The following thoughts serve as an introduction to chapters 8, 9, and 10 of Batsell Barrett Baxter's book, The Family of God. These chapters describe the work of the church.
Over the next four sessions of this class we will be talking about what the Lord's church is supposed to actually do on a day-to-day basis. What are the tasks we have before us? How do we know what they are? What guidelines do we have for carrying out what God wants us to do?
If you have been keeping up with the book or these posts from the start, you know that we will be looking into God's word to find the answers to our questions about what the church should do. The first line of a hymn says, "There is much to do, there's work on every hand." The more we study, the more specific and purposeful our vision for the work of the church becomes. I have seen that happen in church members and leaders that I can call to mind right now, and that gives me great encouragement.
The three areas we will cover are evangelism, edification, and benevolence. All are excellent uses of our time and effort for the Lord. Churches that thrive are covering all of these bases, not just one. Every church has and is a ministry, and the ministry needs to be a balance of everything Christians should do.
We have recently discussed how members of the church are like parts of a body, and all are needed to make the body whole. I think we will see that one beautiful way God blesses the church is with people who have different skills and talents, to balance out the ministry and broaden its reach into all these areas of service.
At the same time every Christian naturally is looking for something to do in grateful response to salvation, as we just recently discussed. In that search, every Christian is accountable for a willing response to God in all areas of the ministry.
Church leaders should look at the balance of activity and see if the local congregation is functioning well. If one aspect of the work of the church is lacking, it is easy to find out how to get back on track through individual and group study. In some cases it might not be quite as easy to actually do what we learn about, but in the larger sense it is not a problem, because our motivation is pure. Again adapting a hymn verse, "Our Shepherd is beside us, and nothing can we lack!"
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
Thanks to My Visitors!
I would like to send out special thanks to those of you from around the world who have visited this site. I pray that the lessons will be of use to you, and that you will be able to get Dr. Baxter's book, if this makes you want a copy. With new methods of publishing on demand, the book will not go out of print. I noticed that the ink in my copy was somewhat shiny, so I looked on the last page and saw that it was printed in LaVergne, Tennessee on March 8, 2010. That means it almost certainly came from the Lightning Source division of Ingram Books. I've toured their plant, and they can literally get an order in the morning and have it on a pallette ready to ship to vendors that afternoon. So, even though some vendors might be temporarily out of stock, there will not be any shortage of The Family of God. That's good news!
Salvation
The following text includes my thoughts on Chapter 7 of Batsell Barrett Baxter's book, The Family of God.
Salvation is redemption. God has bought our freedom from sin with the life of His dear Son. It is justification, an acquittal from paying the penalty for sin. It is reconciliation, in which we are restored to a loving family relationship with God.
Romans 5:11 paints a picture of a redeemed soul, reconciled to God and rejoicing over it. People love this snapshot image of a Christian, and why not! It is uplifting, encouraging, and immediately positive. It should be noted, and will be proven in this lesson, that the rejoicing comes after one responds in faith to God's grace and enters into the relationship with God that can be described as reconciliation or salvation. How can we get there? Read on.
The story is told about a soldier who learned just a little karate and killed himself while trying to give a salute. In a similar way, casual students and even some skeptical scholars of the New Testament might come to an incorrect conclusion that James 2:14-26 means something just the opposite of Ephesians 2:8-9. To get a better perspective, the first thing we can do is include all of Ephesians 2:4-10 in that comparison.
Then God's message becomes apparent: We are saved (1) by grace, (2) through faith, (3) for the actions or deeds of faith known as good works. If we have faith, it will show up in our deeds. If it does not, we must ask ourselves if it is real, because God's grace cannot be accepted by a person whose faith does not exist or cannot be evidenced as real. Voila! The two passages are truly in harmony, and not just because your teacher says so.
Baxter mentions the difficulty we have accepting grace as God's free gift. We want so badly to rack up a good score, so that we can "make the cut" and earn a spot in God's kingdom. More study reveals that good works will never accomplish that. Good works are the evidence of our gratitude for God's grace, which is unearned and undeserved. That is because there is none good but God alone, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and if we say we have no sin, we are not telling the truth. All this is in Romans 3 and 1 John 1.
