion took place on Friday have been greatly perplexed by this fact that in the year 30 A. D., the Passover occurred on Thursday. One writer in seeking a solution of the difficulty suggests that the crucifixion may have been in the year 33 A. D., for although the full moon was on a Thursday that year also, yet it was within two and half hours of Friday, he thinks that perhaps the Jews may have kept it that day. But when we accept exactly what the Bible says, namely, that Jesus was not crucified on the Passover day but on "the preparation of the Passover," and that He was to be three days and three nights in the grave, and as "the preparation of the Passover" that year would be Wednesday and His resurrection early on the first day of the week, this allows exactly three days and three nights in the grave.
To sum it all up, Jesus died about sunset on Wednesday. Seventy-two hours later, exactly three days and three nights, at the beginning of the first day of the week (Saturday at sunset), He arose again from the grave. When the women visited the tomb just before dawn the next morning, they found the grave already empty.4 So we are not driven to any such makeshift as that any small portion of a day is reckoned as a whole day and night, but we find that the statement of Jesus was literally true. Three days and three nights His body was dead and lay in the sepulchre. While His body lay dead, He Himself being quickened in the spirit (1 Peter 3:18) went into the heart of the earth and preached unto the spirits which were in prison (1 Peter 3:19).
This supposed difficulty solves itself, as do so many other difficulties in the Bible, when we take the Bible as meaning exactly what it says.
It is sometimes objected against the view here advanced that the two on the way to Emmaus early on the first day on the week (that is, Sunday) said to Jesus in speaking of the crucifixion and events accompanying it: "Besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done" (Luke 24:21), and it is said that if the crucifixion took place on Wednesday, Sunday would be the fourth day since these things were done. But the answer is very simple. These things were done just as Thursday was beginning at sunset on Wednesday. They were therefore completed on Thursday, and the first day since Thursday would be Friday, the second day since Thursday would be Saturday, and the "third day since" Thursday would be Sunday, the first day of the week. So the supposed objection in reality supports the theory. On the other hand, if the crucifixion tool place on Friday, by no manner of reckoning could Sunday be made the "third day since" these things were done.
There are many passages in scripture that support the theory advanced above and make it necessary to believe that Jesus died late on Wednesday. Some of them are as follows: "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40). "This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days" (Matthew 26:61). "Thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save Thyself" (Matthew 27:40). "Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while He was yet alive, After three days I will rise again" (Matthew 27:63). "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be killed, and after three days rise again" (Mark 8:31). "They shall kill Him, and when He is killed, after three days He shall rise again: (Mark 9:31, R. V.). "They shall scourge Him, and shall kill Him, and after three days He shall rise again" (Mark 10:34, R.V.). "Destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands" (Mark 14:58, R. V.). "Ah thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save Thyself!" (Mark 15:29). "Besides all this, today is the third day since these things were done" (Luke 24:21). "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three days? But He spake of the temple of His body. When therefore He was risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said" (John 2:19-22).
There is absolutely nothing in favor of Friday crucifixion, but everything in the Scripture is perfectly harmonized by Wednesday crucifixion. It is remarkable how many prophetical and typical passages of the Old Testament are fulfilled and how many seeming discrepancies in the Gospel narratives are straightened out when we once come to understand that Jesus died on Wednesday and not on Friday.
FOOTNOTES:
1 - From the chapter of the same title in the book, Difficulties in the Bible, by R. A. Torrey, published by Moody Press. Copyright 1907 by Fleming H. Revell Co., now in the public domain. Footnotes included here were not part of the original article, provided by A. Brouillette. (Revised 4/9/2003)
2 - The other Gospels also support the assertion that Jesus died on the day of the preparation of the Passover: Matthew 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:42.
3 - The other gospels all state that Jesus died on the day of the preparation of the Passover, yet contain references to the disciples preparing their passover on the "first day of the unleavened" (Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7). Since the Jewish day began at sundown, the day of the preparation would have begun at sundown Tuesday and ended at sundown Wednesday. Apparently, the disciples prepared and ate their Passover early, on Tuesday night. It is interesting to note that the Gospels take special care to mention the preparation of the Passover by the disciples, perhaps because it was prepared and eaten before the ordinary time. Also, Jesus made the particular comment that he fervently desired to eat this passover with the disciples before He suffered (Luke 22:15). Was He explaining to the disciples why they were eating the Passover early?
4 - It appears that Mary actually came to the tomb thrice: once, when it was still dark (John 20:1), at which time she saw the stone moved, and the empty tomb, and then went to tell Peter and John; a second time, when Peter and John ran to see the tomb, then left Mary there, weeping (John 20:11); and then again, at sunrise (Mark 16:1,2), when she returned, perhaps catching up with the other women who had not yet heard the news. Mary was the first to see Jesus, which was during her second trip to the tomb (John 20:14-17), but could not touch Him at this time for He had not yet ascended. Perhaps, she did not recognize Jesus at first because it was still dark. On her third trip to the tomb, at sunrise with the other women, an angel confirmed Mary's testimony, and gave them directions to tell the disciples that Jesus had risen. As they ran to tell their news, Jesus met them (Matthew 28:9), and now Mary and the others were able to touch Him.
--------------------------------------
How is that for a bit of a mind-blower? Interesting to say the least, wouldn't you agree? It would certainly appear that our traditions have led us astray on the most important happening in history... but I wonder if there is another truth (i.e. an analogy of sorts) to be drawn from this event... In fact, that's really why I brought all of this up... It's not so much that I think it matters all that much what day a person chooses to celebrate the Lord's resurrection (or even whether or not they choose to formally celebrate it at all), and it's not that I'm concerned that Easter egg hunts are getting more press than Jesus or that paganism is the source of so-called Christians holidays, and it's not so much that I think it's all that important to know the precise day Jesus gave His life or the exact moment He rose from the dead. But I do find it interesting how the wise inventive explanations of man, which sometimes are so far-fetched from actual logical sensability, end up becoming religious icons of sorts (cherished and revered traditions) - to the point where they are just accepted and never questioned.
The first time I mentioned to a friend (just for the sake of discussion mind you) the notion that Jesus, most likely, did not die on Friday or rise on Sunday they laughed at me as if I was the crazy one. It's become that ingrained in our heads...
But my point extends beyond Easter, for certainly this is not the only tradition that holds virtualy no biblical weight. There are many other traditions so many Christians hold dear, but which have no real foundation in Scripture. They may use Scripture passages as "proof-texts" but the results are manipulated by a dismissal of proper context and definition. Many Christians have been influenced by this kind of eisogesis; where religious thinkers force their concepts (which are tainted by their own religious agendas and opinion) into the text rather than simply drawing meaning out of it (the way the authors simply presented it).
The whole modern concept of "church" is one glaring example. Christians have placed this thing called "church" at the center of their very existence. In fact, often times, their very lives are built around it. Yet the Bible never once speaks of starting one, building one, or attending one! In fact, if someone spends enough effort studying the matter, they will discover that the word "church" did not and does not even exist in the original Greek text of Scripture, but was added later by translators and purposely manipulated to justify an emphasis on religious edifices. William Tyndale (who published the first English Bible) even left the word "church" out of his translation because it did not reflect the proper meaning of the Greek word "ecclesia", which actually refers to a people who have been called out of the world and into the family/congregation of God (thus his choice to use the word "congregation" in place of church). Tyndale - whose heart was to magnify the truth, glorify Jesus Christ, and put the Scriptures back into the hands of common folk - was reviled against... primarily by religious authorities. In fact, they were so offended at his work that they confiscated his books, destroyed them, and then burned him at the stake!
Many times Christians come to similar conclusions about things like the definition of "church" because it's become a part of established tradition for more than 1,700 years. And, usually, the mere mention that "church" (as it is commonly understood) might be unbiblical and irrelevant in terms of necessity for spiritual growth is met with even more intense opposition than a subject like what day Jesus rose from the dead.
We could throw other long-held religious traditions into this mix as well; such as monetary tithing, the office of senior pastor, worship leaders, denominationalism, and even water baptism. I can already feel some of you squirming at the very mention of such things. I'm sure some of you will write me and ask, "What do you mean by water baptism not being required?" or "What you mean tithing's not biblical?" The devil is in the details as they say. There can be no doubt that our religious traditions have, many times, twisted our understanding of these things against the way the Bible actually portrays them. If you're interested in subjects like this, may I invite you to check out some of the articles available on my primary website: http://truthforfree.com. But be fair warned that, often times, even just questioning these kinds of things can land you in hot water with religious traditionalists who don't like having their long-held doctrines shaken. But for all those who are genuinely interested in truth, shaking can only cause that which is false to be exposed so that such things which are true will become even more plainly evident.
Hebrews 12:27-29 - Now this, "Yet once more," indicates the removal of those things that are being shaken, as of things that are made, that the things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear. For our God is a consuming fire.
Don't be too alarmed that I mention these things (such as tithing, church, the office of the pastor, keeping holy days, etc.), especially if you are one that believes they are important to practice. My intention is not to offend you or rattle anyone's faith or even to suggest that things like attending churches, giving tithes, or sending your kids to Sunday school is somehow sinful (unless the Lord convicts you that you do not need them and then you hang on regardless of His instruction). By all means, follow Christ! Certainly these things may hold meaning for some at various stages of their walk with God (just as they did for me at one time) and even if some level of ignorance exists among those who engage in these things, it matters little at present so long as the heart is pure and truly fixed on knowing Jesus. Some of these activities, despite their lack of origin in the Scriptures, may contain elements of beneficial truth, encouragement, or genuine Bible-centered education. The Lord is certainly able to forgive our stumbling, work correction and heal us of our misconceptions as well as free us from the legalisms we sometimes tie ourselves up with. He works continually for our good day by day, as we submit ourselves to His instruction. I hope you will just accept this encouragement: to stay pliable in His hands, open to instruction by His Spirit, and maintain a readiness to leave behind whatever things he quickens your conscience about.
