THE CHURCH AND THE CHURCHES
"Search the Scripture." John 5:39.
PART I: THE CHURCH
I
Introductory
2 The Church and the Kingdom of Heaven
3 The Body of
Christ
4 A Fourfold Description of the Church
5 The Father's Family
6
"The Unity of the Spirit"
7 The Building Up of the Body of Christ
8 The
Church the Object of Christ's Love
PART II: THE
CHURCHES
9 Local Churches
10 "Jesus is Lord"
11 Spiritual
Gifts
12 Ministry and Deacons
13 Baptism
14 "The Table of the Lord"
and "The Lord's Supper"
15 "Reception"
16 Church Discipline
17
Giving
18 The Church, the Churches, and the Scriptures
19 Local Church
Characteristics
20 The Position and Service of Sisters
PART I: THE CHURCH
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTORY
In matters of doctrine it is of vital importance that the
authority upon which we act shall be one on which we can unhesitatingly rely.
There are those who advocate that such authority is vested in the Church. This
at once introduces certain questions for our consideration, namely, what the
Church is, and what are its calling, constitution and destiny. No claim to
authority on the part of any man, or company of men, can be admitted, till it
is proved to be well founded. We do not acquiesce in anyone's demands simply
because he puts them forward.
BASIC
FACTS
It is axiomatic that the Church is the possession of
Christ. if Christ were non-existent, there would be no Church. That there is a
Church at all rests upon the basic facts of His Incarnation, His Atoning Death
and His Resurrection, and upon the fulfillment of His prophetic announcement,
"I will build My Church."
Our knowledge of this statement by our Lord
is derived from the writings of the New Testament. These are indeed the chief
sources from which comes our knowledge of Christ Himself, of the claims He made
and the work He accomplished. This would involve, were it necessary here, the
accumulation of proofs that the contents of the New Testament consist of
authentic historical details and teachings and Divinely inspired writings. The
subject of the authenticity, authority and inspiration of Scripture has been
adequately dealt with elsewhere and will not be taken up in these pages.
Suffice it to say that the evidence of Holy Scripture is of primary importance;
all other evidence can be only subsidiary to it. As to their validity, the New
Testament books were written by men who lived both in the time and in the
country in which Christ lived, by men who wrote immediately for the generation
that was born before Christ died, and many of the writers had been witnesses of
the events they narrated. Where the writers had not personal experience of some
of the events they recorded they had ample means of verifying the statements
they made. All the evidence, external and internal, establishes their veracity.
The very contrast of the character of these writings with that of non-canonical
writings, both contemporaneous and of subsequent periods, pays its telling
tribute to their validity and Divine authority and inspiration.
Of the
four Gospels the Gospel of Matthew is the only one that contains a direct
statement made by Christ concerning His Church. The same is true regarding a
local church. But in each respect all that is taught in the rest of the New
Testament is consistent with our Lord's statements, the whole forming a
harmonious body of doctrine relating to the subject. The establishment of the
claims of Holy Scripture and the Divine authority of its teachings necessitate
our adherence to it and our acceptance of that alone which is in accordance
with it. To follow any teaching contradictory to the doctrines taught by Christ
and His Apostles is to challenge at once the accuracy of Holy Scripture and His
prerogatives as therein set forth.
We turn, then, to these writings to
consider the nature and constitution of the Church and the churches, and the
character and scope of the authority given by Christ for the promulgation of
doctrine.
THE TERM EKKLESIA
In the New Testament the word ekklesia (lit. "called out"), apart from
its application to an assembly of Greek citizens (Acts 19:39), and to a riotous
mob (verses 32, 41), and to Israel (Acts 7:38), is used in two senses only,
firstly, of the whole company of the redeemed throughout the present era, the
company of which Christ said, "I will build My Church" (Matt. 16:18), and which
is further described as "the Church which is His Body" (Eph. 1:22, 23);
secondly, in the singular number, of a company consisting exclusively of
professed believers, with reference to the place in which they are accustomed
to meet together, and in the plural with reference to a district. [1]
A SPIRITUAL ORGANISM
The truth
relating to the Church, as formed by the incorporation of believing Jews and
Gentiles in one body, of which Christ is the Head, is spoken of by Paul as a
mystery (i.e., a truth to be revealed to the saints in the Divinely appointed
time) which from all ages had been "hid in God" (Eph. 3:1-9), "kept in silence
through times eternal" (Rom. 16:25, R.V.).
While this great fact of
its constituent parts as a living spiritual organism was especially committed
to that Apostle (Eph. 3:9), the first specific pronouncement concerning the
Church was made by Christ on the occasion of Peter's confession of Him as "The
Christ, the Son of the Living God" (Matt. 16:16). The Lord declared that the
Father, and He alone, had revealed this to him, and that on the foundation of
that revelation Christ Himself would build His Church, [2] and that the gates
of Hades would not prevail against it. The revelation conveys the great
foundation truths of the Person of Christ as such, His eternal relation with
the Father, and the fact of His resurrection; He was "declared to be the Son of
God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the
dead" (Rom. 1:4). Being eternally the Son of God He was declared to be so in
His resurrection. That He would be Himself the Builder of His Church was
essentially connected with His death and resurrection. By these, too, He
vanquished all that Hades stands for, the gates representing the place where
authority is exercised. He brought to nought "him that had the power of death"
(Heb. 2:14). Upon Christ risen, victorious, life-giving, immutable, the Church
is established. "Other foundation can no man lay."
[1] There is an
apparent exception in the R.V. of Acts 9:31, where, while the Authorized
Version has "churches," the singular seems to point to a district; but the
reference is clearly to the church as it was in Jerusalem, which it had just
been scattered, as recorded in 8:1. Again, in Rom. 16:23, that Gaius was the
host of "the whole church," most naturally and simply suggests that the
assembly in Corinth had been accustomed to meet in his house, where also Paul
was entertained.
[2] If we grant that the words, "Thou art Peter,"
represent the actual original, the Lord was confirming a name which He had
already given him (John 1:42), and was indicating the association of his
character with that of the truth of his confession. There is, however,
considerable ms. authority for the reading "thou hast said." In the contracted
form of the last word the lettering of the original is the same, and the
difference is simply one of spacing; thus su ei ps is "thou art Peter,"
and su eips, which stands for su eipas, is "thou hast said." St.
Augustine in his Latin version has "tu dixisti" (thou hast said), and
must have had ms. authority for this. St. Jerome quotes the passage in one
place as "su eipas." Moreover on the occasion, as recorded in this very Gospel,
when Caiaphas questioned the Lord as to His being "the Christ, the Son of God"
(practically the same as in Peter's confession), He immediately answered, "Thou
hast said" (Matt. 26:64).
A SPIRITUAL
EDIFICE
Conspicuous among the facts relating to the Church as
set forth by Christ and His Apostles are its spiritual establishment and its
heavenly character and destiny. The Apostle Peter, continuing the metaphor used
by the Lord, and speaking of Christ Himself as "a living Stone, rejected indeed
of men, but with God elect, precious," says of believers, "ye also, as living
stones, are built up a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer up
spiritual sacrifices" (I Peter 2:5). "All the building, fitly framed together,
groweth into a holy Temple in the Lord" (a sanctuary, a spiritual holy of
holies), believers being "builded together for a habitation of God in the
Spirit" (Eph. 2:21).
The Apostles did not establish an earthly system,
an organization of churches centralized in ecclesiastical headquarters. Such a
policy is significantly absent both from their methods and their doctrine. What
took place at Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts 15 provides no example of such a
centre. The company which assembled there has been called an apostolic council.
Whatever was its nature, no Apostle presided over it; Peter and other Apostles
took part, James summed up matters in a closing speech, and an epistle was
addressed in the name of the Apostles and elders, and delegates were chosen by
the whole local church together with them (verse 22). But this gathering was
incidental and not intended as a precedent. No other such assemblage is
recorded in apostolic times. Nor did the decision effect a settlement of the
trouble. Peter himself was afterwards found acting inconsistently with the
decree (Gal. 2:11-14).
A great missionary enterprise was initiated
from Antioch, but instead of taking place under the aegis of Jerusalem it was
undertaken in entire independence of the Apostles there, and own of their
delegates (Acts 13:1-3).
UNAUTHORIZED SYSTEMS
Events at Jerusalem, therefore, provide no support for the
establishment of a controlling centre for the organization of churches. One
will search in vain in the Acts and the Epistles for even an intimation of the
establishment of such an institution.
Apart from such matters as the
supply, by churches in a district, of the needs of poor saints in another
region, the only bond binding churches together was spiritual, that of a common
life in Christ and the indwelling of the same Holy Spirit. There was no such
thing as external unity by way of federation, affiliation or amalgamation,
either of churches in any given locality or of all the churches together.
Apostolic testimony is, indeed, against the organization of churches into an
ecclesiastical system. There is no such phrase in Scripture as "The Church on
earth," nor is there anything in the Scriptures to justify such an idea (see p.
57). The only Head of the Church is Christ, and at His hands provision is made
for the spiritual needs of each local church. The Church, consisting of all who
are joined to Him, the Head, is "visible" as an entity to God alone. In
contrast to it there stand out to the eyes of the world ecclesiastical systems,
but these include the real and the false. As systems, they are the product of
departure from the design of the Divine Founder and Builder and of human
interference with the operation of the Spirit of God.
The view has
been promulgated that certain decrees of church councils, and potentates, in
centuries subsequent to apostolic times, were either developments from
apostolic teachings or such additions as were necessary to meet the
circumstances of later times. That the accretions were developments is contrary
to facts, and that additions were designed or needful is contradictory to the
testimony of Christ and His Apostles.
The following pages show
something of the departure from the instructions and commandments laid down for
the churches by the Lord and His Apostles, and the radical difference between
what was established in apostate Christendom and the doctrines of the faith
"once for all delivered to the saints." The rise of ecclesiastical systems
produced a state of things in the churches which, so far from being
developments of the faith, were utterly opposed to it. Such a departure was,
after all, the fulfillment of what Christ and His Apostles had foretold, that
false teachers would arise, speaking perverse things.
In these later
times the Spirit of God has been operating in the hearts of thousands of His
people, causing them to return to apostolic teaching.
CHAPTER TWO: THE CHURCH AND THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN
The Lord's statement to the Apostle Peter, that upon the rock
foundation of the truth of his confession, as embodied in His own Person, He
would build His Church and the gates of Hades should not prevail against it,
was followed by the promise, "I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of
Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16:19).
It is important to observe the distinction made by the Lord between the Church
and the Kingdom of Heaven. To identify the two gives rise to much confusion.
"The Kingdom of Heaven" describes Heaven as the place from which
authority proceeds, while the earth is the sphere in which it is exercised.
Heaven is God's Throne, the Seat of Divine Government (Ps. 11:4; 103:19; Matt.
5:34; Acts 7:49). When the One who exercises the authority is the predominant
thought, the phrase used is "the Kingdom of God," etc. a phrase which also
extends beyond all the various ages of time with their dispensational features.
"The Heavens" have always ruled (Dan. 4:32). Inasmuch, too, as the
Kingdom of Heaven assumed a special phase with the testimony of Christ in the
days of His flesh, obviously the Kingdom of Heaven preceded the formation of
the Church. While yet the inception of the Church was future Christ denounced
the Pharisees for shutting up the Kingdom of Heaven against men: "Ye enter not
in yourselves," He said, "neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter"
(Matt. 23:13). That alone would be sufficient to show that there is a
distinction. They were not hindering men from entering the Church, as it did
not then exist.