Not only the New Testament but Jesus Himself says that not everyone will be saved, but only those who do the will of God. So, there is a will of God, and we would do well to find out what it is. That path to salvation is even called the narrow way. How can that be, if grace is God's free gift? Because we must actively accept God's grace in faith. Jesus discusses the matter in Matthew 7:21 and 24-27, and His words pack quite a punch. How can we ignore His teaching and reduce our faith response to a simple mental assent? We cannot.
Faith is an active acceptance, not a passive assent. Baxter says that grace is like fresh air, and God provides both freely to all. We can't get fresh air unless we actually breathe, even though it is freely available. We don't earn air by breathing, but we must breathe to live. What a thought-provoking analogy!
If you have heard most of this material before, you can still learn something by paying special attention to what Baxter observes about the timing of grace. It is not something that will be handed out at judgment. It is here now, and it came in the form of Jesus Christ. Going back to our thoughts on rejoicing, we can rejoice for someone that Christ came and made the sacrifice for us, but rejoicing for our own reconciliation to God can only come after the relationship becomes real and evident.
At this point you might be thinking the same thing as the people in Acts 2, when they asked, "...what shall we do?" How do we go from talking the empty talk to walking the saving walk? In a word, obedience. We do what the Bible says people must do to be saved. We don't spend our time trying to prove that we are saved by doing nothing. Remember, this is the Bible itself we are looking at, not some creed book.
Adding up all the examples of conversion \ aka becoming a Christian \ aka "putting on Christ" in the New Testament, we can see that listening to the gospel message and believing it are the places where it all starts. In our breathing analogy, we have already taken two significant breaths at this point. Life changing or repentance from sin is then mentioned, and it is not merely suggested but commanded in the Bible. Speaking and showing (aka confessing) your belief that Jesus is the Son of God, a fact which was hotly debated during the formation of the church, is most certainly included, and you would not want to skip over it and then read Romans 10:8-10, which would apply to you as a Christian. Finally, in every single example of putting on Christ, without exception, there is baptism by immersion in water for the forgiveness of sins.
Some people can see that baptism is clearly part of becoming a Christian. Others might ask why the Bible says that it works that way. 1 Peter 3:21 probably sheds more light than any other single verse on this question. Bible teachers may come and go, but God's will undeniably remains, and the obedient faith response that brings salvation is crystal clear in the examples of putting on Christ in God's word. Even if we spend months debating how immersion in water works for the forgiveness of our sins, we still find it there, and we must yield to the authority of inspiration. Then comes the rejoicing and a life of grateful service.
Salvation is redemption. God has bought our freedom from sin with the life of His dear Son. It is justification, an acquittal from paying the penalty for sin. It is reconciliation, in which we are restored to a loving family relationship with God.
Romans 5:11 paints a picture of a redeemed soul, reconciled to God and rejoicing over it. People love this snapshot image of a Christian, and why not! It is uplifting, encouraging, and immediately positive. It should be noted, and will be proven in this lesson, that the rejoicing comes after one responds in faith to God's grace and enters into the relationship with God that can be described as reconciliation or salvation. How can we get there? Read on.
The story is told about a soldier who learned just a little karate and killed himself while trying to give a salute. In a similar way, casual students and even some skeptical scholars of the New Testament might come to an incorrect conclusion that James 2:14-26 means something just the opposite of Ephesians 2:8-9. To get a better perspective, the first thing we can do is include all of Ephesians 2:4-10 in that comparison.
Then God's message becomes apparent: We are saved (1) by grace, (2) through faith, (3) for the actions or deeds of faith known as good works. If we have faith, it will show up in our deeds. If it does not, we must ask ourselves if it is real, because God's grace cannot be accepted by a person whose faith does not exist or cannot be evidenced as real. Voila! The two passages are truly in harmony, and not just because your teacher says so.
Baxter mentions the difficulty we have accepting grace as God's free gift. We want so badly to rack up a good score, so that we can "make the cut" and earn a spot in God's kingdom. More study reveals that good works will never accomplish that. Good works are the evidence of our gratitude for God's grace, which is unearned and undeserved. That is because there is none good but God alone, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and if we say we have no sin, we are not telling the truth. All this is in Romans 3 and 1 John 1.