I share this encouragement for those who may already be struggling with these perspectives on Christianity that I am sharing. If that describes you, you might want to just leave it at that and not read any further. Some folks will have no problem understanding the analogies I make in the next few paragraphs and so I write this for their benefit, but if this article already is troubling you, please don't read any further. Be blessed in God and just continue to seek His heart with all your might. May God's love keep you and His wisdom guide you as you move closer and closer to His heart. I pray this for all of us... and certainly for myself as well.
Now, getting back to the Easter topic for just a moment (for anyone who is still awake), isn't it interesting that, pretty much, the whole religious world celebrates Easter on a Sunday morning? In fact, Easter Sunday is also one of the most highly attended church services of the year... and yet the Bible itself seems to indicate that Jesus did not even rise on Sunday! So, what happened on Sunday morning? Well, some really nice folks (who very much believed in the real Jesus) attended a little structure (a tomb), with full intention to anoint a dead body. Hmmm... Maybe Sunday is as good a day as any to attend church? After all, it wouldn't be the first time that people gathered where it was believed that four walls were thought to hold the body of Christ!
Oh dear, did I just say that? (the rest of you who know what I'm getting at are like, "High five dude!" haha). I've often heard Christians say upon coming out of the church system, "Church just seemed so dead to me." Now that I think about, it makes sense. Tombs are intended to hold dead things. These followers of Jesus in Scripture certainly believed in Him. They believed He was the Messiah. They believed He was God robed in human flesh. They believed in His power, His authority, His message... (and I'm sure in His long hair and neatly groomed beard and mustache too)... Yet, on the most important day of all, they came to anoint a dead body. They were not really expecting a risen Lord, even though He told them this would happen. EVEN THOUGH THEY REMEMBERED THAT HE SAID THIS! Are you catching my analogy? Doesn't it strike you a little curious that "church day" (Easter and beyond) is, in a sense, "tomb visiting Sunday" for almost the entire Christian world? They often act like He's still "in there". One of their biggest slogans is W.W.J.D. (What Would Jesus Do); which is the way people talk about someone who isn't there to show them Himself (such as a dead person who is fondly remembered)! They come hoping to see "the body" anointed, but they don't really expect it to live outside the walls. They have simply entombed the Lord again! How tragic!
The good news is that we see an exodus of sorts happening today... where literally millioins of people are coming out of that tomb because they have discovered that He really is not there. I am reminded again of the Bible account and what the two men standing near the tomb said to the women as they approached. O that their message would ring into the ears of blinded Christians everywhere today:
Luke 24:3-8 - Then they went in and did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. And it happened, as they were greatly perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments. Then, as they were afraid and bowed their faces to the earth, they said to them, "Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen! Remember how He spoke to you when He was still in Galilee, saying, 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.'" And they remembered His words.
PRAISE GOD!!! They remembered His words! Would to God that believers in Jesus today would remember His words! Can you remember some of those words? Can you recall even the very analogy Jesus Himself used regarding His death and resurrection?
John 2:19 - Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Imagine the offensiveness of such a statement to the religious of Jesus' day. The Temple was their primary holy place. It housed (so they thought) the very presence of God. So much reverence these people had for their system of worship, but you can imagine how it offended them when Jesus also told them:
Matthew 23:38 - "And now look, your house is left to you, empty and desolate."
Wow! EMPTY? DESOLATE? Sounds like Jesus has absolutely no regard for their holy place anymore. He knew that He was the One come to fulfill all things in Himself. Every type and shadow up to this moment all focused on HIM alone! The Scripture never says that attending church is the hope of glory. No! It says something far more significant:
Colossians 1:26-27 - This message was kept secret for centuries and generations past, but now it has been revealed to his own holy people. For it has pleased God to tell his people that the riches and glory of Christ are for you Gentiles, too. For this is the secret: CHRIST LIVES IN YOU, and this is your assurance that you will share in his glory.
But isn't it interesting that, after Christ had risen, even when they went inside the tomb and did not find Him there, they could not simply conclude that there was no reason for Him to be there at all... but it says that they were greatly perplexed. How many of us, when our eyes began to open to this same revelation, we were greatly perplexed? And even others who observe our testimony, they too are often greatly perplexed. Notice what the others thought of the women when they returned after visiting the tomb and boldly declared, "HE IS NOT THERE!"
Luke 24:9-11 - So they rushed back to tell his eleven disciples-and everyone else-what had happened. The women who went to the tomb were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and several others. They told the apostles what had happened, but the story sounded like nonsense, so they didn't believe it.
Even when Jesus appeared to the disciples Himself, they didn't even know it was Him and they gave this testimony:
Luke 24:22-26 - "Yes, and certain women of our company, who arrived at the tomb early, astonished us. When they did not find His body, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said He was alive. And certain of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but Him they did not see." Then He said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?"
Mark 16:14 - Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen.
Isn't it much the same today for those of us who have "seen" the Lord, risen in glory? We have a revelation that is so exciting and true that we want others to believe our testimony; that Christ does not lie dead in a tomb on Sunday morning (while we come to show off our "anointings"). He is alive!
Of course not every group that may gather in a building should be automatically regarded as ignorant, and that is not the point. But this revelation runs deep! If Christ really finds His home within our hearts, then of what significance is any other form of "home" that He might dwell in? No church building could ever be "the House of the Lord" for such is but an image made with hands and, if we are not careful, such things can ammount to idolatry! We live in HIM and have our being in HIM. And we are drawn together by ONE Holy Spirit into ONE Family of brothers and sisters. There are not many bodies of Christ - there is only ONE! The building then is nothing.... the holy days, insignificant.... the little religious practices we often deem so important.... expired and unprofitable. Though, for many, these things are still intimately tied to their understanding of what it means to be a Christian and such revelation may actually strike as offensive and hard to grasp. That's ok. The Lord loves us all and is leading us, step by step, to higher places in Him. I am still on the path myself and I know there is much ahead that I have not grasped either. But it's good to be free and to walk with others on this journey, though many of us are at different places... still we walk together in HIM. As long a Christ remains central, the details will work themselves out.
Just some ranting thoughts I had today... Probably not too profound, but then, it would be great to hear some of your responses and thoughts - whether in agreement or contrast.
In His grip,
Dave
Sunday, April 5, 2009
The House of the Lord?
by Dave Yeubanks
During my brief ride through Bible school, I was introduced to some fantastic scholarly resources. If nothing else good came out of that period of my religious life, at least I am joyful for this much.
(For those of you unfamiliar with some of the terminology I use, such as when I say "my religious life" I do not mean that I no longer follow Jesus... but just the opposite. I am simply making a separation between some of the typical activities associated with traditional organized religion as opposed to simply following Christ)
It never ceases to amaze me how remarkable is the original language of Scripture as God saw fit to compile together for our learning. The precision of which the words in Scripture connect and the complete harmony of the text as a whole is so incredible that I think even a hardened skeptic, if he were to approach the matter honestly, would have to admit that Scripture presents a most persuasive indication that a wise and loving God exists and has deliberate intent to interact with humanity.
Those who know me well, know how much I enjoy studying the Bible and also the writings of the early church fathers (of the anti-Nicean era). I also enjoy a lot of older Scripture resource commentaries.
One of my favorite works is that of a man by the name of Richard Lenski; a Lutheran theologian from the 1920's who wrote an expansive volume of commentaries on the entire New Testament. Lenski's writings give incredible analysis of verbs, historical background, and syntax. His works are an amazing resource for those of us who don't have the privilege of understanding the complications of the Greek language (that Scripture was written in).
Lenski's writings were actually quite influential in my initial biblical investigation of topics such as "tithing" and other religious concepts and practices - which preceded my own exodus from "organized religion". Oddly enough, however, the very same church organization (that I attended) whose Bible college president suggested to us students that Lenski was a trustworthy "10" as far as commentaries on the Greek text of Scripture was concerned, consistently rejected Lenski's conclusions in doctrine and practice. In fact, after studying the Bible in earnest (along with the help of great works like Lenski), when I raised questions as to why the Bible's account of things held virtually no harmony with what our church was teaching on various subjects (like tithing), I was told to either align myself with the church's viewpoint or find someplace else to take my opinions. I was even threatened to be removed from any position of so-called "ministry" that might influence other people with a viewpoint other than what the church held if I did not hold my peace. When I asked for clear Scripture-based evidence that refutiated my conclusions, I got silence in return.
Funny how a theologian like R.C.H. Lenski was so proudly recommened by even the head of the church's Bible college program (a man who bestowed the title of Doctor of Theology on my pastor and gave me my Associates degree as well), yet anyone who was smart enough to actually read what he had to say, was considered to be a threat to the established order (or so it would seem). In fact, my pastor at the time looked right across his office desk at me and told me he believed I was deceived. I don't hold a grudge against him for this. I believe his reaction was primarily out of anxiety because his long-held comfortable religious traditions were being challenged and he didn't know how to respond. I can only imagine if I had been the one in his shoes; a man whose entire livelihood depends on the religious system and the status-quo perspective on tithing... when suddenly some young punk comes along and says, "Hey, the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes!"
I still pray for that man whenever God puts him on my heart and I try to always remind myself that there, but for the grace of God, go I. My heart wants to see him, and all those like him, totally set free from the many of lies of religious tradition so many of us have bought into over the years. It's funny how so many people can so proudly claim they are "Bible-believing" and yet the very thought of actually embracing what that Book really says sometimes terrifies the hell out of them... to the point where they will go so far as to manipulate their own minds away from the truth and accept a lie that guarantees them comfort and a false sense of security. God help us!