THE KEYS
In
saying to Peter, "I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven," He
was at once differentiating between the Kingdom and the Church, of which He had
just spoken. The keys are symbolic of authority and of the power to give
admission to something. In this case the admission was not to the Church. Peter
did not open the door into the Church either when He preached to the Jews on
the Day of Pentecost or when he preached to Gentiles in the house of Cornelius.
If the preaching of the gospel is the opening of the door into the Church, then
all who engage in preaching are openers of the door. Moreover, the Lord's
commission to preach the gospel was given to all the Apostles, as recorded in
Matthew 28:19. While, on the one hand, He was about to build His Church, which
would consist of true believers only, His disposition of the affairs of the
Kingdom of Heaven, of which He handed Peter the keys, was quite another matter;
it had to do initially with the nation of Israel, in the midst of which the
powers of the Kingdom had already been exercised, though it was not limited to
Israel.
ISRAEL AND THE KINGDOM
Whereas there is no mention of the Church in Christ's previous discourses,
He had constantly spoken of the Kingdom of Heaven, as also had His herald John
the Baptist in his special mission to Israel. Each had given the nation the
message, "Repent ye; for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand" (Matt. 3:2 and
4:17), clearly a reference to the fact of Christ's presence in the nation. The
Kingdom had been one of the Lord's chief topics in His discourses.
The
nation of Israel, though professing allegiance to God, had shared in the
general rebellion of mankind (cp. Isa. 1:2, 4). The King had at length Himself
come into their midst, but they had refused to recognize Him, and, at the time
when Christ spoke of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, the Jews were just
about to reject Him absolutely. For this they were eventually to be "cast
away," until a time of restoration, an event still future (Rom. 11:15,25). In
spite of this, to Peter was to be committed the proclamation of a great amnesty
to the nation, and thereafter the gospel was to be carried by him and others to
the Gentiles.
PENTECOST
On
the Day of Pentecost, after explaining the circumstances of the sending of the
Holy Spirit, and addressing his hearers as "men of Israel" (Acts 2:22), and
"brethren" (verse 29), i.e., as his fellow nationals, the Apostle proclaimed
the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus of Nazareth, whom they had crucified
by "the hand of lawless men." "All the house of Israel" were to know assuredly
that God had "made Him both Lord and Christ" (verse 36). In, his subsequent
message to the nation he says, "The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob,
the God of our fathers, hath glorified His Servant Jesus; whom ye delivered up,
and denied" (3:13). Yet, upon the condition of their repentance, their sins
would be blotted out, "seasons of refreshing" would come from the presence of
the Lord, and He would send the Christ (verses 19, 20).
Here, then,
was a proclamation to the nation, "the house of Israel," and in this and his
further testimony the Lord fulfilled His word to the Apostle, that to him He
would give the "keys of the Kingdom of Heaven." In other words, besides the new
fact that the Church, the Body of Christ, began to be formed at Pentecost, the
Apostle Peter, in offering terms to Israel, was dealing administratively with
the affairs of the Kingdom of Heaven; not that he was the first to do so (that
is not involved in the Lord's word that He would give Him the keys), for the
authority of the Kingdom had already been operating, but that he fulfilled a
special function in regard to it.
While members of the Church, the
Body of Christ, are thereby in the Kingdom, yet, as we have seen, the Kingdom
was preached as the Kingdom of Heaven before the Church began, and will be
proclaimed on earth after the Church is complete and is removed from earth to
its heavenly destiny at the Rapture.
THE
KINGDOM OF GOD
The Kingdom of God is the sphere in which God's
rule is acknowledged. It is said to be "in mystery" (Mark 4:11), that is, it
does not come within the natural powers of observation.' The Lord said, "The
Kingdom of God cometh not with observation" [4] (margin, "with outward show")
(Luke 17:20). The reign of God on earth today is not that of an earthly kingdom
(though His Almighty power controls the affairs of kingdoms), but is the reign
of His will over the unseen movements of the inner man. Submission to His will
involves faith in Christ, and this brings regeneration, or the new birth, of
which our Lord spoke to Nicodemus. Then it is that we become children of God,
being born of the Spirit, and thereupon we receive eternal life and are
justified in His sight, becoming accepted in Christ. Without the new birth all
other conformity is vain. The Kingdom of Heaven, as Scripture portrays it,
makes all attempt to gain temporal power entirely inconsistent with its
objects. Those who would reign as kings to day must reign without the Apostles
(see I Cor. 4:8, where Paul deprecates the attempt to reign now, and expresses
an ardent longing for the appointed future time for doing so). When hereafter
God asserts His rule universally, then the Kingdom will be in glory, and will
be manifest to all (cp. Matt. 25:31-34; 2 Tim. 4:18). That is destined to be
the ultimate phase of the Kingdom of Heaven, an expression which often covers
the same ground as "the Kingdom of God," the two terms being frequently
interchangeable (cp. Matt. 19:23 with verse 24, and again with Mark 10:23, 24;
also Matt. 19:14 with Mark 10:14; and Matt. 13:11 with Luke 8:10). [5]
[4]
See an extended note on the subject in Notes on I and 2 Thessalonians by C. F.
Hogg and the writer.
[5] The phrase "the Kingdom of Heaven" is used
only in the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament (in 2 Tim. 4:18, the phrase
is "His heavenly Kingdom"). That Gospel speaks of the Kingdom of God four
times. There is a distinction between what that Kingdom actually is and what it
resembles. In the parables in Matt. 13 the Lord does not say, "the Kingdom of
Heaven is so and so," but "the Kingdom of Heaven is like unto" (verses 24, 31,
33, 44, 45, 47), and again in the corresponding passage in Mark, "So is the
Kingdom of God as if..." (verse 26), and "How shall we liken the Kingdom of
God, or in what parable shall we show it forth" (verse 30). Just as there is a
radical difference between wheat and tares, so there is all the difference
between "sons of the Kingdom" and "sons of the evil one' (Matt. 13:38). Both
are to be found in the Kingdom, in its mystery form, outwardly acknowledging
the name of Christ. But some yield either merely formal or even feigned
obedience. This will be so even in the Millennium, and with hearts unchanged
they will rebel at the last (see Rev. 20:7-10). Only those can enter into the
Kingdom in reality and in its eternal blessedness who are born again (John
3:5).
BINDING AND LOOSING
The
promise with which the Lord immediately followed His word to Peter about the
keys, namely, "and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in
Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven," He
subsequently extended to all the disciples, as recorded in chapter 18:18. From
this it is obvious that, whatever is indicated thereby, it was not, as a
principle, to be confined exclusively to Peter. The preceding context in the
eighteenth chapter shows that the reference there is to cases of discipline for
maintaining the Lord's honour, and the succeeding context shows that the power
was to be shared with two or three who would be gathered together in His Name.
He would Himself be in the midst of them. The passage in the sixteenth chapter
shows that the reference is, as we have seen, to administration in the Kingdom
of Heaven.
The Lord's words to Peter, therefore, do not in any wise
imply that this Apostle was to receive a primacy of jurisdiction in the Church,
or that he was to have supreme authority to teach and govern under Christ. Both
this, and the idea that Peter was the rock foundation upon which the spiritual
edifice of the Church was to be built, are based upon ecclesiastical
misconception and find no support in the pages of Holy Scripture. Christ was
neither founding a monarchy in forming the Church, nor was He establishing an
individual to be a ruler over it.
Nor again can such superiority or
authority be inferred from the Lord's words to Peter, after His resurrection,
"Feed My lambs," "Feed (or tend) My sheep." What Christ was doing, as recorded
in John 21:15-17, was not the impartation of ecclesiastical authority but a
confirmation of Peter after his restoration from his fall, and a preparation
for his service. There was no implication in the Lord's words that any
specially superior work of pastoral care was to be committed to him. The care
of the flock is a responsibility devolving upon all spiritual shepherds; as the
Apostle himself says when exhorting elders, "Tend the flock of God which is
among you, exercising the oversight thereof, not of constraint, but willingly,
according unto God; nor yet for filthy lucre but of a ready mind; neither as
lording it over the charge allotted to you, but making yourselves ensamples to
the flock" (I Peter 5:2, 3, R.V.).
THINGS THAT
DIFFER
To sum up, the Kingdom is not co-terminous with the
Church. Holy angels, though they do not form part of the Church, are in the
Kingdom of God. The Psalmist, after saying "The Lord hath established His
Throne in the heavens; and His Kingdom ruleth over all," calls at once upon His
angels to praise Him. They fulfil His commandments, "hearkening unto the voice
of His words"; they are "His ministers that do His pleasure" (Ps. 103:19-21).
In the present era the powers of the Kingdom work in the hearts of men by means
of the preaching of the gospel, but neither the Kingdom of God nor the Church
consists of a visible external organization. Christ did not found and build up
for Himself a Kingdom upon earth, nor do we find any intimation in Scripture
that the Church is an earthly establishment.
When Christ, speaking of
a trespass on the part of one brother against another, and of the efforts that
were to be made by means of witnesses to remove the difficulty, said that if
the erring one refused to hear them the injured brother was to tell it to the
church (Matt. 18:17), obviously the reference was to a local congregation. The
Church, in the extended significance of the word, is ruled out by the
circumstances. The thought of the establishment of a central ecclesiastical
institution as a court of judicature for the trying of such cases is as absent
from that passage as it is from the rest of the New Testament. The Church is
never looked upon, in the teaching of Scripture, as an earthly institution. To
conceive of it as the Kingdom of God is to confound things concerning which
Holy Scripture makes a difference. That Kingdom is spiritual in its present
phase. Its operations do not consist in the punctilious observance of
ordinances, in things external and material, but in those which are spiritual
and essential, in righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost (Rom.
14:17).
CHAPTER THREE: THE BODY OF CHRIST
The truth relating to the Church as the Body, of which Christ
is the Head, was especially committed to the Apostle Paul, and it was evidently
with the design of unfolding it that he set out to write the Epistle to the
Ephesians. The teaching that occupies the first twenty-one verses of the first
chapter forms the basis of the statement that God gave Christ to be "Head over
all things to the Church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth
all in all."
An essential truth laid down in this first chapter,
amplified in the course of the Epistle, and conveyed in the symbolism of the
head and the body, is that the Church, instead of being an earthly organization
built up and established in the world, is heavenly in its design, establishment
and destiny. Its individual members necessarily become incorporated into it in
this life, according as each one receives eternal life through faith in Christ
and is born of God. Each one then becomes part of the Body and is inseparably
united to the Head. At no period can all the believers living in the world at
any given time have constituted the Church. They could not in that respect be
spoken of as the Body of Christ and yet that is an alternative designation of
the Church. [6]
[6] A local church, meeting in any particular place,
is spoken of as a body in 1 Cor. 12:27, but in a different aspect: "To the
church in Corinth," the Apostle says, "Ye are (the) body of Christ" (the
definite article is absent in the original), but some of the members, in that
application of the word, are themselves part of the head, being spoken of as an
"eye," an "ear" (see verse 16). Accordingly the symbol is not applied in that
passage in the same way as in Ephesians, where Christ is the Head of the whole
Church, the Body.
THE SCRIPTURE VIEW OF THE
CHURCH
Even at the time of Pentecost those who believed
comprised only a small fraction of the whole Church, and if they, or all the
truly regenerate in the world at the present time, or at any other time, were
the Church, then that of which He is the Head (and there is no other) would be
a body maimed and marred and lacking most of its parts. In the early part of
the present era most of the Church had not come into being; in the closing part
of the era most of the Church has, or will have, departed this life, such,
while still part of the Body, being present with the Lord. The whole will not
be completed till the gospel has fulfilled its object. After its number is
complete, the Lord will "descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of
the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise
first; then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be
caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air" (I Thess. 4:16, 17,
R.V.). The Church win then have its full membership as the Body of Christ, and
only of that company can the term "the Church" be rightly used, apart from its
application to a local company.