Not only the New Testament but Jesus Himself says that not everyone will be saved, but only those who do the will of God. So, there is a will of God, and we would do well to find out what it is. That path to salvation is even called the narrow way. How can that be, if grace is God's free gift? Because we must actively accept God's grace in faith. Jesus discusses the matter in Matthew 7:21 and 24-27, and His words pack quite a punch. How can we ignore His teaching and reduce our faith response to a simple mental assent? We cannot.
Faith is an active acceptance, not a passive assent. Baxter says that grace is like fresh air, and God provides both freely to all. We can't get fresh air unless we actually breathe, even though it is freely available. We don't earn air by breathing, but we must breathe to live. What a thought-provoking analogy!
If you have heard most of this material before, you can still learn something by paying special attention to what Baxter observes about the timing of grace. It is not something that will be handed out at judgment. It is here now, and it came in the form of Jesus Christ. Going back to our thoughts on rejoicing, we can rejoice for someone that Christ came and made the sacrifice for us, but rejoicing for our own reconciliation to God can only come after the relationship becomes real and evident.
At this point you might be thinking the same thing as the people in Acts 2, when they asked, "...what shall we do?" How do we go from talking the empty talk to walking the saving walk? In a word, obedience. We do what the Bible says people must do to be saved. We don't spend our time trying to prove that we are saved by doing nothing. Remember, this is the Bible itself we are looking at, not some creed book.
Adding up all the examples of conversion \ aka becoming a Christian \ aka "putting on Christ" in the New Testament, we can see that listening to the gospel message and believing it are the places where it all starts. In our breathing analogy, we have already taken two significant breaths at this point. Life changing or repentance from sin is then mentioned, and it is not merely suggested but commanded in the Bible. Speaking and showing (aka confessing) your belief that Jesus is the Son of God, a fact which was hotly debated during the formation of the church, is most certainly included, and you would not want to skip over it and then read Romans 10:8-10, which would apply to you as a Christian. Finally, in every single example of putting on Christ, without exception, there is baptism by immersion in water for the forgiveness of sins.
Some people can see that baptism is clearly part of becoming a Christian. Others might ask why the Bible says that it works that way. 1 Peter 3:21 probably sheds more light than any other single verse on this question. Bible teachers may come and go, but God's will undeniably remains, and the obedient faith response that brings salvation is crystal clear in the examples of putting on Christ in God's word. Even if we spend months debating how immersion in water works for the forgiveness of our sins, we still find it there, and we must yield to the authority of inspiration. Then comes the rejoicing and a life of grateful service.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Authority in Religion
The following comments are observations on chapter six of Batsell Barrett Baxter's book, The Family of God.
Have you ever met someone who seemed to be afraid of the church or the Bible? It is hard for us within the church to understand, but it is quite common. The Bible has the power of God within its pages, so it needs to be used properly if we want to really help people and provide them with the benefits of knowing their Creator.
Hebrews 4 says it is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword. 2 Timothy 2:15 says we should be diligent to handle it accurately, and we can see that is because of its power. If we saw a three-year-old child walking through a crowd with a nuclear fusion device, we might be apprehensive. To say that it has the power to change lives is an understatement. So it is with God's word.
This chapter introduces the need for seeking God's authority in the Bible for whatever we do with it. We could substitute the word "permission," but it is really more than just permission. It is permission combined with encouragement, assignment, enabling, strengthening, and convincing. To me the word authority embodies all these concepts, pointing us in a certain direction. It is God's guidance, and anyone who prays for His guidance should be looking in His word to see what He authorizes.
Baxter compares authority to a job description. He shows how Jesus demonstrated in at least four ways that His authority came from God the Father. So, can we go back to the question in Matthew 21:23 and give a substantial response when asked by what authority we do what we do in the church? I think we must start from the position that we cannot simply claim it. We've seen many people do that and go down in flames.
We must search the scriptures like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 to find out what authority we have as Christians. In that environment practices and doctrines would not all be equal. Some things would be authorized and some would not. We could trust each other to help us in our walk with God, to the extent that we would search for authority and do only what God truly does authorize.