Today, just out of curiosity, I thought I'd dust off one of Lenski's old books and look up Acts 7:48, which includes Stephen's sharp words about religion that earned him a proper stoning to death! I couldn't recall if I had ever looked up the ol' Lutheran theologian on this passage upon my own exodus from church world or not, so I thought, why not give it a look. The passage, as it appears in the NKJV, is first as follows:
Acts 7:48-56 - "However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says: 'Heaven is My throne, And earth is My footstool. What house will you build for Me? says the LORD, Or what is the place of My rest? Has My hand not made all these things?' You stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers, who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it." When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
I find it interesting how familiar this passage is for those of us who have also experienced the harsh reaction of religious folks who still don't like to hear from us that God doesn't dwell in houses built by the hands of men. Amazing how this revelation (which he did not hesitate to boldly proclaim) cost Stephen his very life. I love that God opened Stephen's eyes to see the Lord Jesus Christ standing at the right hand of the Father as he declared it! What an incredible picture of endorsement and honor from God Himself! Stephen got it right! What an encouragement and what a challenge to us!
Such a contrast from Peter, whom when he witnessed Jesus being transfigured in glory before his very eyes (and even seeing Moses and Elijah appearing and talking with the Lord), said in excitement:
(Matthew 17:4) "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
Isn't that funny? And isn't that just what men do today? "Let's build something to memorialize the Lord... a place to honor Him with worship... a house to make monument to the move of God that we have thus experienced." And in just the same way, they build shrines to honor men as much as they do to honor God (often indirectly, but you can tell by the way the people attending talk about their leader). Funny how they seem to forget the lessons of passages like this one in Matthew as well, where God immediately replies to Peter's wild idea to build three "churches" (if you will forgive that interpretation). In fact, God didn't even "reply" so much as INTERRUPT Peter right as he was blabbing on about how to "package" this moment:
(Matthew 17:5) While he (Peter) was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!"
Curious how God was not the least bit interested in anything coming out of Peter's mouth at this moment; completely disregards his "inspired" idea to organize religion (as it were), and instead declares His Son alone in whom He is well pleased with and whom He desires that men focus their attentions on... No one and nothing more, no one and nothing less. The voice simply says, "HEAR HIM!" Why does it seem this is the last lesson we seem to learn? God Himself has said that all that is required is that we HEAR JESUS! His desire is not shrines dedicated unto worship... He simply wants hearts to follow what the Lord speaks. No memorial chapels necessary! As Jesus told the woman at the well, "the Father seeks those to worship Him in spirit and in truth." What is with our infatuation with "houses of worship" to the point where we even condemn those who choose (or even feel they are led by God) not to attend such? In all of Scripture, God has never given command for men to build houses of worship! Indeed God allowed it for a time because of man's ignorance. The Scripture says that He "winked" on it. But now He calls all men everywhere to repent!
Acts 17:28-30 - "for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, 'For we are also His offspring.' Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent."
Anyway, out of curiosity, I looked up Lenski and read the following:
Wow! Isn't it amazing what's contained in some of these old books? Where are these men and women of Scriptural integrity today, who handle the Truth honestly and preach it boldly? They still exist... (and they may even be reading this blog or writing or declaring this truth to others), though they are not often received by the mainstream church any better than as the religious Jews during the New Testament era.
Not too many people today are getting stoned to death for standing on this revelation, but many have still experienced a "death" by disassociation from the folks they once thought were their friends and family in Christ and whom they once trusted as spiritual fathers in the faith. But I pray that, even though some must endure the rejection of friends and family for the sake of embracing truth, that they will embrace that truth fully and react with only love. For the freedom that comes from knowing Christ deeply without the distraction of religious pressure is like nothing else! He whom the Son sets free is FREE INDEED!!! (John 8:36) Please, my friends, if you have been pondering these things in your heart for some time (perhaps even long before you read this), don't be intimidated by religious peers who warn you that leaving behind the established religious pattern may threaten the success of your spiritual growth and development. That is a LIE from the devil himself! If Christ is your center and if it is truly He whom you cling to, you will not be able to help but grow spiritually.
The lie of organized religion says that you can't make it without the help of that system, but it is only a lie; a desperate attempt to manipulate you by fear and keep you under control. GOD LOVES YOU! He has your very best interest at hand and, if you are willing, He will lead you - as His Word promises - into ALL truth! (John 16:13) Not only will you grow spiritually... YOU WILL THRIVE! And don't be deceived to think that true spiritual growth comes without its share of growing pains... because you will have plenty and the enemy will use them as opportunity to make you want to "go back to Egypt" where things were comfortable. Religious friends will watch you going through some trial and assume it is because you are "disconnected from church" and "outside the covering", but don't be intimidated by the ignorance of others. The Scripture plainly says that all who follow Christ will suffer hardship and trial. This is just par for the course. I would rather worry if hardship never seems to cross your path...
John 16:33 - (Jesus said) "I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."
Romans 5:3-5 - "...but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us."
2 Timothy 2:3 - "You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ."
1 Peter 4:12-13 - "Dear friends, don't be surprised at the fiery trials you are going through, as if something strange were happening to you. Instead, be very glad-because these trials will make you partners with Christ in his suffering, and afterward you will have the wonderful joy of sharing his glory when it is displayed to all the world."
The religious world does not like tribulation because it shakes the foundations and brings the lofty minded to their knees. Hardship often causes us to re-evaluate things and to be reminded of our need for God... And it's often through hardship that we come face to face with the futility of religion because religion means restriction and that is contrary to the life of the spirit.
2 Corinthians 3:16-18 - "But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, then the veil is taken away. Now, the Lord is the Spirit, and wherever the Spirit of the Lord is, he gives freedom. And all of us have had that veil removed so that we can be mirrors that brightly reflect the glory of the Lord. And as the Spirit of the Lord works within us, we become more and more like him and reflect his glory even more.
Walking without the "crutch" of organized religion can be difficult at times. There may even be moments when you will pray for something to inoculate you from the pain of the stretching and uncomfortable circumstance that leaves you without any crutch to lean on except to produce an even greater desperation for God and the opportunity to focus like a laser beam on learning to hear His voice because - trust me friends - sometimes it's all you will have.
At the time of writing this blog, I've been out of typical "church world" now for almost 8 years (in fact, maybe a little over that now). I can promise you, the Lord will always have your back and never leave or forsake you and - if you trust Him and follow Him - you will not be disappointed. You will learn to know your Heavenly Father in a way deeper than you've known before and it will do your heart MUCH good! My love for Jesus has not diminished at all, nor has my process of spiritual growth slowed down or been stunted in any way! And don't worry too much about what appears a "lack of fellowship" at first. God knows exactly what you have need of and He will lead you and He will assemble you together with His body as His Spirit sees fit and on His own time table.
Galatians 5:1 - Christ has freed us so that we may enjoy the benefits of freedom. Therefore, be firm in this freedom, and don't become slaves again.
Colossians 2:16-23 (The Message) - So don't put up with anyone pressuring you in details of diet, worship services, or holy days. All those things are mere shadows cast before what was to come; the substance is Christ. Don't tolerate people who try to run your life, ordering you to bow and scrape, insisting that you join their obsession with angels and that you seek out visions. They're a lot of hot air, that's all they are. They're completely out of touch with the source of life, Christ, who puts us together in one piece, whose very breath and blood flow through us. He is the Head and we are the body. We can grow up healthy in God only as he nourishes us. So, then, if with Christ you've put all that pretentious and infantile religion behind you, why do you let yourselves be bullied by it? "Don't touch this! Don't taste that! Don't go near this!" Do you think things that are here today and gone tomorrow are worth that kind of attention? Such things sound impressive if said in a deep enough voice. They even give the illusion of being pious and humble and ascetic. But they're just another way of showing off, making yourselves look important.
Be free my friends!!! Remember that YOU are the House of the Lord. Let that be enough! And no longer be intimidated by proud pious men who think they are wiser than God in these things. You know the Truth! The Truth sets you FREE!!! BE FREE THEN!!! And let the true joy of the Lord be your strength and let His love and grace give you hope, confidence, and strength for each day you live.
1 Corinthians 3:16 - Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
(For those of you unfamiliar with some of the terminology I use, such as when I say "my religious life" I do not mean that I no longer follow Jesus... but just the opposite. I am simply making a separation between some of the typical activities associated with traditional organized religion as opposed to simply following Christ)
It never ceases to amaze me how remarkable is the original language of Scripture as God saw fit to compile together for our learning. The precision of which the words in Scripture connect and the complete harmony of the text as a whole is so incredible that I think even a hardened skeptic, if he were to approach the matter honestly, would have to admit that Scripture presents a most persuasive indication that a wise and loving God exists and has deliberate intent to interact with humanity.
Those who know me well, know how much I enjoy studying the Bible and also the writings of the early church fathers (of the anti-Nicean era). I also enjoy a lot of older Scripture resource commentaries.
One of my favorite works is that of a man by the name of Richard Lenski; a Lutheran theologian from the 1920's who wrote an expansive volume of commentaries on the entire New Testament. Lenski's writings give incredible analysis of verbs, historical background, and syntax. His works are an amazing resource for those of us who don't have the privilege of understanding the complications of the Greek language (that Scripture was written in).Lenski's writings were actually quite influential in my initial biblical investigation of topics such as "tithing" and other religious concepts and practices - which preceded my own exodus from "organized religion". Oddly enough, however, the very same church organization (that I attended) whose Bible college president suggested to us students that Lenski was a trustworthy "10" as far as commentaries on the Greek text of Scripture was concerned, consistently rejected Lenski's conclusions in doctrine and practice. In fact, after studying the Bible in earnest (along with the help of great works like Lenski), when I raised questions as to why the Bible's account of things held virtually no harmony with what our church was teaching on various subjects (like tithing), I was told to either align myself with the church's viewpoint or find someplace else to take my opinions. I was even threatened to be removed from any position of so-called "ministry" that might influence other people with a viewpoint other than what the church held if I did not hold my peace. When I asked for clear Scripture-based evidence that refutiated my conclusions, I got silence in return.