Many apply the term "the Church" to
all those in the world who profess the faith. But such a view of the Church is
not borne out by the teaching of Christ and His Apostles.' Believers [7] are
formed into local churches here, each being a separate spiritual temple of God,
according to the Divine plan; as the Apostle says to the church at Corinth, "Ye
are a temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you" (I Cor. 3:16,
R.V.). But the churches were not externally organized into an ecclesiastical
entity, in any district or country, or generally as a universal system. Neither
is there any hint in apostolic teaching that such was Divinely intended to be
the case. To such a system or combination the word "Church" is nowhere applied
in Scripture, and any such organization is a contravention of apostolic
testimony and therefore of the will and design of Christ.
[7] The view
referred to has been explained by means of the illustration of a regiment in
the British Army, which fought, for instance, at the battle of Waterloo, and
still bears the same designation, though not a soldier who took part in that
battle is alive today. But Scripture knows no such third definition of the
Church as would provide ground for the illustration. Again, an attempt has been
made to find some support for the view in the suggestion that the letters to
the seven churches in the second and third Chapters of the Apocalypse speak of
conditions which anticipatively represent successive periods in the history of
the Christian churches, or of Christendom, throughout the present era. It is
argued from this that since the condition prevailing in any one of the periods
represents what is conveyed to a particular church in the actual letter, the
term "church" way be said to stand for all the Christians in the world during
the period intimated. This argument is precarious indeed. To begin with, it is
based upon a mere inference, and then, whatever justification there may be for
the successive period view, that view involves the teaching that the conditions
which are represented by the last of the four letters are not distinctly
successive since each of these four last continues from its beginning to the
end of the age; so that there are four simultaneous conditions at the time
represented by the letter to Laodicea, three represented by the letter to
Philadelphia, two by the letter to Sardis, while that which is represented by
the one to Thyatira continues through all four. In other words, if we hold the
anticipative and prophetic view of these letters to the churches they cannot
all be held to represent distinctly separate, successive periods. This itself
runs counter to the idea that the Church consists of all believers in the world
at any given time, and in any case it is unsafe to apply the word "Church," in
a way in which it is not used in Scripture, to something which is simply based
upon inference, and especially an inference which does not fit the view taken.
CHRIST'S DESIGN ABANDONED
In
times considerably subsequent to those of the Apostles, churches were
externally combined, organized and centralized, as the result of ecclesiastical
aims and efforts, and by such means something took shape quite different in
character from the arrangements which were designed by Christ and carried out
by the Apostles. It is true that then the term "Church" was applied to that
organization, but in no way could its use in that respect be justified from the
Divine point of view. The claim is made that such an organization was
inevitable, and was developed and directed by the Spirit of God, but the claim
is invalid. The ecclesiastical history of the third, fourth and fifth centuries
is a witness against it. In those times the churches became partially
paganized, and their organization was arranged under the influence and guidance
of the Emperor Constantine, and modelled largely on the plan of State
arrangements. The whole system thus became a travesty of the Divine institution
and the term "the Church" was, and has been since, a, misnomer, when applied to
it.
That local churches are themselves visible communities professing
the same faith, partaking of the same holy privileges and spiritual blessings,
governed by the same Lord, and indwelt by the same Holy Spirit, has never
afforded any ground for their external amalgamation, with the establishment of
a central ecclesiastical authority on earth, either for any particular
district, or for the churches at large; neither has the fact that the Lord
provides spiritual gifts in the several churches for the guidance and care
therein of believers. We have already remarked that the record of what is
regarded as a Council of the Church in Acts 15 affords no evidence of this. The
incident there mentioned is, on the contrary, a testimony against such an
institution rather than an evidence in favour of it.
THE ONE AND ONLY HEAD
That God the Father gave
Christ to be Head over all things to the Church as His Body is the crown of all
the Divine counsels relating to the Church. There is no more glorious theme in
all the plan of Redemption. That, no doubt, is the significance of the double
title of God, "the God of our Lord Jesus Christ" and "the Father of glory,"
with which this passage begins (Eph. 1:17), while it also resumed the threefold
mention of the praise of His glory, in verses 6, 12 and 14. The Son wrought for
the glory of the Father in His life on earth and His atoning death, and the
Father, in response thereto, glorified His Son in raising Him from the dead and
seating Him at His right hand in the place of universal authority and in
Headship over the Church.
The phrase "Head over all things to the
Church" is very comprehensive when viewed in the light of both the preceding
and succeeding contexts. The latter speaks of the Church as the fulness of Him
"that filleth all in all" [8] that is to say, in regard to the Church as His
Body, He fills all things in all the members, all their activities being under
His direction and fulfilled by His power. But this does not exhaust the meaning
of the phrase. The preceding context directs our thoughts to the position which
Christ occupies in His universal power and authority both in this age and that
which is to come, a position in which all things are put in subjection under
His feet. This is stated here anticipatively, as an accomplished fact; for,
though as the Epistle to the Hebrews says, "we see not yet all things subjected
to Him," yet its fulfillment is as certain as if it had already taken place.
[8] Here the presence of the definite article in the original refers
apparently to what has preceded.
This opens out a wonderful vista. The
One to whom all things are to be subjected has been given to the Church as its
Head. The Church in this relation to Christ occupies the highest position in
the Divine counsels for the future. All things in Heaven and on the earth are
unitedly to own His authority, and the position of the Church as being "in
Christ" determines its association with Him in the exercise of this universal
control. We are to be "joint-heirs with Christ" (Rom. 8:17). The Father has in
view for His Son "a dispensation (or administration, lit., economy) of the
fulness of the times," wherein He will sum up all things in Christ, "the things
in the heavens and the things on the earth" (Eph. 1:10); and inasmuch as the
Church, chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, is united to Him in
the closest possible manner, it will, while being under His Headship as His
Body, at the same time be associated with Him in His power and rule, and thus
He is, in the fullest scope, "Head over all things to the Church."
PREPARATORY ANTAGONISM
Against such a
transcendent truth, affecting as it does the glory of God and the Person of
Christ, it is not a matter of surprise that the arch-adversary should set
himself with his utmost might and his most persistent and ingenious devices,
both by opposition and imitation. Nor need we be surprised that, throughout an
era when God is calling out from among the nations a company for His Name, to
constitute the Church the Body of Christ, formed by the Holy Spirit, and
Heavenly in establishment and destiny, the adversary should seek to obscure and
travesty the truths relating thereto. Satanic preparation had been made, in the
long centuries before Christ came, for the paganizing of the apostate
Christendom of the fourth century A.D., by the worldwide spread of Babylonish
tents, customs and practices.
ECCLESIASTICAL
PRESUMI'TION
The doctrine relating to the Church as the Body of
Christ has a most practical effect on the life of believers, and is strikingly
counteractive of a tendency to regard Church truth as merely doctrinal and
removed from the sphere of Christian activities. The dominating principle for
all believers, in this figure under which the Church is set forth, is their
entire subjection to Christ. The Body is for the Head. Human will of itself is
ruled out. The glory of man as such has no place. For the believer the Cross of
Christ is the death of human self-satisfaction, ambition and pride. The Cross
has revealed in full measure man's alienation from God, his love of this world
and his disinclination towards grace. But the Cross is at the same time the
very basis upon which the relationship of the Church to Christ is established.
Man's tendency is to exalt himself. He loves reputation. He likes to be
somebody, to do something which will attract the esteem of people to himself,
to be of importance in his own eyes as well as in the eyes of others. In the
very discharge of spiritual functions in the Church, man is apt to forget that
all that he is and does is to be surely and solely for the glory of Christ,
that Christ is the one Head, controlling everything, and imparting everything
of life and energy to the Body in all its members.
Nowhere is this
innate tendency more dangerous than in spiritual things, and particularly in
the exercise of the care and guidance of the people of God. Here one exposes
himself especially to the wiles of the adversary, and a man may be deceived
into thinking that he is serving God while really he is establishing the glory
and power of his ecclesiastical position. The true glory of Christ is obscured
when man's greatness is prominent. Ecclesiastical rivalry, and the resulting
domination of the strongest men in the churches, served to produce such a
condition, that control eventually was exercised from one religious centre, and
man usurped the position of the authority of Christ.
That the Church
is the Body of Christ strikes a blow at the idea of its establishment on earth
as a universal ecclesiastical organization. Christ the Head is in Heaven, and
His Body the Church is identified with Him in the Heavenly places. There the
Church is "seated" with Him, and its establishment and destiny are there. Its
very existence and condition depended, and ever will depend, upon His ascension
and exaltation there as a result of His Incarnation, Death and Resurrection.
There could be no Church without Christ as its Head, and it is because He is
set at God's right hand that He holds that position. That the Church is His
Body assumes, then, both His exaltation and the identification of the Church
with Him in the heavenlies.
GROWTH OF CLERICAL
DOMINATION
This is not according to the ideas and inclination of
the natural mind; it clashes with man's carnal propensities. It is significant
that, while this great truth relating to the Church as the Body of which Christ
is the Head, was taught and maintained by apostolic testimony, there is the
clearest evidence that in post-apostolic times it fell into neglect. The low
spiritual condition into which the churches lapsed made this inevitable. The
state of things against which Christ Himself remonstrates through the Apostle
John in Revelation 2 and 3 was such as to induce a disregard of the doctrine
concerning the true position and relation of the Church. Not only so, but, on
the other hand, there were forces at work detrimental to it. The rapid and
general advance of clerisy was against it. The un-apostolic assumption of human
power and domination on the part of Church leaders practically obliterated it.
How could it be apprehended when men "loved to have the pre-eminence," and when
people gloried in man? The general development of the clerical system was
antagonistic to that truth.
Those who have carefully studied the
history of the first few centuries of this era, will perhaps have observed that
the writings even of the early "Fathers" contain no testimony to this doctrine
of the Headship of Christ over the Church as His Body. Whatever else was
taught, that was allowed to lapse. Earthly aspirations, motives guided by
natural ambition, aims that were concentrated on worldly ideas, superseded the
truth of the Church as the Body of Christ. The confusion of the true character
of the Church with that of earthly organization was a triumph for the adversary
and shows how possible it was for the churches to be "corrupted from the
simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ."
CHAPTER FOUR: A FOURFOLD DESCRIPTION OF THE CHURCH
The first chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians sets forth the character of
the Church as heavenly in its position, its relationship to Christ and its
destiny. As His Body, it is united to Him as its Head "in the heavenly places."
The second chapter likewise speaks of the constitution of the Church. It
consists of those who "in the flesh" were Jews and Gentiles, all alike being
"sons of disobedience," living "in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of
the flesh and of the mind," "by nature children of wrath," and spiritually
"dead through our trespasses" (2:3-5). Of such materials Divine grace has
designed that Christ should "create in Himself... one new man," reconciling
believers both Jew and Gentile, "in one body unto God, through the Cross"
(verses 15, 16). The "one new man" is the Body with the Head, viewed
anticipatively, instinct with spiritual life derived from the Head, though the
Body is actually in process of formation until the whole attains "unto a full
grown man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (4:13).
Toward the close of the second chapter the metaphor is changed (to be
resumed in the fourth chapter), and a threefold description is given. There is
firstly the figure of a city, secondly that of a household, and thirdly that of
a temple. Gentile believers are not raised to the level of Jewish believers;
both are brought out of their former condition into the high privileges of
fellowship and association with Christ.