Baxter looks at three places where most people search for authority in religion. They become the source of authority in the groups that rely on them. The first is the church itself, then people's ideas, and finally the Bible. If you have read this far, maybe you can already pick the best choice.
Authority of the church emphasizes church leadership as the final authority that trumps all other. Hierarchy is important, along with traditions and creeds. A leadership group might meet and vote on a change in practice, but as Baxter points out, they are not able to change God's will.
The authority of people's ideas comes through feelings and constructed lines of reasoning, which Baxter calls a "creature of education," not in the positive sense, but in the sense that shows potential weakness and bias. Back when the apostle Paul was known as Saul of Tarsus, he wreaked havoc on the Lord's church, in all good conscience (Acts 23:1) against Jesus (Acts 26:9-10). Feelings, opinions, humanism, and philosophical modernism certainly have a seductive power, but their limited value in arriving at objective truth makes them extremely fallible.
The authority of God is what we really need, and the place to find it is in the Bible. We in the church must stand down and submit to God's authority before asking people to trust us in teaching them. Even the apostles were given the message they would speak (Matthew 10:19-20).
When studying the Bible, we should pay attention to how it teaches us what to do. A two-dollar name for that is hermeneutics. Many, many people give no attention to that question or rely on a do-it-yourself approach or hermeneutic, so they cannot receive instruction when studying. Are there any specific directions (direct commands) for Christians? Which apostolic examples apply to the whole church and should be followed? Also, what elements or practices are necessarily inferred by the text of the New Testament? The wise application of these questions pulls us out of the doctrinal mire of a confused world and safely onto solid ground under God's authority.
Have you ever met someone who seemed to be afraid of the church or the Bible? It is hard for us within the church to understand, but it is quite common. The Bible has the power of God within its pages, so it needs to be used properly if we want to really help people and provide them with the benefits of knowing their Creator.
Hebrews 4 says it is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword. 2 Timothy 2:15 says we should be diligent to handle it accurately, and we can see that is because of its power. If we saw a three-year-old child walking through a crowd with a nuclear fusion device, we might be apprehensive. To say that it has the power to change lives is an understatement. So it is with God's word.
This chapter introduces the need for seeking God's authority in the Bible for whatever we do with it. We could substitute the word "permission," but it is really more than just permission. It is permission combined with encouragement, assignment, enabling, strengthening, and convincing. To me the word authority embodies all these concepts, pointing us in a certain direction. It is God's guidance, and anyone who prays for His guidance should be looking in His word to see what He authorizes.
Baxter compares authority to a job description. He shows how Jesus demonstrated in at least four ways that His authority came from God the Father. So, can we go back to the question in Matthew 21:23 and give a substantial response when asked by what authority we do what we do in the church? I think we must start from the position that we cannot simply claim it. We've seen many people do that and go down in flames.
We must search the scriptures like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 to find out what authority we have as Christians. In that environment practices and doctrines would not all be equal. Some things would be authorized and some would not. We could trust each other to help us in our walk with God, to the extent that we would search for authority and do only what God truly does authorize.
Baxter looks at three places where most people search for authority in religion. They become the source of authority in the groups that rely on them. The first is the church itself, then people's ideas, and finally the Bible. If you have read this far, maybe you can already pick the best choice.
Authority of the church emphasizes church leadership as the final authority that trumps all other. Hierarchy is important, along with traditions and creeds. A leadership group might meet and vote on a change in practice, but as Baxter points out, they are not able to change God's will.
The authority of people's ideas comes through feelings and constructed lines of reasoning, which Baxter calls a "creature of education," not in the positive sense, but in the sense that shows potential weakness and bias. Back when the apostle Paul was known as Saul of Tarsus, he wreaked havoc on the Lord's church, in all good conscience (Acts 23:1) against Jesus (Acts 26:9-10). Feelings, opinions, humanism, and philosophical modernism certainly have a seductive power, but their limited value in arriving at objective truth makes them extremely fallible.
The authority of God is what we really need, and the place to find it is in the Bible. We in the church must stand down and submit to God's authority before asking people to trust us in teaching them. Even the apostles were given the message they would speak (Matthew 10:19-20).