Funny how a theologian like R.C.H. Lenski was so proudly recommened by even the head of the church's Bible college program (a man who bestowed the title of Doctor of Theology on my pastor and gave me my Associates degree as well), yet anyone who was smart enough to actually read what he had to say, was considered to be a threat to the established order (or so it would seem). In fact, my pastor at the time looked right across his office desk at me and told me he believed I was deceived. I don't hold a grudge against him for this. I believe his reaction was primarily out of anxiety because his long-held comfortable religious traditions were being challenged and he didn't know how to respond. I can only imagine if I had been the one in his shoes; a man whose entire livelihood depends on the religious system and the status-quo perspective on tithing... when suddenly some young punk comes along and says, "Hey, the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes!"
I still pray for that man whenever God puts him on my heart and I try to always remind myself that there, but for the grace of God, go I. My heart wants to see him, and all those like him, totally set free from the many of lies of religious tradition so many of us have bought into over the years. It's funny how so many people can so proudly claim they are "Bible-believing" and yet the very thought of actually embracing what that Book really says sometimes terrifies the hell out of them... to the point where they will go so far as to manipulate their own minds away from the truth and accept a lie that guarantees them comfort and a false sense of security. God help us!
Today, just out of curiosity, I thought I'd dust off one of Lenski's old books and look up Acts 7:48, which includes Stephen's sharp words about religion that earned him a proper stoning to death! I couldn't recall if I had ever looked up the ol' Lutheran theologian on this passage upon my own exodus from church world or not, so I thought, why not give it a look. The passage, as it appears in the NKJV, is first as follows:
Acts 7:48-56 - "However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says: 'Heaven is My throne, And earth is My footstool. What house will you build for Me? says the LORD, Or what is the place of My rest? Has My hand not made all these things?' You stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers, who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it." When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
I find it interesting how familiar this passage is for those of us who have also experienced the harsh reaction of religious folks who still don't like to hear from us that God doesn't dwell in houses built by the hands of men. Amazing how this revelation (which he did not hesitate to boldly proclaim) cost Stephen his very life. I love that God opened Stephen's eyes to see the Lord Jesus Christ standing at the right hand of the Father as he declared it! What an incredible picture of endorsement and honor from God Himself! Stephen got it right! What an encouragement and what a challenge to us!
Such a contrast from Peter, whom when he witnessed Jesus being transfigured in glory before his very eyes (and even seeing Moses and Elijah appearing and talking with the Lord), said in excitement:
(Matthew 17:4) "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
Isn't that funny? And isn't that just what men do today? "Let's build something to memorialize the Lord... a place to honor Him with worship... a house to make monument to the move of God that we have thus experienced." And in just the same way, they build shrines to honor men as much as they do to honor God (often indirectly, but you can tell by the way the people attending talk about their leader). Funny how they seem to forget the lessons of passages like this one in Matthew as well, where God immediately replies to Peter's wild idea to build three "churches" (if you will forgive that interpretation). In fact, God didn't even "reply" so much as INTERRUPT Peter right as he was blabbing on about how to "package" this moment:
(Matthew 17:5) While he (Peter) was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!"
Curious how God was not the least bit interested in anything coming out of Peter's mouth at this moment; completely disregards his "inspired" idea to organize religion (as it were), and instead declares His Son alone in whom He is well pleased with and whom He desires that men focus their attentions on... No one and nothing more, no one and nothing less. The voice simply says, "HEAR HIM!" Why does it seem this is the last lesson we seem to learn? God Himself has said that all that is required is that we HEAR JESUS! His desire is not shrines dedicated unto worship... He simply wants hearts to follow what the Lord speaks. No memorial chapels necessary! As Jesus told the woman at the well, "the Father seeks those to worship Him in spirit and in truth." What is with our infatuation with "houses of worship" to the point where we even condemn those who choose (or even feel they are led by God) not to attend such? In all of Scripture, God has never given command for men to build houses of worship! Indeed God allowed it for a time because of man's ignorance. The Scripture says that He "winked" on it. But now He calls all men everywhere to repent!
Acts 17:28-30 - "for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, 'For we are also His offspring.' Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent."
Anyway, out of curiosity, I looked up Lenski and read the following:
- "For, indeed, all that others can do is 'to dwell in things made with hands.' That is one difference between them and the Highest, one of the great titles for God. It is because of His infinite exaltation that he is beyond all man-made things."
"When Stephen speaks thus about the Temple, the very one built by Solomon, he has God's own Word to support him: even as the prophet states, namely Isaiah 66:1,2, with only slight verbal difference between the LXX and the Hebrew. The quotation is exactly to the point:
"'The heaven a throne for Me, and the earth a footstool of my feet! What kind of house will you build Me?' saith the Lord; 'And what a place of my rest? Did not my hand make all these things?'"
"Here God Himself speaks and declares what he things of any and every temple built for Him by men. The superstitious reverence of the Jesus for their Temple here finds its divine answer. These Jews treat the Highest as though He were some pagan god or pagan idol that had to have some sort of temple for its home. Because Stephen has spoken of God as being exalted above all man-made temples, they are now putting him on trial. Because he will not make God an idol that needs must have a temple, they are ready to condemn him for blasphemy of their Temple."
"We must note the full force of what Stephen says... without either break or pause. Even the heaven is only God's throne, a royal seat for Him. Heaven itself is not a house or a temple for Him; it is only one of the things He has made. As for the whole earth, it is vastly less, nothing more than a footstool for His feet, so far beneath Him, one of the insignificant things He has made. Why does Isaiah say these tremendous things to the Israel of his time and to the future Israel that would return from its seventy years of captivity in Babylon to build Him another temple? Because of their wicked and obdurate hearts."
"That is exactly why Stephen, too, hurls these same words at his present hearers, whose hearts are of the same kind... The Herodian Temple was even now in the process of being rebuilt. And what a place of rest are they trying to provide, where He may enter and abide among them? They have forgotten His infinite greatness which Solomon remembered, II Chronicles 6:18... They no longer know that God looks only to him who is of a contrite spirit and who trembles at His Word lest perhaps he fail to observe it..."
"to build temples and churches, to make them grand and imposing, to fill them with crowds for great services while hearts are without contrition, obdurate before God's Word, is to treat God as an idol to whom we may dictate as we please, to invent what his will and word is to be to suit our own perverted hearts. That kind of house many still build, a place where they offer rest to the Highest."
Wow! Isn't it amazing what's contained in some of these old books? Where are these men and women of Scriptural integrity today, who handle the Truth honestly and preach it boldly? They still exist... (and they may even be reading this blog or writing or declaring this truth to others), though they are not often received by the mainstream church any better than as the religious Jews during the New Testament era.
Not too many people today are getting stoned to death for standing on this revelation, but many have still experienced a "death" by disassociation from the folks they once thought were their friends and family in Christ and whom they once trusted as spiritual fathers in the faith. But I pray that, even though some must endure the rejection of friends and family for the sake of embracing truth, that they will embrace that truth fully and react with only love. For the freedom that comes from knowing Christ deeply without the distraction of religious pressure is like nothing else! He whom the Son sets free is FREE INDEED!!! (John 8:36) Please, my friends, if you have been pondering these things in your heart for some time (perhaps even long before you read this), don't be intimidated by religious peers who warn you that leaving behind the established religious pattern may threaten the success of your spiritual growth and development. That is a LIE from the devil himself! If Christ is your center and if it is truly He whom you cling to, you will not be able to help but grow spiritually.
The lie of organized religion says that you can't make it without the help of that system, but it is only a lie; a desperate attempt to manipulate you by fear and keep you under control. GOD LOVES YOU! He has your very best interest at hand and, if you are willing, He will lead you - as His Word promises - into ALL truth! (John 16:13) Not only will you grow spiritually... YOU WILL THRIVE! And don't be deceived to think that true spiritual growth comes without its share of growing pains... because you will have plenty and the enemy will use them as opportunity to make you want to "go back to Egypt" where things were comfortable. Religious friends will watch you going through some trial and assume it is because you are "disconnected from church" and "outside the covering", but don't be intimidated by the ignorance of others. The Scripture plainly says that all who follow Christ will suffer hardship and trial. This is just par for the course. I would rather worry if hardship never seems to cross your path...
John 16:33 - (Jesus said) "I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."
Romans 5:3-5 - "...but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us."
2 Timothy 2:3 - "You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ."
1 Peter 4:12-13 - "Dear friends, don't be surprised at the fiery trials you are going through, as if something strange were happening to you. Instead, be very glad-because these trials will make you partners with Christ in his suffering, and afterward you will have the wonderful joy of sharing his glory when it is displayed to all the world."
The religious world does not like tribulation because it shakes the foundations and brings the lofty minded to their knees. Hardship often causes us to re-evaluate things and to be reminded of our need for God... And it's often through hardship that we come face to face with the futility of religion because religion means restriction and that is contrary to the life of the spirit.
2 Corinthians 3:16-18 - "But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, then the veil is taken away. Now, the Lord is the Spirit, and wherever the Spirit of the Lord is, he gives freedom. And all of us have had that veil removed so that we can be mirrors that brightly reflect the glory of the Lord. And as the Spirit of the Lord works within us, we become more and more like him and reflect his glory even more.
Walking without the "crutch" of organized religion can be difficult at times. There may even be moments when you will pray for something to inoculate you from the pain of the stretching and uncomfortable circumstance that leaves you without any crutch to lean on except to produce an even greater desperation for God and the opportunity to focus like a laser beam on learning to hear His voice because - trust me friends - sometimes it's all you will have.
At the time of writing this blog, I've been out of typical "church world" now for almost 8 years (in fact, maybe a little over that now). I can promise you, the Lord will always have your back and never leave or forsake you and - if you trust Him and follow Him - you will not be disappointed. You will learn to know your Heavenly Father in a way deeper than you've known before and it will do your heart MUCH good! My love for Jesus has not diminished at all, nor has my process of spiritual growth slowed down or been stunted in any way! And don't worry too much about what appears a "lack of fellowship" at first. God knows exactly what you have need of and He will lead you and He will assemble you together with His body as His Spirit sees fit and on His own time table.