A
CITY AND A HOUSEHOLD
"So then" (i.e., because of this union in
Christ and the common access by one Spirit unto the Father) "ye are no more
strangers and sojourners, but ye are fellow-citizens with the saints, and of
the household of God." The words rendered "strangers" (xenos) and "sojourners"
(paroikos, lit., a by-dweller) and not infrequently found together in the
Septuagint.
The stranger was an alien, tolerated, indeed, yet liable
to be frowned on and debarred from rights and privileges which belonged to the
nation into whose midst he had come to reside for the time being.
As a
sojourner, if the Apostle was merely referring to conditions in Greek States, a
sojourner was one who came from one city and settled in another but did not
enjoy the rights of citizenship. If, however, he had in mind the Septuagint use
of the word in the rendering of Leviticus 22:10; 25:23, etc., the reference
would be to one who, while resident with a family or community, was excluded
from its domestic rights and privileges, as, for instance, in the case of one
who sojourned with a priest as his guest but was prohibited from eating the
holy things. That this is the meaning is suggested by the contrasting context,
which speaks of believers as "of the household of God." [9]
[9] In
Leviticus 22:10, the Septuagint has a different word for "stranger" (allogenos,
one of another race). In Genesis 23:4, "sojourner" (Paroikos) is the first
word. See also Leviticus 25:23, 35, 47. In the New Testament the terms are
found only elsewhere in Acts 7:6, 29; cp. 1 Pet. 2:11.
How striking
the change wrought by Divine grace! Instead of "strangers," "fellow-citizens
with the saints!" Literally the phrase is "fellow-citizens of the saints," that
is to say, the saints constitute a community of which all are fellow-citizens
not that Gentile believers are now privileged with Jewish saints, as a distinct
class, but that all saints (whether Jew or Gentile formerly) are together
privileged as being possessed of heavenly citizenship. All enjoy the same
government and protection, the same organization and fellowship, the same
rights and liberties. Instead of "sojourners," they are members "of the
household of God!" Not mere guests, here to day and gone tomorrow, but members
of God's spiritual House, enjoying all the benefits of domestic life, in the
most intimate relationship, as "heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ."
A TEMPLE
As a Temple the saints
are "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus
Himself being the chief corner stone; in whom each several building (more
literally, 'every building') fitly framed together groweth into a holy temple
in the Lord."
As to the foundation, the word rendered "being built"
(lit., "being built upon"), containing in itself the mention of a dwelling
place, forms a transition from the figure of the household to the material of a
building, that of a temple being in view. The foundation was laid by the
Apostles and prophets (i.e., those whose testimony was contemporaneous with
that of the Apostles); it consisted of the doctrines relating to Christ. [10]
Their testimony was foundation work, Christ Jesus Himself, i.e., His own
Person, being "the chief corner stone," the foundation stone placed at the
corner. Cp. Psalm 118:22, Isaiah 28:16. Christ, the glories of His Person and
work, form the foundation. The Apostles and prophets are again viewed in 4:12
as engaged in the work of "building up."
[10] Some regard the apostles
and prophets as themselves the foundation. While this is possible, it is
needful to remember that the genitive case in the original, represented by the
preposition "of," frequently has an objective sense instead of the
appositional. That is to say, in the present instance the meaning would be, not
that the apostles and prophets were themselves the subjects, forming part of
the foundation, but that the foundation was the object laid by their agency,
and this is a fact. Revelation 21:14 affords no confirmation of the subjective
or appositional view; that passage speaks of a city wall, a symbol of defence,
not of God's Temple.
The phrase rendered "every building" (R.V.
margin); "all the building," (A.V.); each is possible as a rendering signifies
the structure in every part of it. The edifice in course of construction, in
process of being "fitly framed together (or, more literally, 'jointed
together')," grows "into a holy Temple in the Lord." This presents the process
in its ultimate issue. All is viewed in its future state as complete and
perfect, every stone fitting its appointed place, the whole being God's
dwelling place, a place of absolute holiness, a structure of glory and beauty,
a place of worship. There is no noise in the process, no outward display. The
building is not set up on the earth it is a spiritual structure and this is
consistent with and confirms all the teaching of the New Testament concerning
the Church. Nothing can prevent its completion. The gates of Hades cannot
prevail against it.
CHAPTER FIVE: THE FATHER'S
FAMILY
The first chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians speaks
particularly of the counsels of God in regard to the glory of Christ and the
relationship of the Church to Him. The second chapter brings especially before
us the operations of God in the formation of the Church, the present process
and the ultimate design.
The third chapter, which, since the Apostle
treats therein of his own ministry, is parenthetic, yet introduces, as we shall
see, a figure additional to those of the second chapter. At the same time even
here he recalls the subject of the Body; in speaking of the special stewardship
committed to him in connection with "the mystery" of Christ and the Church, he
defines the mystery in this way, "that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs and
fellow-members of the same Body, and fellow-partakers of the promise in Christ
Jesus, through the gospel" (3:6, R.V.) Co-heirs, co-incorporated and
co-sharers. Here the one Body is again the dominating thought. For the thought
of the incorporation into the same Body conveys a closer union than that of
joint inheritance, and the third expression, "fellow-partakers" is simply added
to show that the first two involve this, that there is no blessing or
privilege, either in kind or in degree, which is not shared alike by believers,
both Jew and Gentile.
The additional figure which this chapter
presents is that of a family. Having pointed out the present purpose of God
concerning the Church, in regard to the principalities and the powers in the
heavenly places, the Apostle speaks of the access which we enjoy through faith,
and bows his knees "unto the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on
earth is named." "Every family" may be taken as the correct rendering. [11]
[11] It is true that the Greek word pas may signify "all," even
when it is not followed by the definite article with the noun (when the article
is used, the rendering should be "all the " or "the whole" as in Acts 3:25,
"all the families," and Phil. 1:3, R.V. "all my remembrance of you; in contrast
"every prayer" in verse 4, where the article is absent). Yet a distinction is
necessary in the phrases without the article. In the case of an abstract, or a
proper noun, some collective nouns, and some used in a collective sense where
no other meaning but "all" is possible, the rendering is "all," e.g., "all
righteousness" (Matt. 3:15), "all Jerusalem" (Matt. 2:3), "all flesh" (Luke
3:6). Otherwise the rendering should be "every;" thus "every ordinance" (1
Peter 2:13), "every creature' (Col. 1:15, 23), "every Scripture" (2 Tim. 3:16);
so "every family" (here).
THE
PATRIA
As to the meaning of the word patria,"family," it
is found only twice elsewhere in the New Testament, in Luke 2:4, "lineage of
David" (R.V. "family"), that is, those who reckon their descent from David, and
Acts 3:25, "the kindreds (R.V., families) of the earth." The word, then,
signifies those who have a common paternal origin.
Now as to the
context, the Apostle has mentioned in the 18th verse of the preceding chapter
that through Christ "we have our access in one Spirit unto the Father." This he
has just repeated in the 12th verse of the third chapter and in this connection
he speaks of "the Father" as the One to whom he bows his knees. In both
passages the Fatherhood of God is stressed, and the point here is that from the
Father every family in heaven and on earth is named. Some have regarded this as
signifying a series of families consisting of the Church, angels, Jews and
Gentiles. This, however, does not seem to be the apostle's meaning.
"EVERY FAMILY"
The phrase,
exactly parallel in the original to that in 2:21, speaks of the Church as a
temple he says "in whom every building (see RV margin) fitly framed together,
groweth unto a holy temple in the Lord." Just as there the phrase "every
building" signifies "the building in all its parts" so here "every family"
would point to the same kind of meaning namely, "the whole family in all its
parts," that is to say, all those who, whether in Heaven or on earth, enjoy
relationship to God as their Father. Thus the Church is in view, in all its
constituent parts those who are already with the Lord and the various
communities or assemblies on earth who likewise enjoy this Divine relationship.
This is in keeping with the tenor of the whole Epistle.
That the whole
in its several parts is named from the Father indicates that from Him as Father
it derives that which gives it its true character, and it is the practical
realization of this in the lives of believers that the Apostle desires, as
expressed in his immediately following prayer. For the Fatherhood of God, and
all that this means in spiritual relationship and experience, can be carried
into practical effect only if we are strengthened by the power of the Spirit of
God in the inward man Christ dwelling in our hearts through faith. Only so can
we be rooted and grounded in love and be strong to apprehend with all the
saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the
love of Christ which passeth knowledge. Thus and thus only can we be "filled
unto (Or 'into') all the fulness of God." All this is consequent upon having
God as our Father.
THE FATHER
The matters contained in. this comprehensive prayer, then, are those which
appertain especially to the family of God. In the Apostle's prayer in the first
chapter he speaks of God as "the Father of glory," as well as "the God of our
Lord Jesus Christ" (verse 17); for the subject of that prayer is more
especially the power of God in raising Him from the dead, and in consequence
the greatness of His power to usward. Here in the third chapter his prayer is
occupied more particularly with the subject of love. We are to know the love of
Christ and are to be rooted and grounded in love. The theme of love is
especially appropriate to the subject of the family. As the Father of glory
(chapter 1) He raised up Christ from the dead, and made Him to sit at His right
hand in heavenly places, giving Him to be Head over all things to the Church,
which is His Body. As the Father of the spiritual family (chapter 3) His design
is that the members of the family should know His love as embodied in and
expressed through Christ. In the first prayer the Church is the fulness of Him
that filleth all in all." That is a matter of glory expressed in power. Here in
the second prayer the subject of fulness is not the power by which Christ fills
all things in all the members, as in 1:23, but the design of the Father that
the members of His family should so know the love of Christ that they may be
filled into all the fulness of God. Divine power fills all the members of the
Body; by Divine love the members of God's family are filled into His fulness.
THE DOXOLOGY
The theme of the
Apostle's prayer is so transcendent, and the effects designed to be produced so
soul-stirring and heart- affecting, that he follows his prayer with this
doxology: "Now unto Him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that
we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto Him be the
glory in the Church and in Christ Jesus unto all generations for ever and ever"
(3: 20, 21). Let us note particularly the combination "in the Church and in
Christ Jesus"; that is undoubtedly the right rendering. The Church is the
sphere in which the glory here spoken of is to ascend to God. But not simply
the Church; never the Church without Christ who is its Head, who fills the
members, and whose love draws forth their praise. The combination is a
beautiful continuation of the great theme of the Epistle, the union of Christ
and His Church. The Son, who glorified the Father on the earth, having finished
the work which He gave Him to do, glorifies Him now, and will ever do so, in
and through His Church, which He has redeemed by His precious blood and united
to Himself. It is this oneness, this fellowship, with Christ which causes the
glory to ascend to Him who is the Father of glory. The glory, which is the
exhibition of His own character, power and attributes, flows down from Him, and
returns to Him, in responding recognition and expression, in the Church and in
Christ Jesus, and it will do so through all successive generations and
throughout eternity.
CHAPTER SIX: "THE UNITY OF
THE SPIRIT"
At the beginning of the 4th chapter of Ephesians the
Apostle recalls his circumstances as mentioned at the opening of chapter 3.
There he described himself as "the prisoner of Christ Jesus;" here he speaks of
himself as "the prisoner in the Lord." The change of title is appropriate to
the context. At the close of chapter 2 he had been occupied with the Heavenly
aspect of the Church, and there, in introducing his appeal, he uses a title of
Christ which expresses the intimacy of the mystical union between the Lord and
His saints; here, where his appeal actually begins, and his series of
exhortations in regard to practical Christian life, he uses the title which
betokens His authority as Lord over their lives.
In saying, "I
therefore, the prisoner in the Lord," he not merely resumes what he had said of
the Church at the close of chapter 2, but bases it likewise on all that he has
unfolded in chapter 3.