When studying the Bible, we should pay attention to how it teaches us what to do. A two-dollar name for that is hermeneutics. Many, many people give no attention to that question or rely on a do-it-yourself approach or hermeneutic, so they cannot receive instruction when studying. Are there any specific directions (direct commands) for Christians? Which apostolic examples apply to the whole church and should be followed? Also, what elements or practices are necessarily inferred by the text of the New Testament? The wise application of these questions pulls us out of the doctrinal mire of a confused world and safely onto solid ground under God's authority.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
What's in a Name?
The following comments refer to chapter five in Batsell Barrett Baxter's book, The Family of God. In this chapter are some thoughts on what makes a good name for the church and why. This study is a great help in learning about the church. Most people come in with the idea that names are like opinions--everybody has one, and in the long run there is not much difference among them. Let's take a closer look and then decide.
Whether it's in a class like ours, in which we try to define the church, or just a general lesson on why we do some of the things we do, the topic of what name we use comes up every few years. The discussion often starts on the premise that the exact name doesn't matter, but it's who we are that matters. It eventually concludes with someone saying the name does matter and should never be changed. Classes like that can reveal some truth, but usually people are more confused afterward than when they started. Now we have an opportunity to lift ourselves above all that.
Let's explore the question, "Can a name provide the intended unity to the church?" This line of thinking sends us on a search through the New Testament for a name that stands above any other to represent the hope we have and the way we should approach God. What is the source of our hope? That narrows things down quite a bit. If you found yourself in the presence of God, what name would you utter to show whether you were friend or foe? Your own name? No, that even brings to mind the hymn phrase, "my worthless name." The Koine Greek word for church, ekklesia, might work, but that is just a practical designation, used to show that the church was not just any cluster of people. Pulling a name out of thin air would not do the job, and we need to keep that in mind as we search.
In Matthew 16 Jesus told Peter that, on the rock of his statement of faith, "...I will build my church." Then, as He went through the gruesome work of providing the very foundation for the church, Jesus prayed for its unity, as shown in John 17:20-21. Baxter makes two really good points here. First, Jesus prayed for as much unity in the church as He had with God the Father. What a staggering thought! How can we achieve that? Next, He asked for that unity so that the world would believe that God sent Jesus to save us. Check it out--it's in John 17. Baxter comments that, if we settle for division in Christianity, the price we pay for that is an unbelieving world. Take a look around and see if you agree.
Names can be divisive or unifying, based on the scope of what is referred to in the name. Looking at Baxter's examples of divisive names, we are motivated to avoid any name that would jeopardize fellowship across all of the Lord's church throughout the world.
Back to the search, we see that Peter asked the potential respondents to the first gospel sermon at the beginning of the church to repent and be baptized, every one of them, "...in the name of Jesus Christ..." Then, in Acts 4, Peter explains a miraculous healing as, "in the name of Jesus Christ... And in none other is there salvation..." Evidently Peter was convinced of whose name he would hold up before God as well as other people. Jesus Christ is the foundation and the key unifying force among Christ-ians, who were first called Christians at Antioch in the first century, according to Acts 11:26.
There are several terms used for the church in the New Testament, and among them are church of the Lord, body of Christ, and churches of Christ. These names also do what Peter would do, because they hold up the name of Christ. Even with these slightly different alternating terms, there was no serious division in the church until the years began to roll on and separate doctrines, leaders, and causes led to the use of divisive names that ripped the Lord's church into hundreds of self-exiled, isolated groups. If we see the church as the body of Christ and Jesus Himself as the head, we must ask why any part of the body would separate itself from the head in this way.
Baxter shows that even the leaders of some prominent divisions in Christianity pleaded with others of their time not to substitute their names or the names given to their modified doctrines for the "name which is above every name," as we read in Philippians 2:9-10. Bam! Please go and read that.
Paul writes by the inspiration of God in Colossians 3:17 that we should do all in the name of the Lord Jesus. In that light we can see how much less effective it would be to use the name of a doctrine, an ordinary person, or an arrangement of church government as the name of the church. That is enough to convince me that it does matter what's in a name for the church. The name of Christ is the obvious choice. Maybe next time we discuss this topic, we can start and finish on that level. I plan to keep this lesson in my heart as long as I have any teaching to do.