Galatians 5:1 - Christ has freed us so that we may enjoy the benefits of freedom. Therefore, be firm in this freedom, and don't become slaves again.
Colossians 2:16-23 (The Message) - So don't put up with anyone pressuring you in details of diet, worship services, or holy days. All those things are mere shadows cast before what was to come; the substance is Christ. Don't tolerate people who try to run your life, ordering you to bow and scrape, insisting that you join their obsession with angels and that you seek out visions. They're a lot of hot air, that's all they are. They're completely out of touch with the source of life, Christ, who puts us together in one piece, whose very breath and blood flow through us. He is the Head and we are the body. We can grow up healthy in God only as he nourishes us. So, then, if with Christ you've put all that pretentious and infantile religion behind you, why do you let yourselves be bullied by it? "Don't touch this! Don't taste that! Don't go near this!" Do you think things that are here today and gone tomorrow are worth that kind of attention? Such things sound impressive if said in a deep enough voice. They even give the illusion of being pious and humble and ascetic. But they're just another way of showing off, making yourselves look important.
Be free my friends!!! Remember that YOU are the House of the Lord. Let that be enough! And no longer be intimidated by proud pious men who think they are wiser than God in these things. You know the Truth! The Truth sets you FREE!!! BE FREE THEN!!! And let the true joy of the Lord be your strength and let His love and grace give you hope, confidence, and strength for each day you live.
1 Corinthians 3:16 - Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Forsaking The Assembly?
by David Yeubanks
And let us not forsake the fellowship that we have among ourselves as the maner of some is: but let us exhort one another and that so much the more because ye see that the day draweth nigh."
Hebrews 10:25 (William Tyndale's Translation, 1526)
The book of Hebrews talks about a separation from the old religion of Judaism and a drawing unto Christ alone. This was a hard message for the Jews to hear because Judaism was their whole life and their whole perceived connection with God. In their minds submitting to the practice of organized religion was godliness (and new Christians were also being swept right into this religious influence). But the author places his message in no uncertain terms, "you must leave that camp and join yourself to Jesus Christ, even if it means you bear His reproach." Reproach by whom? Whom do you suppose, given the context of that passage? Who was it that rejected Christ and called Him a blasphemer? Was it not the religious Jews? The sinners even invited Him into their homes, but the religious cast Him out.
And let us not forsake the fellowship that we have among ourselves as the maner of some is: but let us exhort one another and that so much the more because ye see that the day draweth nigh."
Hebrews 10:25 (William Tyndale's Translation, 1526)
The following is a letter I wrote to someone a long while back about the subject of "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together" (Hebrews 10:25), which is a common verse cited by Christians who believe that if you're not attending weekly meetings or plugged in a church organization that you are somehow out of sync with Scripture and, for all practical purposes, "backsliding". Some refer to the out of church crowd as isolationists, rebels, or walking wounded and this verse is often given as the prescription. But is "attending church" really what the author of Hebrews had in mind here? I don't think so. For those interested, I thought I'd share my (not so) little rant. 
Dave
P.S. Much of the information in this letter is drawn from other articles I have written as well as books and resources from other researchers and friends who have written on this topic. This particular article also appeared on the blog at http://www.myspace.com/truthforfree.
Doesn't The Bible Say Not To Forsake Assembling Together?
First of all, I believe it is essential that we understand the meaning of the word "church" as it is used in the Bible. Perhaps this has already been reiterated in other web posts but I am going to mention this again (in some detail) before tackling the Hebrews 10:25 passage you mentioned (regarding "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together") in more detail. Please note, I am going to attempt to lay some heavy (although not all-inclusive) groundwork here in advance of my answer, but these comments, while being historically and biblically sound, are not meant to suggest that Christians should not meet together, share fellowship, pray or preach the Word of God. If that is the conclusion someone makes from these comments, then they have misinterpreted my reason of emphasis. I do not write these words from ignorance or out of any bitterness, although I confess to you that I spent much of my life in organized religion in ignorance about a great many of these issues. My desire is to embrace God's truth (not just for truth's sake, but because I love Him and desire to grow evermore close to Him) and I, quite honestly, do not care if the traditions of men (even my own) are offended by His truth. If a person is honest, they will have to admit that when flesh is confronted by the Spirit of the Living God and the truth of Scripture it often resists submission and humility. But my response to that conviction of Christ and His Word must be to repent and yield, otherwise I only end up hardening my heart and increasing in stubbornness as well as blindness. I want to see clearly with spiritual eyes and walk full in the grace and liberty of Jesus Christ whose precious blood was shed for me.
We Christians tend to throw around a lot of terminologies as well as operate under a lot of religious mindsets that are, quite honestly, the primary product of human tradition and not biblical design. This is not to suggest that all organization is "evil" but sometimes it is counterproductive to true and essential spiritual growth. Sometimes our traditions can make God's Word to seemingly have no affect and can even move us to actually reject His commands. Jesus Himself noted this reality. Just as we read in Mark 7:5, so are there Pharisees today who are asking the question of those who refuse to follow erroneous traditions at the expense of biblical truth: "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders?" You know well, I'm sure, Jesus' bold reply:
Mark 7:6-9 - He told them, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites. As it is written, 'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is empty, because they teach human rules as doctrines.' You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition." Then he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to keep your own tradition!"
Before I can answer the question of what I believe Hebrews 10:25 has in mind concerning "assembling", I feel it is important to look closer at what "assembly" is all about in the body of Christ. Too many Christians have been raised with a traditionally inspired definition of some of these terms and this has served to make them embrace many biblically inaccurate concepts. First I would like to look closer at the popular concept of the word "church" in comparison with the biblical meaning.
The Greek word for "church" is "ecclesia" and it means "assembly". It is a combination of two separate words (ek, "out of," and klesis, "a calling" – from kaleo, "to call") meaning "a calling from out of." This coincides with the Lord's directive, which Paul reminded the Corinthian believers of (notice how God describes His temple):
2 Corinthians 6:16-18 - And what union can there be between God's temple and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God said: "I will live in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they will be my people. Therefore, come out from them and separate yourselves from them, says the Lord. Don't touch their filthy things, and I will welcome you. And I will be your Father, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty."
Truly God has called us out of the world unto Himself – into His Assembly. This is the "Church" (according to its true biblical meaning)! We, indeed, are the "called out ones". However, even the word "church" itself is really a poor term to use. The word has no literal derivative in the original text of Scripture. It was added by translators hundreds of years after the New Testament was written. As a matter of fact, the English word "church" is presumed to come from a Greek word that is never even used one time in all of Scripture! Here we have an example of translators modifying the text to make it seem to align better with tradition rather than trying to convey the literal intended meaning. The word "church" naturally draws the reader's thoughts to religious structure and form rather than organic spiritual life. When the King James Version of the Bible was created, James actually instructed the translators (through a bishop by the name of Robert Bancroft) not to change the word church to reflect its actual meaning. This is not a conspiracy theory, this is documented history! The Bishop, with the King's approval, devised 15 rules which the translators were ordered to abide by in their development of what has come to be known as "the Authorized Version", one of which was this rule not to tamper with the old ecclesiastical terms (i.e. church). Again, this is historical fact.
It is a well known fact among many scholars that King James was not a fan of the Bible translation most popular in his day known as the Geneva Bible. There were two major reasons for this. One, because of the Geneva Bible's Calvinistic leanings and, two, the Geneva Bible had marginal notes to help explain certain texts and some of these notes challenged his view of what he believed to be the divine right of kings to govern the church and stand as its head. James saw the Geneva Bible as a threat to his lordship over the church and this no doubt fueled much of his ambition to create a Bible version that was officially "authorized" by the king himself.
"'I profess,' he said, 'I could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst.'" (The
As an interesting side note, even the first pilgrims who came to
In all honesty, the word "church" should not even appear in the Bible. But rather than getting into an enormous discussion over the word we are accustomed to using and not likely to see change any time soon, I will instead emphasize the actual biblical meaning of ecclesia. I am convinced that there is not that much problem with use of the word "church" so long as we clearly comprehend its intended meaning and use in Scripture. So, for the rest of this letter, I will continue to use the word "Church" appealing to the reader's understanding that it is the "ecclesia" of God that I have in mind and I will clarify my use of the term when I am referring to "church" as the human-devised structures and programs of organized religion and institutional Christianity.
In every case where we see this word "church" used in reference to believers, it is speaking of the Lord's Church (his ek-klesis or ecclesia). There are not many brides of Christ, there are not many bodies of Christ… There is only one. Paul spoke concerning the Church with such incredible singularity. Additionally, we never see this word "ecclesia" used in terms of an organization or a building or a denomination – it always, ALWAYS, is a direct reference to the people of God, born into His Kingdom through Christ Jesus. Paul wrote many letters to many people in different locations, but he spoke a singular message of there being only ONE BODY, which is the Lord's Church. Therefore, in my humble opinion, it is not accurate to say that Paul necessarily wrote letters to "churches" but rather to the Church (Ecclesia) represented in a given city. Though our English translations of the Bible virtually every use the word "churches" (plural), the Greek remains "ecclesia" singular! The only exception to this rule is when the author is speaking to communities of believers within a massive region (e.g. the "churches" in
This, I believe, is a most significant fact to regard. Observe the following passages concerning the "oneness" of the Body (the church). Notice how SINGULAR these terms are in every group Paul preached to.
Ephesians 4:1-6 - Therefore I, a prisoner for serving the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of your calling, for you have been called by God. Be humble and gentle. Be patient with each other, making allowance for each other's faults because of your love. Always keep yourselves united in the Holy Spirit, and bind yourselves together with peace. We are all ONE BODY, we have the same Spirit, and we have all been called to the same glorious future. There is only one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and there is only one God and Father, who is over us all and in us all and living through us all.
Ephesians 5:29-30 - No one hates his own body but lovingly cares for it, just as Christ cares for his body, which is the church. And we are his body.
Colossians 1:18 - Christ is the head of the church, which is his body. He is the first of all who will rise from the dead, so he is first in everything.