HOW TO KEEP THE
UNITY
While now beginning that part of his Epistle which
consists more especially of practical exhortations, he has yet more to say, by
way of the development of his subject, concerning the Church as the Body of
Christ. The sublime character of his theme leads him at once to enjoin upon the
saints the need of a walk worthy of their calling. Such a walk could be marked
only by "all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering" and by forbearance of
one another in love. Indissociable from these is the diligence necessary "to
keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."
Unity can exist
only where we have a right estimate of ourselves, a realization of our own
littleness and demerit, and that unassuming self-abasement which is a
reflection of the lowliness of Christ; when, too, we exercise that spirit of
glad submissiveness to God's dealings which produces considerateness towards
others even when under provocation, the "invincible might of meekness," which
reflects the meekness of Christ and overcomes evil with good. To these is to be
added the longsuffering which patiently bears with unreasonableness and meets
disappointments with quiet fortitude. Only so can we forbear one another in
love. That kind of forbearance is not studied courtesy or frigid endurance, but
is characterized by the holy attachment which binds believers together in the
bonds of Christian love.
THE FORMATION OF THE
UNITY
Since these things are exhibited by reason of our
relation to Christ, and are the fruit of the Spirit, they are essential to the
maintenance of the unity of the Spirit. We are to "give diligence" (not merely
"endeavour"), i.e., to make it our business, to keep this unity. The unity is
there; it is not for us to fashion it. The Church is one, a Divine entity. The
Spirit of God makes it so. As the presence of the Holy Spirit imparts to the
Church its fitness to be God's Temple (2:22), so His power imparts its unity to
it. That unity is not formed by man, nor by any ecclesiastical organization on
earth. Human arrangements and institutions may devise, and have devised,
something which possesses a show of uniformity from the natural point of view,
but the unity of the true Body of Christ of which Scripture speaks, is
spiritual in its course of development and heavenly in its position and
character, its design and destiny.
Believers, then, are not exhorted
to make the unity but to keep it. Each has a responsibility to act consistently
with it, keeping it in the bond of peace, by exhibiting those traits of
character and that conduct which are here enjoined. Such a manner of life is
necessarily connected immediately with local conditions and circumstances. The
Apostle was, for instance, directing his injunctions to the church at Ephesus,
thus bringing his general instruction about the character of the whole Church
as the Body of Christ, to bear upon their life as a local community. By
dwelling together in harmony in "all lowliness and meekness, with
longsuffering, forbearing one another in love," they would walk worthily of
their high and spiritual vocation, and, as he says further on, by speaking
truth in love (or rather dealing truly [12] in love), they would "grow up into
Him in all things, which is the Head, even Christ" (verse 15). Again, "putting
away falsehood, they were to speak truth, each one with his neighbour, since
they were members one of another" (verse 25). All bitterness, and wrath, and
anger, and clamour and railing, and all malice were to be put away from them;
they were to be kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving each other, even
as God also in Christ forgave them (verses 31, 32). Thus maintaining unity in
the local church, their harmonious conduct would be in conformity with the
unity of the Spirit which pervades the whole mystical Body.
[12]
"Speaking truth," represents the one verb aletheuo in the original. It
signifies to deal faithfully, or truly, with anyone. "The idea of integrity of
conduct as well as of truthfulness of speech is included in the word, see Gen.
42:16, LXX, "whether ye deal truly or no"' (Notes on the Epistle to the
Galatians, by C. F. Hogg and the writer, p. 207).
AN UNSCRIPTURAL UNIFICATION
There is no hint
here, or anywhere else in the New Testament, of anything like a unity
consisting of the combination of a number of communities, or assemblies,
delimited by geographical conditions, or formed into earthly associations or
circles of fellowship, nor is there any hint of a number of churches bound
together by the bonds either of formulated religious creeds or of human
tradition. No matter whether such communities are organized by mutual consent
or under a church council or any form of ecclesiastical authority centralized
in a given locality, all such combinations are a distinct departure from the
plain teaching of Christ and His Apostles. They do not constitute the unity
spoken of in this passage or any other in the Word of God. They are the outcome
of human conceptions and operations. They satisfy the aspirations of men but
are contrary to the mind of the Lord.
The unity which the believer is
to give diligence to keep is determined neither by efforts to bind churches
into an earthly organization, nor by human ideas of what is or is not a local
church. The risen and glorified Head has made provision for the spiritual
direction and care of each local assembly. The traditions of men and the
bondage, or confusion, which has been brought about by them have naught to do
with the unity formed by the Holy Spirit. Where a local church acts in
conformity with the teaching of the Word of God, it is thereby an expression of
the unity of the Spirit.
ELEMENTS OF
UNITY
There are elements of unity which characterize the whole.
These are enumerated in verses 4 to 6:"There is one body, and one Spirit, even
as ye were also called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one
baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in
all." The mention of the Trinity, "one Spirit," "one Lord," "one God and Father
of all," is significant. The Spirit is put first, for the immediate subject
dealt with is the unity of the Spirit. Associated with Him are the spiritual
and heavenly unities of the Body and the hope of our calling. The Body, yet
incomplete, and only a small portion of which is on the earth, is the entire
Church, formed by the Spirit of God. The hope is associated with the Spirit,
inasmuch as He is "the earnest of our inheritance" and is in that connection
called "the Holy Spirit of promise" (1:13, 14).
The next three unities
are associated with Christ. They have to do with public witness; firstly, the
acknowledgment of Christ as Lord; secondly, the one faith, the complete Divine
revelation, which testifies of Christ; he who holds it confesses Him; thirdly,
the one baptism, an ordinance involving the public recognition of, and
identification with, Christ as Lord. Then, to crown all, "there is one God and
Father of an, who is over all" (His transcendence and supremacy), "and through
all" (His pervading and controlling power), "and in all" (His indwelling and
sustaining presence).
All these constitute "the unity of the Spirit"
(verse 3), and they are enumerated as inducements for us to give diligence to
keep this unity in the bond of peace. They have to do with the one Church, the
Body of Christ, in which all believers are thus united to Him. Its unity is not
yet visible, for the Head is not visible, but it will become so when He is
manifested and His saints with Him.
CHAPTER
SEVEN: THE BUILDING UP OF THE BODY OF CHRIST
After the description
of "the unity of the Spirit," a unity which constitutes the high character of
our calling (Eph. 4:1-6), our attention is drawn to the functions assigned to
individual members of the Body. Indeed the mention of the seven unities in
verses 4 to 6 is designed to form a basis for the setting forth of the various
forms of service given to us and the source from whence they are derived.
UNITY NOT UNIFORMITY
Unity is
not uniformity. There is diversity of gifts, a variety of operation. "To each
one of us was the grace given." None have been overlooked. There is no room for
envy at the possession of gifts by others, or of self-glorying in the exercise
of them ourselves; they are gifts of grace; they are to function for the glory
of Christ. Grace and self-exaltation are incompatible. The grace was given
"according to the measure of the gift of Christ." That is the principle
operating in the endowment of gifts. To each believer grace for service is
supplied upon becoming, by faith in Christ, a member of His Body, the Church.
That is the significance of the past tense "was given." In 2:8 grace was
mentioned in the matter of salvation: "by grace have ye been saved through
faith." That gives us membership in the Church. In no other way is such
membership possible. Here in 4:7 there is an added grace grace for functioning
in the Body.
THE GIVER OF THE GIFTS
"The gift [14] of Christ" suggests the source of the supply, the fulness
which there is in Christ, and the relation which each recipient bears to Him.
Paul has already anticipated this in the preceding chapter. His own ministry of
the gospel was 'according to the gift of that grace of God which was given him
according to the working of His power.' "Unto me," he says, "was this grace
given, to preach unto the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ" (3:7, 8).
In his case he mentions God the Father as the Bestower of the gift; here he
speaks of Christ as the Bestower, a testimony to the Deity of Christ and His
oneness with the Father. Whatever the nature of the gift, Christ is the
sovereign Distributer. Whatever the degree of ability, whether the more highly
gifted, or the less, the adjustment in the Body is His work. The measure of the
gift is His.
The description of the varying gifts is preceded first by
a quotation from the Psalms, which tells first of Christ's triumphant Ascension
(verse 8), and then by a statement as to the antecedent descent which His
Ascension involved, and the position and purpose of His Ascension (verses 9,
10); all this serves to establish the fact of His absolute prerogative and
power in the distribution of the gifts. Let us consider this a little.
"Wherefore He saith, When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive and
gave gifts unto men." Psalm 68, from which this is quoted, is a celebration
(probably of a general character, that is to say, without pointing to any
particular occasion) of Jehovah's victory over the foes of Israel and the
deliverance of His people from the oppressor. [15]
[14] "The word
dorea, "gift," is used (in the eleven passages where it is found in the
New Testament) only of spiritual gifts bestowed by Divine grace. This word and
dorema, which has the same meaning, and is found only in Romans 5:16 and
James 1:17, are to be distinguished from dosis, which directs the
thought more particularly to the act of giving; dosis is used only in
Philippians 4:15, "giving and receiving," and in James 1:17, which, taking the
RX. margin, reads, "Every good giving (dosis the act) and every perfect
boon (dorenia, the concrete gift)." Here in Ephesians 4:7 the phrase
"the gift of Christ" is not "the gift possessed by or consisting of Christ,"
but "the gift bestowed by Him." There is a further word, charisnou,
signifying distinctly "a gift of grace," and though this is not used in the
Epistle to the Ephesians, yet it is connected with the bestowment of grace
(charis), as in chapter 3:7, as well as the present passage.
[15] The phrase "to lead captivity captive," was used to express the
completeness of a victory, as demonstrated by the multitude of captives taken.
Cp. the words of Deborah's song in Judges 5:12. The abstract noun "captivity,"
stands apparently for the concrete "captives," thereby adding force to the
expression. No intimation is given in Ephesians 4:9 as to who the captives
were. The statement has been regarded as referring to the release of the
spirits of the just from Hades and their transference by Christ into Heaven.
Not improbably the reference is directly to the complete victory of Christ over
the spiritual foe, which had formerly triumphed over his captives (cp. Is.
14:2). All the efforts to oppose the designs of God in the Death, Resurrection
and Ascension of Christ, had been frustrated, and now, as a result of what had
been accomplished, and in virtue of the glory and power of His own Person as
the triumphant one over him who had the power of death, as the Liberator of His
redeemed and as Head of the Church in His place of high exaltation, He "gave
gifts unto men," i.e., those on whose behalf He had triumphed (Acts 2:33).
CHRIST'S UNCHANGED PERSONALITY
The next verses lay stress upon the fact of His descent and then upon the
identity of His Person as the One who having descended likewise ascended. "Now
this, He ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts
of the earth?" (verse 9). Opinions vary as to whether this means the descent
into Hades after His death, or whether the reference is to His Incarnation. In
the latter, the phrase, "lower parts of the earth," means the earth as
consisting of the parts lower than heaven. Whatever may be the intention in the
statement, the great fact stands out that Christ could not be the ascended One
if He had not first descended. It is a confirmation of His pre-existence, and
served to counteract the erroneous Gnostic theories being promulgated in the
Apostles' times. So again, in the next statement, "He that descended is the
same also that ascended, far above all the heavens, that He might fill all
things." Changes of locality meant no change in His humanity.