Whether it's in a class like ours, in which we try to define the church, or just a general lesson on why we do some of the things we do, the topic of what name we use comes up every few years. The discussion often starts on the premise that the exact name doesn't matter, but it's who we are that matters. It eventually concludes with someone saying the name does matter and should never be changed. Classes like that can reveal some truth, but usually people are more confused afterward than when they started. Now we have an opportunity to lift ourselves above all that.
Let's explore the question, "Can a name provide the intended unity to the church?" This line of thinking sends us on a search through the New Testament for a name that stands above any other to represent the hope we have and the way we should approach God. What is the source of our hope? That narrows things down quite a bit. If you found yourself in the presence of God, what name would you utter to show whether you were friend or foe? Your own name? No, that even brings to mind the hymn phrase, "my worthless name." The Koine Greek word for church, ekklesia, might work, but that is just a practical designation, used to show that the church was not just any cluster of people. Pulling a name out of thin air would not do the job, and we need to keep that in mind as we search.
In Matthew 16 Jesus told Peter that, on the rock of his statement of faith, "...I will build my church." Then, as He went through the gruesome work of providing the very foundation for the church, Jesus prayed for its unity, as shown in John 17:20-21. Baxter makes two really good points here. First, Jesus prayed for as much unity in the church as He had with God the Father. What a staggering thought! How can we achieve that? Next, He asked for that unity so that the world would believe that God sent Jesus to save us. Check it out--it's in John 17. Baxter comments that, if we settle for division in Christianity, the price we pay for that is an unbelieving world. Take a look around and see if you agree.
Names can be divisive or unifying, based on the scope of what is referred to in the name. Looking at Baxter's examples of divisive names, we are motivated to avoid any name that would jeopardize fellowship across all of the Lord's church throughout the world.
Back to the search, we see that Peter asked the potential respondents to the first gospel sermon at the beginning of the church to repent and be baptized, every one of them, "...in the name of Jesus Christ..." Then, in Acts 4, Peter explains a miraculous healing as, "in the name of Jesus Christ... And in none other is there salvation..." Evidently Peter was convinced of whose name he would hold up before God as well as other people. Jesus Christ is the foundation and the key unifying force among Christ-ians, who were first called Christians at Antioch in the first century, according to Acts 11:26.
There are several terms used for the church in the New Testament, and among them are church of the Lord, body of Christ, and churches of Christ. These names also do what Peter would do, because they hold up the name of Christ. Even with these slightly different alternating terms, there was no serious division in the church until the years began to roll on and separate doctrines, leaders, and causes led to the use of divisive names that ripped the Lord's church into hundreds of self-exiled, isolated groups. If we see the church as the body of Christ and Jesus Himself as the head, we must ask why any part of the body would separate itself from the head in this way.
Baxter shows that even the leaders of some prominent divisions in Christianity pleaded with others of their time not to substitute their names or the names given to their modified doctrines for the "name which is above every name," as we read in Philippians 2:9-10. Bam! Please go and read that.
Paul writes by the inspiration of God in Colossians 3:17 that we should do all in the name of the Lord Jesus. In that light we can see how much less effective it would be to use the name of a doctrine, an ordinary person, or an arrangement of church government as the name of the church. That is enough to convince me that it does matter what's in a name for the church. The name of Christ is the obvious choice. Maybe next time we discuss this topic, we can start and finish on that level. I plan to keep this lesson in my heart as long as I have any teaching to do.
Monday, May 3, 2010
The Beginning of the Church
This entry covers chapter four of Batsell Barrett Baxter's book, The Family of God. In this chapter, we consider the question, "When did the church of Christ begin?"
Some people accustomed to thinking of Christianity in terms of denominations might ask, "When did your denomination begin," or, "When did your church begin? Here's when ours began..." An in-depth understanding of the church as described in the Bible shows that, stated this way, the question does not really apply. The church is one worldwide, as shown in Ephesians 4:4-6. It is made up of autonomous congregations that are also called churches, but it is never defined in the Bible as being divided into groups like denominations. The inspired New Testament writer, Paul, taught the church not to divide in such a way, in 1 Corinthians 1-3.