Romans 12:4-5 - Just as our bodies have many parts and each part has a special function, so it is with Christ's body. We are all parts of His ONE BODY, and each of us has different work to do. And since we are all ONE BODY in Christ, we belong to each other, and each of us needs all the others.
Ephesians 1:21-23 - Now he is far above any ruler or authority or power or leader or anything else in this world or in the world to come. And God has put all things under the authority of Christ, and he gave him this authority for the benefit of the church. And the church is his body; it is filled by Christ, who fills everything everywhere with his presence.
Ephesians 4:15-16 - Instead, we will hold to the truth in love, becoming more and more in every way like Christ, who is the head of his body, the church. Under his direction, the whole body is fitted together perfectly. As each part does its own special work, it helps the other parts grow, so that the whole body is healthy and growing and full of love.
The verses (like those mentioned above) are numerous and exceptionally clear! While as one body we have many parts, those individual parts are not defined by attendance of or joining some other separate church organization. When someone speaks of getting one's self into a church, what exactly are they suggesting? Are they suggesting that there is more than one church a person needs to "get into"? The biblical fact is that once a person is joined to Christ he is a full participating member of the Church; which is the body of Christ. There is nothing else he need join. There is nothing else he can join. There are "parts" but only
We have already mentioned this next detail briefly, but allow me to expand on it a bit further. Scholars agree that our English word, church, actually is derived from a Greek term that is never once used at all in the Bible! The Greek word which corresponds with the English word "church" is "kuriakon" (meaning "the lord or master of a property" also simply "the lord's house"). Kuriakon is a derivative of "kuriakos" (meaning "of, or belonging to a lord, master, etc."). The latter (kuriakos) is used twice in the Bible – NEVER as a definition of the Lord's Assembly (examples of use: 1 Corinthians 11:20; Revelations 1:10)! The word "church" (or rather "kuriakon") was typically used in reference to things belonging to the Roman Emperor in early times. Eventually, Christians adopted the word and applied it to their temples, but in the first and second century, Christians did not engage in the practice of building temples because such was unanimously considered idolatry; the very practice of pagans. This is 100% documented fact! The following quotations are excerpts from early Christian writings:
"The Word, prohibiting all sacrifices and the building of temples, indicates that the Almighty is not contained in anything." - Clement of
"We refuse to build lifeless temples to the Giver of all life... Our bodies are the
"You mistakenly think we conceal what we worship since we have no temples or altars. Yet how can anyone make an image of God? Man himself is the image of God. How can anyone build a temple to Him, when the whole world can't contain Him? Even I, a mere human, travel far and wide. So how can anyone shut up the majesty of so great a Person within one small building? Isn't it better for Him to be dedicated in our minds and consecrated in our innermost hearts - rather than in a building?" - Mark Felix in "Octavius" (2nd Century A.D.)
"You say that we build no temples [to the gods] and do not worship their images... Well, what greater honor or dignity could we ascribe to them than that we put them in the same position as the Head and Lord of the universe! ...Do we honor Him with shrines and by building temples?" - Arnobius (305 A.D.)
"It remains for me to tell you about the temple, how these wretched men who had been deceived put their trust in the building, as though it were God's house, and not in God who made them. For almost like the gentiles they 'made him holy' in the temple. But know what the Lord said in nullifying the temple: 'Who has measured the sky with a span, or the land with his hand? Haven't I?,' says Yahweh. 'The sky is my throne and the land is the footstool for my feet. What kind of house will you build for me? Or what will be my resting place?' Know that their hope is worthless… Now let's ask whether there is any
"(You) being stones of the temple of the Father, prepared for the building of God the Father, and drawn up on high by the instrument of Jesus Christ, which is the cross, making use of the Holy Spirit as a rope, while your faith was the means by which you ascended, and your love the way which led up to God. Ye, therefore, as well as all your fellow-travelers, are God-bearers, temple-bearers, Christ-bearers, bearers of holiness, adorned in all respects with the commandments of Jesus Christ, in whom also I exult that I have been thought worthy, by means of this Epistle, to converse and rejoice with you, because with respect to your Christian life ye love nothing but God only." – The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians; Chapter 9 (30-107 A.D.).
"Let us therefore do all things as those who have Him dwelling in us, that we may be His temples, and He may be in us as our God, which indeed He is, and will manifest Himself before our faces. Wherefore we justly love Him." – The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians; Chapter 15 (30-107 A.D.).
"Rusticus, the perfect, said, 'Where do you assemble?' Justin Martyr replied, 'Where each one chooses and is able. Do you imagine that we all meet in the very same place?'" - Martyrdom of the Holy Martyrs (160 A.D.)
"We assemble together with the same quietness with which we live as individuals." - Mark Minucius Felix (200 A.D.)
"For where there are three persons - even if they are laity - there is a church." - Tertullian (212 A.D.)
[Pagan Antagonist:] "They [the Christians] despise the temples as dead houses... They laugh at sacred things." - Mark Minucius Felix (200 A.D.) NOTE: Felix was a Roman lawyer that converted to Christianity and wrote one of the finest apologies of early Christianity in the form of a dialogue between a Christian and a pagan; hence, this quote is intended to be a pagan's expressed agitation with the Christian's perspective on things.
Thanks to the influence of the Greeks and the Romans (and eventually the Roman Catholic Church), we now have church buildings and they have become so adopted as a part of our religious culture that we actually have deceived ourselves to think they are necessary and biblical. We falsely presume that true spiritual growth and fellowship cannot transpire without one of these "churches." We might ask ourselves, "if the early ecclesia thrived and spread like wild fire throughout the world without church buildings and programs, how is it we have come to believe that we can do nothing without them?"
Ecclesia, by stark contrast, bears no connotation whatsoever of an earthy building, temple or shrine. In the 16th Century, men of God like William Tyndale (Greek scholar and translator of the first printed English Bible) knew it and did not translate "ekklesia" as "church"... They (the religious leaders of his day) called him a heretic and burned him at the stake all because he translated the Scriptures straight from Greek and Hebrew into terms that more closely identified with their original meanings.
The Christians in the earliest centuries understood what it meant to "come out from among them and be separate" (2 Corinthians 6:13-18) as we discussed earlier. There was a cost to count that few of us can even compare to; for they gave their very lives for the truth.
As Christians we have been called out by God into His royal Assembly; His family. I personally think it is no coincidence that ecclesia has this very thought in mind. It makes perfect sense! For not only has God, in His Word, shown that we have been called out from among the world, but also even the RELIGIOUS world! In Jesus' (and the apostles') day it was the religious world of Judaism. Judaism was the epitome of organized religion. It was filled with rules, rituals, ceremonies and observance of holy days and religious meetings. God called His people to come out from that camp and to be joined with Christ. In fact, there is a prophecy in Isaiah where God showed His utter disgust for man's religious worship (which had become lip service and going through the motions but void of any sincere heart).
Isaiah 1:12-17 - When you come before me, who ever gave you the idea of acting like this, Running here and there, doing this and that-- all this sheer commotion in the place provided for worship? Quit your worship charades. I can't stand your trivial religious games: Monthly conferences, weekly Sabbaths, special meetings-- meetings, meetings, meetings--I can't stand one more! Meetings for this, meetings for that. I hate them! You've worn me out! I'm sick of your religion, religion, religion, while you go right on sinning. When you put on your next prayer-performance, I'll be looking the other way. No matter how long or loud or often you pray, I'll not be listening. And do you know why? Because you've been tearing people to pieces, and your hands are bloody. GO HOME and wash up. Clean up your act. Sweep your lives clean of your evildoings so I don't have to look at them any longer. Say no to wrong. Learn to do good. Work for justice. Help the down-and-out. Stand up for the homeless. Go to bat for the defenseless.
Isn't it funny that God wasn't interested in their "assembling" while they continued to simply perform religion and still sin. He sends them home! Go take care of business! Let your life speak louder than your mouth! Stand up for the homeless and the defenseless! People ought to be your concern! It reminds me of what James said.
James 1:27 - Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.
In similar fashion, while many people today have been taught that "giving" is actuated by donating percentages of their money to church organizations (which is resource primarily wasted on buildings rather than meeting the financial needs of actual people as was common in the early Church), the Scripture presents no such design. In fact, Jesus Himself clearly told His followers how to give to Him… Surprisingly enough, He never told them to get plugged into a good "church" and start tithing. Rather he said the following:
Matthew 25:34-40 - Then the king will say to those on his right, "My father has blessed you! Come and receive the kingdom that was prepared for you before the world was created. When I was hungry, you gave me something to eat, and when I was thirsty, you gave me something to drink. When I was a stranger, you welcomed me, and when I was naked, you gave me clothes to wear. When I was sick, you took care of me, and when I was in jail, you visited me." Then the ones who pleased the Lord will ask, "When did we give you something to eat or drink? When did we welcome you as a stranger or give you clothes to wear or visit you while you were sick or in jail?" The king will answer, "Whenever you did it for any of my people, no matter how unimportant they seemed, you did it for me."
God's Word sounds a loud call to all of those who are His that we are not to be about the business of building and concerning ourselves with earthly cities (religious centers and temples) here on earth (as the Jews did), but to keep our eyes peeled for the city yet to come. That's where it's at! That's where we are to store up our treasures.
Hebrews 13:8-16 - Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever. Do not be turned away by different strange teachings, because it is good for your hearts to be made strong by grace, and not by meats, which were of no profit to those who took so much trouble over them. We have an altar from which those priests who are servants in the Tent may not take food. For the bodies of the beasts whose blood is taken into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin are burned outside the circle of the tents. For this reason Jesus was put to death outside the walls, so that he might make the people holy by his blood. Let us then go out to him outside the circle of the tents, taking his shame on ourselves. For here we have no fixed resting-place, but our search is for the one which is to come. Let us then make offerings of praise to God at all times through him, that is to say, the fruit of lips giving witness to his name. But go on doing good and giving to others, because God is well-pleased with such offerings.