The
Giver of the gifts is One who ascended with unchanged personality. Coming down
from heaven to enter upon a life of true manhood, and having become, by His
Death and Resurrection, the Victor over death and him that had the power of it,
He ascended in His glorified humanity to His place of authority at the Father's
right hand. As Son of Man, while still Son of God, He had experienced all human
conditions, sin apart, and still with undissociated Godhood and manhood He
ascended far above all the heavens, that filling all things He might meet the
needs of His Church. The One who supplies the gifts is as absolutely cognizant
of human needs as He was m the days of His flesh. He is therefore entirely
fitted to give gifts to His Church, assigning to each his appropriate work.
This is indicated by the emphatic pronoun in the original; "He Himself gave,"
that is to say, He and no other is the Provider and Bestower of the gifts.
THE VARIETY OF THE GIFTS
"And
He gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some evangelists; and
some, pastors and teachers." Human appointment has no place here. The list is a
series not of formal offices but of the exercise of spiritual gifts bestowed by
the Lord. The apostles and prophets fulfilled an initial ministry in laying the
foundations of doctrine. The revelation given to the apostles was likewise
communicated to the prophets (see 3:5). Evangelists, pastors and teachers
communicated the truth already received in respect of the gospel and the
ministry of the truths of the faith. The work of the apostles and prophets was
distinctly supernatural and temporary, until the completion of the Divine
revelation. The work of evangelists, pastors and teachers continued and still
continues. The last two are associated in a special way, as one who teaches
thereby engages in a measure of pastoral work.
The provision of these
spiritual gifts by the ascended Lord was for the perfecting of the saints, that
is to say, for the development and equipment of each member, with the following
twofold object in view:(1) "unto the work of ministering," [16] that is to say,
for service in all its various forms, each in harmonious relationship with
others (a general ministry in which we all share), and (2) "unto the building
up of the Body of Christ." What this verse plainly sets forth is that both the
service and the building up of the Body, by gathering in new members and
consolidating the work, are to be rendered by all the saints. In other words,
the provision of the spiritual gifts mentioned is to enable all the saints both
to serve and to do the work of building up of the Body, and this "till we all
come in the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a
perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ."
[16] Diakonia is "service," "ministering," not "the ministry," as if
signifying the present technical sense of an ordained set of ministers. The
prepositions pros and eis, in verse 12, make clear the order intended. Pros,
"for," "with a view to," introduces the phrase "the perfecting of the saints;
on the other hand, the preposition eis, "unto," is used to introduce each of
the two following clauses, "the work of ministering," and "the building up of
the body of Christ," showing that both the ministering and the building up are
intended to be the work of all the saints.
THE COMPLETION OF THE BODY
There are three parts to the subject
of the unity of the Spirit in the 4th chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians:
(1) As to its essentials (verses 1-6); (2) as to its development
(verses 7-12, 14-16); (3) as to its ultimate state (verse 13). In the first
part, the unity, which is sevenfold, provides the standard of conduct
consistent with our calling. In the second part the unity is shown to be
developed by the ascended Lord, who provides the requisite spiritual gifts, the
object being that the saints may be perfected in their service and may fulfil
their part in the building up of the Church, avoiding error, dealing in truth
and love, and so growing up into Christ in all things. In the third part the
finality designed is stated, and is to have fulfillment in the completion and
perfection of the Body of Christ.
In verse 13 the threefold use of the
word "unto" (eis) should be noted: "till we all attain unto the unity of the
faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a full-grown man, unto the
measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (R.V.). The 46 we all"
signifies all believers as a Body, the complete company. [17] The end in view,
then, while it has its bearing upon the life of each individual, is yet the
consummation of the whole as the glorified Body of Christ. The present
operation of the Spirit in the process of building in regard to each member, is
antecedent to the aggregate completeness. The perfect attainment is not
possible for the individual in this life, but nothing can prevent its
fulfillment in all the saints in the Divinely appointed time and manner.
[17] This is indicated by the use of the article with pantes,
"all"; as we might say, "the whole of us" (cp., e.g., I Cor. 10:17, there
especially of each local community).
CONFORMITY TO CHRIST
Again, the word rendered "attain," in its
grammatical form in the original, signifies the point of time at which the end
determined is to be realized, indicating the culminating event. The faith and
the knowledge of the Son of God are associated as a unity. They will together
reach their climax in the day to come. Faith is the outcome of, and is
inseparable from, "the faith." The doctrines of Scripture, spoken of as "the
faith," so called because they consist of what is to be believed, are not given
merely as a revelation of Divine truth, less still as a mere subject for
theological contemplation, but with a view to bring to us an increasing
knowledge of the Son of God; an all this is a matter of faith on the part of
believers. Here the word for "knowledge" is, more literally, "full knowledge,"
as in 1:17.
But this, again, is not a matter simply of personal
acquaintance with Christ. It is rather that of conformity to His character, of
the manifestation of Christ Himself in His saints. This is what is suggested by
the phrase "a full-grown man." This, too, is what is borne out by the context,
both immediately and what follows in the subsequent verses. The complete
development is defined as "the measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ," for it is Christ as the Head of His Body who fills every part,
ministering His grace and power by the Holy Spirit through His spiritual gifts
in the Church. The fulness is that which is His in His own Person as the Head
and by means of which the Body is filled, now as the members are united to Him
and hereafter in eternal completeness. The present process of conformity to His
character is brought out in the exhortations which follow. "That ye be no
longer children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of
doctrine, by the sleight of men, in craftiness, after the wiles of error; but
speaking truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him, which is the Head,
even Christ from whom all the body fitly framed and knit together through that
which every joint supplieth, according to the working in due measure of each
several part, maketh the increase of the body unto the building up of itself in
love" (verses 14, 15, 16, R.V.).
I THE WILES
OF ERROR
The first exhortations have to do with that which
hinders the development of spiritual growth. We are not to remain as infants,
spiritually immature in the knowledge and likeness of Christ. Our spiritual foe
exerts himself in unremitting antagonism against all that makes for the glory
of Christ. While, therefore, Christ provides those in the Church to minister
the doctrines of the faith and build up the saints, the adversary endeavours to
thwart this work by false teachings. These are spoken of metaphorically in two
ways. They are winds of doctrine and wiles [18] of error (R.V.). Winds are
variable and irregular, wiles are ingenious and subtle. Those who are subject
to such errors are like a rudderless vessel, tossed about on a stormy ocean. On
the other hand, they unconsciously yield themselves to the craftiness of the
Devil.
[18] The word methodeia is rightly rendered "wiles" in
the R.V. in this verse. The Apostle uses it again in 6:11, "the wiles of the
Devil," and it is found in these two places only in the New Testament. In 4:14,
it is in the singular number; in 6:11, it is in the plural.
To give
way to error, then, is to come under a power which prevents that spiritual
growth into conformity to Christ which it is the gracious work of the Spirit of
God to develop. In contrast to such hindrances, that which makes for spiritual
progress is "speaking truth in love" (margin "dealing truly"). This is not a
matter merely of the maintenance of moral virtue, it is a case of that conduct
towards one another which is essentially the outcome of adherence to the truth
of Holy Scripture and manifesting it in all our ways in the exercise of the
love of Christ. "No lie is of the truth" (1 John 2:21). If I deal falsely I not
only act contrary to the truth but stifle its power to work in me. I am robbing
myself as well as injuring my brother, and above all I am grieving the Holy
Spirit. The truth, the revealer of which is the Holy Spirit, binds together in
love those who know it. Possession of the truth leads to walking in the truth,
for the truth produces truthfulness (see 2 John I and 3 John 3, 4). The
exercise of godly sincerity, of love that goes hand in hand with the truth,
enables us with our fellow believers to grow up in all things into Christ. For
such conduct is the effect of His own work as the Head, making increase of the
Body unto the building up of itself in love.
TRUTH AND LOVE
It is needful to give heed to the exhortation
that, "putting away falsehood," we should "speak truth each one with his
neighbour," remembering that "we are members one of another" (Eph. 4:25). Love
and truth are never to be separated; they are intimately associated. Love that
is pursued at the expense of truth is mere sentiment. While it may captivate
the natural mind, it is not of God. It plays no part in the building up of the
Body of Christ. Truth that is maintained at the expense of love is frigid
theory. It lives in the element of legalism. Its effect may be the very
opposite to that which it seeks to maintain. Faith, which links us to Christ,
works by love and maintains truth, of both of which He is the source and which
therefore in the life of the believer are expressions of His character. When
Christ fills the heart there is no room for selfishness. False teaching and
deceit have selfishness as their motive. They belong to the old nature and are
expelled by the love of Christ. They are superseded by that self-forgetfulness
which seeks the interest of Christ and His people. Truth and love belong to the
new man, "which after God hath been created in righteousness and holiness of
truth." It is only the power of the Holy Spirit which enables us to grow up
"into all things in Him."
CHAPTER EIGHT: THE
CHURCH THE OBJECT OF CHRIST'S LOVE
In the passage which follows the
command, "be filled with the Spirit," Eph. 5:18 (a passage which, we may note,
in passing, is explanatory of what being filled with the Spirit involves in
human relationships, as of husbands and wives, parents and children, masters
and servants), the subject of the relationship of husband to wife is taken as
an illustration of the relationship between Christ and the Church. It should be
observed that what is here set forth is used simply as an illustration. That is
to say, the passage does not state that the Church is actually the Bride of
Christ. Whatever may be gathered from the other parts of Scripture, we need to
keep clearly before us the difference between what is definitely set forth in
the passage and what are merely deductions from it. The illustration, with its
spiritual application, is beautiful and full of teaching, but any direct
statement that the Church is the Bride is absent from this chapter.
THE METHOD OF COMPARISON
The
language adopted is that of comparison. The reason why wives are to be in
subjection to their own husbands as unto the Lord, is given as follows "For the
husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the Head of the Church, being
Himself the Saviour of the Body" (verse 23, RV). The phraseology of comparison
is continued in the next verse, where the order of the natural and the
spiritual is reversed. "But as the Church is subject to Christ, so let the
wives also be to their husbands in everything" Again husbands are to love their
wives "even as also Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself up for it" (verse
25). Again and still by way of comparison "No man ever hated his own flesh but
nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the Church" (verse 29).
Finally, when the Apostle speaks about a man's leaving his father and mother
and cleaving to his wife, the twain becoming one flesh, he says, "This mystery
is great: but I speak in regard to Christ and the church."
THE COMBINED FEATURES
While injunctions are
given as to Christian conduct in the matter of this natural relationship, the
subject of the Church which has occupied a prominent place in the earlier part
of the Epistle, is interwoven into them. There are features of the relationship
between Christ and the Church which could not all be included in any of the
figures which have been used in the earlier part of the Epistle, those namely
of the body (1:23), the city, the household (2:19), the temple (2:20, 21), the
family (3:15), and the full-grown man (4:13). While the subject of authority
and subjection are involved, for instance, in the relationship of the head to
the body, yet there are additional features in this respect in the simile of
the relationship between husband and wife. In the illustration of the head and
the body there is union between the one and the other, but, so far as the
physical illustration itself goes, the head does not choose the body; with
husband and wife there is choice as well as union, and love, joy and
companionship.
Again, there are servants in the household, and they are
chosen for their service, but they are not related to the head of the
household; with husband and wife there is relationship as well as choice. There
may be friends in the household, but here, too, there is choice without
relationship. Again, in the family there are love and joy, communion and
relationship, but not choice. Only in the case of husband and wife are an the
conditions fulfilled choice, union, relationship, love, joy, companionship and
communion. All are comprehended in this illustration.
These features
form, in a special way, the subjects of that part of the Lord's discourse in
the upper room recorded in John 15. There He speaks of His choice of them
(verse 16), of their union with Him (there in the figure of the vine and the
branches verses 4, 5 and 16, where the word "appointed," R.V., is literally
"set in"), of His love for them (verse 9), their mutual joy (verse 11), their
companionship with Him (verse 27), His communion with them (verse 15), and
their relationship with Him (verse 5). Thus to those who formed, as it were,
the nucleus of His Church, He unfolded, before His death, those details which
the very illustration of husband and wife in Ephesians 5 provides.