I believe it was the Encyclopedia of American Religions by J. Gordon Melton that included a top-ten list of the most significant events in American religious history. In the doctrinally competitive environment of frontier America in 1801, a revival known as the Cane Ridge meeting, led by Barton Stone, became one of those significant events.
Stone told the attendees that being part of the Lord's church meant that they must lay down their doctrinal differences and be of one mind on the essential issues that would affect their standing before the Lord, or if you will, their salvation. On minor, non-essential things they should tolerate opinions. Both of these biblical directives, if practiced, allow much greater unity. The sad thing about it is that the biblical message was astonishingly fresh and untried by that time.
This meeting was a pivotal event that began a return to the use of the Bible to define Christianity rather than using creed books with their individual biases and doctrinal weaknesses. So, was it the beginning of yet another denomination, or was it a return to the truth? The churches of Christ maintain that it represented the restoration of true, New Testament Christianity, the kind that Paul was trying to save from the ravages of division. The restoration movement is an attempt to unify all Christians on solely biblical terms, to return the church to what it should be, not to create a new church, denomination, or sect.
If you re able to grasp this concept of the body of Christ, you can see what strength it has--the sheer, awesome power of the almighty God living in His church, as opposed to some person in the 1800's who might have given an inspiring speech. No one who has embraced this concept thinks or teaches that any recent date marked the beginning of the church that Jesus established. Let's look at when it did start.
Baxter notes that references to the church in the Old Testament were made in prophecy and described as being in the future. For example, Daniel's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream told of a kingdom that would outlast all the earthly kingdoms represented by the multi-layered statue in Daniel 2 and never be destroyed.
During the life and ministry of Jesus, the church, also referred to as the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven, is seen as being in the near future. Jesus appropriately taught his followers to pray to God, "...Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done..." He told them in Mark 9:1 that a number of them would be around to see it established. As the New Testament moves ahead in time beyond the four gospels, the church is referred to as being already established and in existence.
We find its beginnings in Acts 2 and the events that occurred on the Pentecost, after Jesus had been crucified, buried, raised, and seen again among His followers. Acts 2 also happened after Jesus had instructed them how to spread the word, then ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God. Described in Galatians 4:4 as "the fullness of time," this period was the perfect place in history for Christ to save humanity and pave the way for all of us to be reconciled to God.
Jesus had said in Matthew 16:18, after Peter's heartfelt statement of faith, that He would (in the immediate future) build His church. He told Peter and the disciples, who would become apostles, that He would give them the keys of the kingdom, meaning that it was their responsibility to explain to people how to get inside God's family. They later took advantage of a perfect opportunity to do that, and Peter himself stood up in Acts 2 and gave the first gospel sermon ever recorded. It was entirely guided and accompanied by the Holy Spirit, as is plainly shown in Acts 1 and 2.
Peter asked people to change their ways (repent) and allow themselves to be immersed in water (be baptized) for the forgiveness of their sins. Today I feel we as a society have lost much of the humility and willingness to obey that was present in the crowd that day. Imagine 3,000 adults, presumably of sound mind, willing to leave behind their familiar lives and make a radical new commitment to Christ.
If we turn to the Bible to find the beginning of the church, the phenomenal events of Acts 2 form the starting place. It could not have started before Jesus died on the cross, as He demonstrated by remaining under the Law of Moses His whole life. He had not yet paid the price for the sin of humankind. Likewise, the church could not have started after the rest of the New Testament was written, because most of the New Testament is about the church.
A big part of the reason we have such a great hope in Christ is because we don't depend on any recently devised doctrinal position, but instead draw strength, encouragement, and unity in knowing when the church actually began.
Sometimes it takes many years for someone to appreciate the sense of greatness that pervades the church. Knowing when and how it started increases the overwhelming sense of security surrounding the house that is built on the Rock of ages. I want to live there!