I find it interesting again that God does not call us to have large worship services but to live a life of worship – that worship being trademarked with ACTION. The offering He desires is praise at ALL TIMES (not just a Sunday sing song) and that primarily to be actuated through our doing good and being generous to others who are in need. The time for sitting in pews and thinking this is somehow "fellowship" or that it constitutes "being assembled" is long over. God is merciful in our stages of ignorance and is patient as we grow. He is so good and so faithful to continue to lovingly guide us and pour out His blessings on us, even when while we sometimes ignorantly remained engrossed in traditions that do more to slow that process of growth that aide it.
Many churched believers remain in a seemingly perpetual state of babyhood, always dependent on "leaders" to teach them, hear from God for them, do the work of evangelizing the lost for them, entertain them, counsel and encourage them, help them in crisis, and direct practically their every move. So many Christians divide themselves according to favored leaders they admire and who give them that sense of security they lack. This dependence on men is a natural byproduct the church system produces. Ironically, it's not just a byproduct… it's also the fuel that keeps it running. It is designed to foster spiritually immature children and keep them that way (just enough truth and freedom to keep them happy and pacified). If it fails in this task, the system will crumble for lack of support. It needs these immature foster children as much as they think they need it. But Christ never intended His people to be treated this way. He wants them to move beyond immaturity and grow up into mature men and women of God who rest confident in the leadership of the Holy Spirit more than men and programs. He wants them to find their security in Him alone, not in men and religious programs. When Christians follow the path of denominationalism and churchianity, they become blinded to their own condition and they fall prey to the danger of actually embracing a worldly mindset that cleverly creeps in through the guise of spirituality. This is not all that different from what the apostle Paul warned the believers in
1 Corinthians 3:1-4 - Dear brothers and sisters, when I was with you I couldn't talk to you as I would to mature Christians. I had to talk as though you belonged to this world or as though you were infants in the Christian life. I had to feed you with milk and not with solid food, because you couldn't handle anything stronger. And you still aren't ready, for you are still controlled by your own sinful desires. You are jealous of one another and quarrel with each other. Doesn't that prove you are controlled by your own desires? You are acting like people who don't belong to the Lord. When one of you says, "I am a follower of Paul," and another says, "I prefer Apollos," aren't you acting like those who are not Christians?
Remember how Jesus also told the woman at the well that the day was coming when men would not need to go to the temple in
John 4:23-24 - (Jesus said) "But the time is coming--it has, in fact, come--when what you're called will not matter and where you go to worship will not matter. It's who you are and the way you live that count before God. Your worship must engage your spirit in the pursuit of truth. That's the kind of people the Father is out looking for: those who are simply and honestly themselves before him in their worship. God is sheer being itself--Spirit. Those who worship him must do it out of their very being, their spirits, their true selves, in adoration."
But what has the church organization done today? It has made "worship" a song service that must be actuated routinely in an officially designated building, once a week, and led by professional musicians. The organization has carried over the types and shadows of Old Covenant Levitical priesthood and placed before believers "worship leaders" who mediate and perform and supposedly lead people into the throne room of God. But where is such concept ever found in the New Testament? Do we really need a modern system of Levites, an elite class, to lead people into God's throne room? I thought we were afforded the right to come boldly before his throne freely because of Christ's work.
Hebrews 4:14-16 - Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.
No man on earth can "lead us" in worship. Being led is something that transpires only through direct communication with the Father. And as we've already seen in the Word, "worship" is not a song style – it is how we live our lives before Him. I have no problems with song services in and of themselves. It's a total blast to be in a room with a collective of believers in Christ, singing our hearts out to Jesus. That is wonderful, but there is no mandate for such organization on worship in the Scripture. In fact, the New Testament never describes worship at all in the context of a song service in some weekly meeting. Again, worship is a lifestyle and this importance is far too often overlooked. All of these elements of "the program" deceive people to think that they are fulfilling the Lord's desires by cramming all of these things into a 2 hour church service each week. People instinctively get themselves into a mode that "if I just do this faithfully every week, it covers all the bases, God is pleased, I'm doing my duty, I am "assembling" as the Bible says, and I'm growing spiritually." It is so easy to fall into the trap of thinking our righteousness is based on and maintained by works and things like church attendance. That is why I believe organized religion is so dangerously deceptive. The same was true in the first century. Paul was stunned that these believers who had experienced such great freedom and joy in Christ, were now turning back to religious practice. They still believed in Jesus. They still wanted to follow God, but they had allowed themselves to move away from the simplicity of their devotion to Christ and were replacing it, little by little, with religious observation.
Galatians 3:1-5 - You crazy Galatians! Did someone put a hex on you? Have you taken leave of your senses? Something crazy has happened, for it's obvious that you no longer have the crucified Jesus in clear focus in your lives. His sacrifice on the Cross was certainly set before you clearly enough. Let me put this question to you: How did your new life begin? Was it by working your heads off to please God? Or was it by responding to God's Message to you? Are you going to continue this craziness? For only crazy people would think they could complete by their own efforts what was begun by God. If you weren't smart enough or strong enough to begin it, how do you suppose you could perfect it? Did you go through this whole painful learning process for nothing? It is not yet a total loss, but it certainly will be if you keep this up! Answer this question: Does the God who lavishly provides you with his own presence, his Holy Spirit, working things in your lives you could never do for yourselves, does he do these things because of your strenuous moral striving or because you trust him to do them in you?
So many good, church attending folks look at passages like the previous one and they shake their heads and say, "those foolish Jews." Or they look at other groups, like the Roman Catholics, and say, "now they're really religious, but not us, we understand…. We speak in tongues and dance and have powerful worship services and our pastor preaches lively sermons that are culturally relevant…" I think there are going to be many like the
2 Corinthians 11:2-3 - For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
It is foolishness to think that most Christians aren't likely to get distracted by such things but the Scripture tells us that even the great apostle Peter, who walked with Christ in the flesh, compromised the truth and yielded to organized religion and was rebuked by Paul before the assembly!
Galatians 2:11 - Later, when Peter came to
Galatians 2:13-21 - Unfortunately, the rest of the Jews in the
The book of Hebrews talks about a separation from the old religion of Judaism and a drawing unto Christ alone. This was a hard message for the Jews to hear because Judaism was their whole life and their whole perceived connection with God. In their minds submitting to the practice of organized religion was godliness (and new Christians were also being swept right into this religious influence). But the author places his message in no uncertain terms, "you must leave that camp and join yourself to Jesus Christ, even if it means you bear His reproach." Reproach by whom? Whom do you suppose, given the context of that passage? Who was it that rejected Christ and called Him a blasphemer? Was it not the religious Jews? The sinners even invited Him into their homes, but the religious cast Him out.
We do not have a city or a building on this earth that represents the Lord's
Hebrews 13:12-14 (GW) - That is why Jesus suffered outside the gates of
I do want to look closer at the reference of Hebrews 10:25, but I wanted to lay a strong foundation for this word "church" (ecclesia) as it is rendered and understood in the original languages and how the apostles and Christ Himself detested organized religion, considering it an obstacle to faith. It is a fact that the early Christians knew nothing of church the way we know it today. They were a community of believers and they interacted with each other as a family not as members of some religious organization. They didn't build institutions of worship and Christian education. They didn't congregate to hear one guy preach at them for an hour. There were no liturgies in their gatherings. Their meetings were informal and everyone participated (in fact there was so much participation that sometimes their meetings together led to some disorder, which Paul lovingly helped them restore focus without squashing their zealousness to minister to one another). Their lives centered around Christ not around their meetings. They were a body who built up one another, person to person, on the faith of Jesus Christ. This is so important to understand because their concept of meeting together and their concept of the Church was virtually 180 degrees apart from what we consider the church and fellowship today. When we first realize this, it brings passages like Hebrews 10:25 that have been so abused and removed from context into proper light. I thank God that He did not say any of the things that most folks suggest in that verse. He did not say to make sure you attend a good church organization every Sunday. HE style="mso-spacerun: yes" together.? There are two important aspects here that must be regarded. The first I will emphasize by quoting the passage in its complete context. Note that the author here is not talking to some little church organization but to the body of Christ; which includes all of the called out ones!
Hebrews 10:14-25 - For by that one offering he perfected forever all those whom he is making holy. And the Holy Spirit also testifies that this is so. First he says, "This is the new covenant I will make with my people on that day, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts so they will understand them, and I will write them on their minds so they will obey them." Then he adds, "I will never again remember their sins and lawless deeds." Now when sins have been forgiven, there is no need to offer any more sacrifices. And so, dear brothers and sisters, we can boldly enter heaven's
Didn't Jesus say that when as few as two or three come together He would be there with them? (Matthew 18:20) Many Christians have even twisted this verse and changed the word "three" to "more" to justify their massive meetings. They say, "whenever two or more are gathered." The text, however, speaks in very intimate terms. Think about this in the natural… How easy is it to gather with just a few friends and be united together in purpose and conversation. It gets very difficult, however, the larger the number grows. What most people would feel comfortable sharing amidst a couple of close brothers or sisters in Christ, the same would not likely be willing to tell a crowd of people. Perhaps when Jesus said "two or three" He simply meant "at least that many". I don't want to presume too much. I'm just making an observation here. Another brother (Neil Girrard) actually shared this thought with me and I found it interesting. Anyway, it makes simple sense; especially when we consider what is clearly known about the early believers – they frequently met together in their homes and shared meals together. It's pretty hard to cram 5,000 people in a small room, especially around a dinner table. ;)
Even the early Church father Tertulian (late second century A.D.) acknowledged that even if just two or three come together, there is the church present. So "a church" is not described by a building and a program BUT BY PEOPLE! This is critical to understand because you can't have it any other way. You can't tell people they need to get into a church so that they will be "assembled" because it's misleading. People typically understand that this means they must find some organization to join. Whether you have said it or not, this implies also that attendance and membership in this organization somehow validates their faith (because real Christians go to church). If we say such things, we impose a legalism that God's Word never imposes. By all means encourage fellowship with other believers, but we should not tell people to get signed up in religious organizations (for the sake of fellowship). When we encourage that we do so without any authority of Scripture.