UNITY AND UNION
The metaphor
of the head and the body suggests unity; the illustration of husband and wife
suggests union. The former has to do with constituent parts of a whole, the
latter with the oneness of two persons. The body conveys the thought of that
which is the instrument of the Lord's will; the simile of the wife conveys the
thought of that which is the counterpart of Himself and the object of His love.
The similitude of the marriage state is the most lovely of all the figures by
means of which the mystery relating to Christ and His Church is set forth. It
is at the same time the most practical in its teaching for it sets forth, to
begin with, the headship and authority of Christ over the members of the Church
and their delighted subjection to Him in the fulfillment of His will, the great
principle that moulds their character and guides their conduct; for Christ
Himself becomes the ideal and standard of their manner of life. Further still,
the illustration conveys the truth of that holy and gracious intimacy by which
the Lord unlocks the secrets of His heart, making known His mind, His counsels
and His love; while on the other hand it suggests that living response which
those who enter into the joy of this communion make to Him.
THE PRACTICAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT
It was the delight
of Christ ever to abide in the Father's love and so to fulfil His will. This is
the very fount of His love to us and His desires toward us, as is expressed in
His words of grace "Even as the Father hath loved Me I also have loved you:
abide ye in My love. If ye keep My commandments, ye shall abide in My love;
even as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love" (John 15,
9, 10). Let us, then, abide in His love, as a faithful spouse does in her
husband's love. The practical acknowledgment of this relationship is intimated
in what is said of Sarah, who "obeyed Abraham, calling him Lord" (I Peter 3:6).
Not by mere exclamations of faithfulness and loyalty, or loud protestations of
adherence to the truth, is He to be acknowledged as Lord, but by manifestation
of that character which is conformed to His own, which indeed involves the
maintenance of Divine truth, but therein displays His virtues and excellences.
Christian conduct consists in truth expressed in love, love which is a
Spirit-kindled response to His. "We love because He first loved us" (I John
4:19, R.V.).
THE CLEANSING AND
PRESENTATION
"Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for
it." Displayed in all its fulness at the Cross, His love is undiminished now
that He is in glory. The love which led Him to the Cross had this as its
object, that, having cleansed the Church by the washing of water with the Word,
"He might sanctify it," and might "present it to Himself." Christ did not
sanctify the Church in order that it might be His possession, He made it His
possession in order that He might sanctify it. It belongs to Him inasmuch as He
gave Himself for it, and it is destined to be just what He designed that it
should be, the great expression of His character as well as the object of His
care. It is in its heavenly sphere and destination that He will present it to
Himself and it will then be entirely suited to His own glory. Since there are
things which are contrary to His character in the life of believers here below,
His present work is to cleanse them by the laver of the Word of God. This is
the Divine purpose for all who as true believers constitute the Church. How
readily, therefore, should we respond to this His gracious operation, realizing
what He has done in giving Himself up for us, what His will is for us now, and
the destiny to which He is bringing us! How ardently we should desire just
those things that He desires, and do only that which pleases Him, that our life
may be entirely lived for Him!
THE
NOURISHING
Let us ever remember that we are the objects of that
tender care and love which are expressed in the words "nourisheth and
cherisheth." "Even so ought husbands to love their own wives as their own
bodies." To love one's wife is to love oneself. "For no man ever hated his own
flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the Church" (verse
29, R.V.). What is said about Christ's love for the Church is given as the
pattern of the husband's love for his wife, but what constant and loving care
on the part of Christ, what provision for all our needs, are herein set forth!
As one ministers nourishment to his body so that it may be healthy and strong,
and affords it protection and everything else designed to make it free from
that which would be detrimental to it, so is the gracious and unremitting
ministry of Christ for those who are members of His Body, the Church. All this
is designed for our comfort. May we live in such close communion with our Lord
that we may enjoy the realization of His love, and respond by our love to the
impulse of His. Let us remove from us all that would hinder this holy
communion, and, entering into His desires towards us, find accordingly our
delight in Him.
PART II
THE
CHURCHES
CHAPTER NINE: LOCAL
CHURCHES
The word ekklesia is never used in the New
Testament in the singular number to embrace all the believers in a country, or
district, or the churches in any locality. Such companies of believers are
spoken of in Scripture as "churches of God," as in I Cor. 11:16; 1 Thess. 2:14;
2 Thess. 1:4. The phrase in the singular, "the church of God," is
correspondingly used to designate a company of believers acting together in
local capacity and responsibility. Thus Paul addresses his first Epistle to the
Corinthians to "the church of God which is at Corinth" (1:2. See also 10:32,
and 11:22). He uses the same phrase with reference to the church at Jerusalem,
which he had persecuted (I Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:13). So with regard to the church
at Ephesus in Acts 20:28. Obviously the phrase is used of the local church
there, for the Apostle, in addressing the elders of the church whom he had
called to him at Miletus, exhorts them to take heed to themselves and "to all
the flock, in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops, to feed the
church of God which He purchased with His own blood" (R.V.). That the church in
which they were to exercise their responsibility is spoken of as a flock, and
the whole character of the injunctions given to them, indicate that the phrase
is used there simply of the local company.
THINGS THAT DIFFER
Similarly in his instructions given to
Timothy as to the character and qualifications of a bishop, he says, "If a man
knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of
God?" (I Tim. 3:5). Again, the Epistle is written that he may "know how men
ought to behave themselves (lit., 'how it is necessary to behave,' i.e., for
all in the assembly) in the house of God, which is the church of the living
God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (verse 15). The description of the
kind of person referred to is general, but the application is to any given
local assembly, as is clear from the facts that Timothy, who had been at
Ephesus, was exhorted in the same Epistle to stay there for a time, and that
the Apostle was hoping to come shortly to him there (3:14). If we speak of the
whole Church, the Body of Christ, as "the Church of God," we confuse things
which Scripture differentiates, and we miss the import and teaching conveyed by
the term, which has to do with local responsibility and testimony. The plural,
"churches," is used in other descriptions of such companies, besides that
already referred to. They are spoken of as "churches of Christ" (Rom. 16:16),
"churches of the saints" (I Cor. 14:33), or, topographically, as churches of a
particular country (I Cor. 16:1; 16:19; 2 Cor. 8:1; Gal. 1:22), or,
ethnographically, as "the churches of the Gentiles" (Rom. 16:4). None of the
phrases containing the word "churches" is used with reference to the entire
Church, the Body of Christ, and this for the obvious reason that the Church
which is His Body is one and indivisible and to it the plural would be
inapplicable.
SCRIPTURAL
TERMINOLOGY
The importance of having regard to the Scriptural
use of these terms lies especially in this, that deviations therefrom support
unscriptural organizations, sectarian views, racial antipathies, and merely
human traditions concerning the true Church. The application of the word
"church" to the Christians or to the churches in a whole country, as, e.g.,
"the Church of England," "the Indian Church," or "the Church in China," or
again, to any section or branch of professing Christians, is unwarranted by the
Scriptures. Hence the importance even of guarding against the term "Indigenous
Church." The expression is subversive of the maintenance of that true and
spiritual position and relationship the realization of which is necessary for
our fulfillment of the will of God. A believer of Chinese nationality is as
much a foreigner spiritually as the missionary from Europe or elsewhere who
brought him the gospel. Plants of the Heavenly Father's planting are not
"indigenous" in the spiritual realm; they have been transplanted by the Holy
Spirit (cp. Col. 1:13). Churches of God as such should know no racial
distinctions.
We have already pointed out that it is contrary to the
teaching of Scripture to use the word to designate all believers now living in
the world, or for any religious system to apply the term to all its adherents
in the world. The phrase "the Church on earth" finds no support in the
Scriptures. The Church is heavenly in its constitution and organization; its
seat and centre are in Heaven, where its one and only Head is. The Word of God
does not countenance any organization or amalgamation of churches, whether in a
locality or in the world at large.
A
SANCTUARY
The terms "churches of God" and "churches of Christ"
indicate that they are each His possession, a possession purchased by His
blood. As "churches of the saints" they consist of those who, by the operation
of the Spirit of God, have been set apart to Him for His glory. Not only so,
they are in each case indwelt as churches by the Holy Spirit, and hence are
each one a temple of God. To the church in Corinth the Apostle writes, "Know ye
not that ye are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If
any man, destoyeth the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of
God is holy, which temple ye are" (I Cor. 3:16, 17, R.V.). The word used for
"temple" here (as also in 6:19, and again in 2 Cor. 6:16, of the body of the
believer and of the whole Church in Eph. 2:21) is naos, which is derived
from a word meaning "to dwell." The earthly temple in Jerusalem was most
frequently called hieron ("the divine or dedicated place"). That term
was applied to the whole building, and is never used in the New Testament in
the figurative sense, as in the passages in the Epistles just referred to.
Naos, while occasionally used of the whole earthly temple, more frequently
signified the inner sanctuary, the holy of holies." [20]
[20] It was
the naos into which Zacharias entered (Luke 1:9, 10), while the people
were without in the hieron. Into the naos the Lord did not enter
during His ministry on earth. He drove out the money changers from the
hieron, not from the naos. Zacharias was slain between the
temple, naos, and the brazen altar, which was outside. The priests alone
went into the naos, and there Judas in his despair entered and cast down
the money before them.
Many circumstances in connection with the
Temple, as with the Tabernacle, find their spiritual counterpart in a local
church. Of this we speak fully later. How solemn and yet what a high and holy
privilege it is to be a naos, a sanctuary, a dwelling place for God, a
house of God (oikos from oikeo "to dwell") as the local church is
called in I Tim. 3:15 "Holiness becometh Thine House, 0 Lord, for evermore."
Evil doctrine, evil association and evil practice are to have no place there.
Where such exists it is to be judged and put away. It is a place where God's
honour dwells (Ps. 26:8, lit., "the place of the tabernacle of Thy glory").
There the honour of the Name of Christ is to be maintained and those who name
His Name are "to depart from iniquity." It is a place of worship, and worship
can only rightly be offered in "the beauty of holiness." It is a place of
witness for God, where the testimony to His attributes, His character and His
Word are to be maintained; for the house of God, the church of the living God,
is "the pillar and ground (or stay) of the truth," and the witness is to be
that not only of oral testimony but of Christian character and conduct. Those
who belong to it are to live "in righteousness and holiness of truth."
CONSISTENT CONDUCT
It is with
that in view that the Apostle, in the passage just referred to, says that the
object of his Epistle is that Timothy may know "how men ought to behave
themselves in the house of God" (R.V.). That is to say, instruction is given
concerning the believers who form a local church, in regard to their general
life, conduct and service, so that the assembly itself may be a living
testimony for God. Both in doctrine and practice, our spiritual foes are
constantly and assiduously set against such a testimony. Collectively as well
as individually, we need to be much in prayer and intercession and ever on the
watch, lest the Lord's Name should be brought into dishonour, and the witness
He designs be marred by our inconsistencies.
CHAPTER TEN: "JESUS IS LORD"
That part of the first Epistle to the
Corinthians which treats specially of the distribution and exercise of
spiritual gifts in a local church, is introduced by a declaration concerning
Christ Jesus as Lord: "No man speaking by the Spirit of God saith, [21] Jesus
is anathema; and no man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit" (I Cor.