Some people accustomed to thinking of Christianity in terms of denominations might ask, "When did your denomination begin," or, "When did your church begin? Here's when ours began..." An in-depth understanding of the church as described in the Bible shows that, stated this way, the question does not really apply. The church is one worldwide, as shown in Ephesians 4:4-6. It is made up of autonomous congregations that are also called churches, but it is never defined in the Bible as being divided into groups like denominations. The inspired New Testament writer, Paul, taught the church not to divide in such a way, in 1 Corinthians 1-3.
I believe it was the Encyclopedia of American Religions by J. Gordon Melton that included a top-ten list of the most significant events in American religious history. In the doctrinally competitive environment of frontier America in 1801, a revival known as the Cane Ridge meeting, led by Barton Stone, became one of those significant events.
Stone told the attendees that being part of the Lord's church meant that they must lay down their doctrinal differences and be of one mind on the essential issues that would affect their standing before the Lord, or if you will, their salvation. On minor, non-essential things they should tolerate opinions. Both of these biblical directives, if practiced, allow much greater unity. The sad thing about it is that the biblical message was astonishingly fresh and untried by that time.
This meeting was a pivotal event that began a return to the use of the Bible to define Christianity rather than using creed books with their individual biases and doctrinal weaknesses. So, was it the beginning of yet another denomination, or was it a return to the truth? The churches of Christ maintain that it represented the restoration of true, New Testament Christianity, the kind that Paul was trying to save from the ravages of division. The restoration movement is an attempt to unify all Christians on solely biblical terms, to return the church to what it should be, not to create a new church, denomination, or sect.
If you re able to grasp this concept of the body of Christ, you can see what strength it has--the sheer, awesome power of the almighty God living in His church, as opposed to some person in the 1800's who might have given an inspiring speech. No one who has embraced this concept thinks or teaches that any recent date marked the beginning of the church that Jesus established. Let's look at when it did start.
Baxter notes that references to the church in the Old Testament were made in prophecy and described as being in the future. For example, Daniel's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream told of a kingdom that would outlast all the earthly kingdoms represented by the multi-layered statue in Daniel 2 and never be destroyed.
During the life and ministry of Jesus, the church, also referred to as the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven, is seen as being in the near future. Jesus appropriately taught his followers to pray to God, "...Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done..." He told them in Mark 9:1 that a number of them would be around to see it established. As the New Testament moves ahead in time beyond the four gospels, the church is referred to as being already established and in existence.
We find its beginnings in Acts 2 and the events that occurred on the Pentecost, after Jesus had been crucified, buried, raised, and seen again among His followers. Acts 2 also happened after Jesus had instructed them how to spread the word, then ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God. Described in Galatians 4:4 as "the fullness of time," this period was the perfect place in history for Christ to save humanity and pave the way for all of us to be reconciled to God.
Jesus had said in Matthew 16:18, after Peter's heartfelt statement of faith, that He would (in the immediate future) build His church. He told Peter and the disciples, who would become apostles, that He would give them the keys of the kingdom, meaning that it was their responsibility to explain to people how to get inside God's family. They later took advantage of a perfect opportunity to do that, and Peter himself stood up in Acts 2 and gave the first gospel sermon ever recorded. It was entirely guided and accompanied by the Holy Spirit, as is plainly shown in Acts 1 and 2.
Peter asked people to change their ways (repent) and allow themselves to be immersed in water (be baptized) for the forgiveness of their sins. Today I feel we as a society have lost much of the humility and willingness to obey that was present in the crowd that day. Imagine 3,000 adults, presumably of sound mind, willing to leave behind their familiar lives and make a radical new commitment to Christ.
If we turn to the Bible to find the beginning of the church, the phenomenal events of Acts 2 form the starting place. It could not have started before Jesus died on the cross, as He demonstrated by remaining under the Law of Moses His whole life. He had not yet paid the price for the sin of humankind. Likewise, the church could not have started after the rest of the New Testament was written, because most of the New Testament is about the church.
A big part of the reason we have such a great hope in Christ is because we don't depend on any recently devised doctrinal position, but instead draw strength, encouragement, and unity in knowing when the church actually began.
Sometimes it takes many years for someone to appreciate the sense of greatness that pervades the church. Knowing when and how it started increases the overwhelming sense of security surrounding the house that is built on the Rock of ages. I want to live there!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)