The author of Hebrews is not prescribing formula or ritual in the passage we are discussing. He is not commanding "church" attendance (the way many today presume) or even weekly meetings (though, in fairness, he is not forbidding weekly meeting either I will say). The book of Hebrews involves reference to the prophecy about the coming destruction of the
Notice something else here… The passage in Hebrews 10:25 says to exhort one another "even more" as you see the day approaching (the definition of the Greek text confirms this as the words "even more" or "much more" means with greater frequency"). Why would the author say "even more" unless it was such that they did not meet all that frequently? Simple logic tells us that he was encouraging them to pull closer together and encourage each other more and more as the days got more difficult. What you end up with here is actually more evidence that Christians did not meet for "church services" or even so-called "fellowship" on a regular basis any more than you can extract any notion that this is somehow what this passage prescribes! "Exhort one another even more" does not mean "schedule more church services and make sure everyone religiously attends them." 
Exhort (according to its definition in the original Greek) means - "to call to one's side, to speak to, to encourage and comfort". Clearly this is possible on any number of levels without necessitating the exorbant waste of financial resource in a building and a weekly program (let alone scores of rituals, liturgies, and other traditional religious practices - virtually all of which are not identified anywhere in the New Testament Scriptures). This "exhorting even more" could transpire very simply through letters, phone conversations, or in person. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to conclude from these passages of Scripture that "not forsaking the assembling" has anything to do with scheduling and imposing a requisite of weekly "church" attendance on believers in Christ.
At the very least, as we just observed, this was a special call to encourage the believers to get together because rough times were on the horizon, but the call is as simple as it was stated. One just cannot infer weekly organized "church" meetings with this passage. To do so is dishonest and a misuse of Scripture. When we do things like this, we remove the simplicity and profoundness of the family characteristic of the body of Christ and we force organization and cold, dead institutional religion into it. We press into a passage 1,700 years of pagan-inspired religious tradition that has influenced the Church but has no ground in the Gospel. Sorry to have to put it so bluntly, but there you have it. Thank God that most of the early Christian Church, and even many of the reformers and great theologians of times past, rightly defined the word "church" as it appears in Scripture – leaving out all the traditional nonsense that has been added to it. What has become of Christians today that they are more willing to accept the false definitions of tradition (and hold those as essential doctrine over others) rather than the simplistic and absolutely clear design of Scripture? And who are these men in the pulpits that see fit to excuse themselves from biblical realities and invest their own religious bias on zero authority of Scripture?
John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible (re: Church) says, "by the church, is meant, not an edifice of wood, stones, &c. but an assembly, and congregation of men; ...the elect of God, the general assembly and church of the first born, whose names are written in heaven; and especially such of them as were to be gathered in, and built on Christ, from among the Jews and Gentiles. The materials of this building are such, as are by nature no better, or more fit for it, than others: these stones originally lie in the same quarry with others; they are singled out, and separated from the rest, according to the sovereign will of God, by powerful and efficacious grace; and are broken and hewn by the Spirit of God, generally speaking, under the ministry of the word, and are, by him, made living stones; and being holy and spiritual persons, are built up a spiritual house: and these are the only persons which make up the true and invisible church of Christ..."
People's New Testament Commentary says, "...the church, the spiritual temple, formed of living stones, and built upon the rock. So is every confessor of Christ."
Milt Rodriguez (The Rebuilder Gazette; Volume 37, June 24, 2003) - "The New Testament is very clear in pointing out the fact that the
1 Peter 2:2-5 - "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious. To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
Consider also "the assembly" which the author of Hebrews is directly referring to:
Hebrews 12:23 - "To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect..."
Acts 7:48-49 - "Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?"
Acts 17:24 - "God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands."
Hebrews 9:11 - "But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building..."
1 Corinthians 3:9 - "For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building."
1 Corinthians 3:16 - "Know ye not that ye are the
2 Corinthians 6:16b - "...for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."
Revelation 21:3 - "And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, 'Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.'"
Ephesians 2:18-22 - "It is through Christ that all of us, Jews and Gentiles, are able to come in the one Spirit into the presence of the Father. So then, you Gentiles are not foreigners or strangers any longer; you are now citizens together with God's people and members of the family of God. You, too, are built upon the foundation laid by the apostles and prophets, the cornerstone being Christ Jesus himself. He is the one who holds the whole building together and makes it grow into a sacred temple dedicated to the Lord. In union with him you too are being built together with all the others into a place where God lives through his Spirit."
Note that in the preceding passage (and the one in 1 Corinthians 3:9) the term "building" is used metaphorically to describe the united body of Christ, who Himself is the foundation, the very cornerstone, of the Church. Note also that it is Christ Himself who is responsible to hold all of us together and cause us to grow and mature into that which He has desired. What is the responsibility of apostles and prophets in this "building"? Their role is to set people's attention upon Christ! The foundation they lay is not a moral system of religion, but it is Christ the Lord. This is immensely significant!
In my personal studies reading through the writings of the Early Church Fathers, I noticed how consistently the "Church" is identified SPECIFICALLY as "the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ which is IN His Saints." For nearly 200 years after
Though it may be uncomfortable, I feel I must reiterate that the religious organization that people today refer to as "the church" is merely an establishment of man, built by human hands, maintained by human effort and employed by human agendas and schedules and, difficult as it might be to swallow, human authority structures. This "system" is not once defined anywhere in the Word of God as being something that makes you any more or less a part of the body of Christ Jesus! It is wrong to judge a brother or sister in Christ who is not a "member" of a "church." That does not in the least invalidate their standing with God and their validity as a member of the Lord's true Church! Does someone want to join an organization or religious club? Fine, but NEVER elevate that organization over the body of Christ and then make it an idol by calling it His Church. Does someone want to belong to some denominational church? Ok, but they should not turn their nose up at those who don't "worship" the system (or that don't worship at the system) and regard it as being God's prized invention and special interest. We had all better start regarding God's people as the precious jewels they are regardless of what organization they may or may not belong to.
Christians in institutional churches often tend to look at each other and pass judgment because they esteem this organizational thing as being so vital to their Christian experience. Friends, we need to approach our Christianity from a relational aspect; relationship with Christ, a life centered around Him, and a love sparked by His grace and His presence in our lives and the experiential knowledge of who He really is and all that He has done for us. Second to this being enthralled with Christ, we must become relationally minded towards one another, NOT ORGANIZATIONALLY MINDED! A meeting, in and of itself, is not evil, and I am not suggesting that. It is good for saints to meet together and the Scripture confirms that we should not neglect to do so (Hebrews 10:25), but are we engaging in the right kind of meeting; the meeting that we see exampled in Scripture? Do we realize that it only takes 2 or 3 simply gathered in agreement (Matthew 18:20) to constitute a meeting where the Lord's presence is manifested? Do we understand that "church" is not a building, not an organization, not an institution, not a program, not a "ministry," not a scheduled meeting with list of required rituals and a liturgy that need be performed routinely, but CHURCH IS WHO WE ARE TOGETHER!!! THE BODY OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!!!
There's not necessarily anything wrong with belonging to a club or some organization, just don't call it "the House of the Lord" and PLEASE don't call it "the church". If you like where you are and think all of this stuff is just too radical, that's fine, stay put and pursue the Lord with all your heart, just don't judge and reject other Christians who choose to "meet" in other ways or that don't choose to "join" a "church" at all. I know that God is merciful and He is able to deal in each of our lives with grace, patience and love. I spent better than 30 years of my life in the institutional church and believed a lot of stupid things, but God still penetrated through all of that and touched my heart. He led me along by His grace and He fed me, nurtured me and changed my life. He poured out his renewing power in my life and filled my home with His manifest presence. Whether in "church" or out of "church" the standard set by Jesus of Spirit and Truth still applies to us all. God is looking into our innermost being for sincerity – not religion. Because my heart of hearts has been set on Him, the institutional church wasn't a complete obstacle and God still connected me with true and sincere saints within that system to provide an element of communion together for a season. I believe the same is true for every one of His dear children. As much as I am weary of the routine called "church" and as much I believe it hinders spiritual growth in so many ways, I all the more believe that God is faithful and He is so amazing and good and He can touch people's live inside. I would be lost if this wasn't true about God! If God waited until we got everything perfect, we'd all be dead with no hope of touching him. But just because God is merciful to our shortcomings and longsuffering, kind and forgiving, doesn't mean we should use that mercy as a license to remain in sin, ignorance and stagnation when we come to a knowledge of the truth and experience the revelation of the Lord; that He is more than religion and He has more than our human attempts to orchestrate religious activity can possibly offer. With all my heart I believe there is higher road! I am seeking to ride on it! I want to learn how to fit into God's more excellent way. At the very least I know that I will never place something so insignificant as an institution of religion in between my relationship with God and with other believers.
Finally, I wish to convey that there appears to be a broader reference concerning "assembling" in the Hebrews 10 passage. It seems, judging by the context, that the "assembling" in discussion is not merely some endeavor to get together, but is a more serious and eternal matter. The whole lead up to verse 25 speaks about our coming to Christ and verse 26, immediately after the "assembling" passage, starts warning us not to apostatize from the Faith. It would seem to me that the more pertinent reference in this passage is to not forsake the assembling together in terms of apostatizing from the truth! Every reference in the passage speaks in terms that indicative of the entire body of Christ – not some small group here and there. In this letter I have emphasized assembly in the broadest spiritual sense but also referred to the small gathering. I am compelled, however, to presume that this passage in Hebrews has little to do with "meetings" together at all (though, understand, I am not suggesting that it condemns them either).
There is much more I could write in this regard but this is already too long. I hope my argument is clear enough. God bless. Be free in HIM!
In His grip,
Dave
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