12:3, R.V.). The test of the witness is the due acknowledgment of Christ. The
two utterances, "Jesus is anathema" and "Jesus is Lord," were the battle cries
of opposing spiritual forces. Readily would the words of execration spring to
the lips of hostile Jews. "Anathema" designated that which was devoted to God
for destruction under His curse. That was how the rulers of the Jews, and the
people after them, regarded and treated Jesus of Nazareth. That was how they
instigated Gentiles to do the same, and the utterances became the glib
expression of Satanically-inspired antagonism, whether on the part of Jew or
Gentile, to the gospel and the Person whom it proclaimed. Doubtless, upon
occasion, when testimony was being given by the preachers of the gospel, or in
the midst of an assembled church, the witness would suddenly be interrupted by
the blasphemous cry "Jesus is anathema," uttered by opponents of the truth.
[21] The words "speaking" and "saith" stand for two different words in
the original, laleo and lego. Laleo signifies an utterance
of human language in contrast with silence; it stresses the fact that speech is
being uttered. Lego represents a statement or discourse in its orderly
reasoning; it stresses the meaning and substance of what is spoken.
THE GREAT ESSENTIAL
"Jesus is
Lord;" that was the witness of the faithful. It sums up the doctrines of the
gospel. It was the great central truth. It formed, therefore, an essential part
in the ministry, 'not only of gospel testimony itself, but of the foundation
thereby laid in the formation of local churches. The acknowledgment of Jesus as
Lord marks the beginning of the life of a believer. It is an element of that
faith by which he is saved and becomes a child of God: "If thou shalt confess
with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thine heart that God raised
Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved" (Rom. 10:9). [22] That is, "the word of
faith" which is preached (verse 8).
[22] The confession of Christ as
Lord is put first, presumably, for the following reasons:
1. It is
appropriate to the order, mouth and heart, verse 8.
2. The order is in
agreement with the order in verses 6 and 7, verse 6 speaking of Christ's
present position in Heaven, verse 7 of His resurrection.
3. The confession
of Jesus as Lord provides a distinctive and evident difference between those
who have been justified by faith and those who are seeking righteousness by
their own works.
With a special significance this passage in Rom. 10, which
deals with the basic ministry of the preaching of the gospel, stresses His
title "Lord." "The same Lord is Lord of all" (verse 12, R.V.), that is to say,
of Jew and Gentile alike, "and is rich unto all that call upon Him; for
whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." The acceptance,
then, of Christ as Lord as well as Saviour is essential for faith, and the
proclamation of Christ in both respects is the responsibility of the
evangelist.
THE FULL COMMISSION
That the work of the preachers of the gospel was not simply
that of evangelization, is clear from the narrative of the Acts and from the
Epistles. The service in which they were engaged had wider responsibilities.
Gospel ministry was designed to issue in a corporate testimony. Hence, by means
of the gospel they preached, evangelists are spoken of as laying the foundation
of churches (I Cor. 3:10). The commission given by the Lord Himself intimates
this wider scope. "Go ye and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them into
the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to
observe all things whatsoever I commanded you" (Matt. 28:19). The incorporation
of believers into local companies had been definitely inculcated by Him.
Besides His intimation concerning His formation of His entire Church (16:18),
He gave unequivocal instructions as to His design for the existence of
communities, gathered in His Name, conditioned by local circumstances, and
enjoying His spiritual and continued presence (18:17-20). These were not
already existent Jewish companies, as has been supposed. The teaching given by
the Lord as recorded in the context makes clear that He had in view not only
His disciples but those who would become so by their instrumentality.
APOSTOLIC METHODS
The record
in the Acts of the Apostles relating to the founding and formation of local
churches is significantly in keeping with the Lord's instructions in His
commission regarding making disciples and teaching them to observe all that He
commanded. No sooner do we read of the effects of the gospel in Antioch in
Syria on the part of the scattered members of the church at Jerusalem, than we
learn that a church has been formed in the northern city; so that those who go
there as servants of God are able to gather together "with the church" (11:26),
and the believers so gathered are spoken of as "disciples." So again, as the
gospel spreads, not only are churches formed in every place, but the saints are
described as "disciples." They were "disciples" who stood around Paul after his
stoning at Lystra (14:20). At Derbe he and Barnabas preached the gospel and
"made many disciples" (verse 20, R.Y.). From thence they returned to Lystra,
Iconium and Antioch "confirming the souls of the disciples" (verses 21, 22),
and after arriving back at Antioch in Syria they are said to have tarried there
with the disciples. "Go ye make disciples," said the Lord.
Now while
believers are spoken of as "brethren" in relation to one another, they are
designated as "disciples" in relation to Christ as their Master and Lord.
Disciples are those who have learned His Will and seek to carry it out in that
relationship. "Ye call Me Master, and Lord; and ye say well; for so I am. If I
then, the Lord and Master, have ... ye ought also to.. ." (John 13:14). In Acts
9:1 believers (not simply the Apostles) are distinctly called "the disciples of
the Lord."
COLLECTIVE
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Since, then, confession of Christ Jesus as Lord
marks believers from the time of their conversion, and their life as His
disciples gives proof of their recognition of their relationship to Him in this
respect, so in their collective capacity, as constituting churches, it is their
high privilege and responsibility to acknowledge Him as Lord by the fulfillment
unitedly of all that He has commanded. Only as an assembly owns Christ as Lord,
can it be built up and ordered according to the Divine will. Only when Christ
has His rightful place in a local church can it be constituted according to
God's design. Only adherence to what is taught in the Word of God will meet
with His approval. That Jesus Christ is Lord betokens the authority committed
to Him by the Father, who has made Him "both Lord and Christ." The measure in
which His authority over a local church is recognized by it is the measure of
its spiritual vitality and power. In virtue of His authority He has Himself
appointed the ordinances and exercises His prerogative in the provision of
spiritual gifts in each assembly and in the functioning of each member in the
power and operation of the Spirit of God.
THE
EFFECT OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The genuine acknowledgment of
Christ as Lord will keep the saints faithful in their adherence to the
Scriptures in these matters, and in the recognition of the presence and work of
the Holy Spirit in matters of worship and service. They will be likewise kept
separate from the world's religions as well as its principles and ways, its
ambitions and follies. The fulfillment of the will of their Lord will be their
consuming ambition, if they are indeed true to Him, and this will involve their
repudiation of the traditions of men, of human accretions to the faith "once
for all delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3), and of all that undermines its
doctrines as they are set forth in the Scriptures of truth.
The craft of
Satan is ever at work to beguile us from allegiance to our Lord. We need, then,
to receive the exhortation He gave to His disciples in this matter, when He
warned them against lip confession, against mere profession of faith, and the
imagination that service is being rendered to Him while all the time His
revealed will is being ignored. His words demand our careful attention. "Not
every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of
Heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in heaven" (Matt.
7:21). His will is not far to seek. It is set forth with such clearness in the
Holy Scriptures that none who genuinely seek to know His mind need err therein.
Let us beware of substituting our own predilections, or the traditions of men,
or matters of our own convenience, or even the bonds of human associations, for
what He has enjoined upon us, lest, in setting aside or ignoring His authority
over us, both in our private life and in our church capacity, we are after all
found wanting.
CHAPTER ELEVEN: SPIRITUAL
GIFTS
In the twelfth chapter of I Corinthians, after the
introductory statement that the acknowledgment that "Jesus is Lord" is due to
the operation of the Holy Spirit, the Apostle takes up the subject of the
provision of spiritual gifts and their exercise, with special reference to the
local church. The uniform confession of Christ as Lord produces multiform
effects. The source, the distribution and the operating power are Divine, not
human: "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are
diversities of ministrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of
workings, but the same God, who worketh all things in all" (verses 4-6). The
essential element of harmony and unity is pointedly stressed by a sevenfold
mention of "the same," first as to the Triunity of the Godhead, "the same
Spiritthe same Lord ... the same God," and then a fourfold repetition of "the
same Spirit," in verses 8- 11. So in Ephesians 4, with reference to the whole
Church, the Body of Christ, stress is laid upon the essential unity--a
sevenfold oneness; there not only of the Trinity, but of details of a basic
character relating to the church.
There is a threefold diversity, first as
to possession of the gifts, then as to forms of service, and then as to their
exercise: diversity of "gifts," of "ministrations," of "workings." Firstly, the
differing gifts are distributed to be possessed according to the individual
capacity as Divinely prepared. Secondly, there are the varying kinds of
ministration of service. [23]
[23] Not "administrations," as in the
AV. The exercise of rule is not in view here. The word is diakoniai,
"ministrations," i.e., forms of service. The gifts are charismata, gifts of
grace (expressive of their utility); they are energemata, "workings"
(expressive of their activity).
Two enumerations of gifts follow, one
immediately, in verses 8-10, the other in verse 28. The former has to do with
the functions discharged, the latter more particularly with the persons who
exercise them. The lists are not formal and exhaustive. The order sets forth,
to some extent, their comparative importance, but the great object for which
they are mentioned is to keep before us their Divine origin, and the purpose
for which they are bestowed. "To each one is given the manifestation of the
Spirit withal" (verse 7). Their rightful exercise gives evidence of the power
of the Spirit of God acting through the human channel. This again, in each
case, is for the profit both of the one who possesses the gift and of the other
members of the church. They are given not for the display of human abilities
but for the glory of God in the edification of the saints. They are given not
to be characterized by an atmosphere of mystery, but that the Spirit's power
may be manifest.
THE TEMPORARY AND THE
PERMANENT
They are mentioned just as they were in operation in
the churches in apostolic times. Some were designed for the temporary and
special purposes of that period, others were for permanent functioning. This is
made clear in the next chapter. The personal gifts of apostles and prophets,
for instance, were bestowed for the immediate purposes of the time. They laid
the foundation of the truths of the faith by the revelations Divinely imparted
to them, and laid it completely. No foundation doctrine remained to be added.
The special work of apostles and prophets ceased with the completion of the
inspired Scriptures. All that was communicated to them by direct revelation,
and through them by oral testimony in the churches, was, during their lifetime,
imparted "in the written Word of God."
TONGUES AND PROPHESYINGS
As with the temporary character of the
ministry just mentioned, so with other gifts imparted for the particular
purposes of the apostolic period. "Tongues" were "for a sign" and especially to
unbelieving Jews (I Cor. 14:21, 22):the Apostle makes this clear by basing the
fact that they were for a sign upon the quotation from Isaiah 28:11, 12,
wherein God declared that "by men of strange tongues" He would speak "unto this
people," that is to say, to Israel. This testimony, the rejection of which was
likewise foretold, continued while God maintained relations with His earthly
people, and ceased with the termination of those relations." [24]
[24]
As to the gift of tongues, this was not be exercised without being interpreted
(verse 28). There was a special gift of interpretation (12:10). Each of these
was an inferior gift (verse 31; 14:1, 2, 12, etc.).
So, again, with
the miraculous manifestation of the power of the Spirit of God. In every
instance recorded in the Acts, the testimony and its appeal were especially to
Jews, as vindicatory signs of what God had done and was doing through Christ
Jesus in His death, resurrection and session at His right hand. Firstly, there
was the testimony at Jerusalem at Pentecost (2:22- 36); secondly, in Samaria
(8:14-17); thirdly, at Caesarea, in the house of Cornelius ("they of the
circumcision were ... amazed," 10:45); fourthly and lastly, at Ephesus, where
the "certain disciples" were clearly Jews who had been baptized with John's
baptism, and had not heard "whether the Holy Ghost was given" (19:2, R.V.). The
sign was accompanied by the exercise of the gifts, tongues and prophesying
(verse 6). There is no further mention of this kind of demonstration either in
the Acts or anywhere in the Epistles. All took place within twelve years after
Pentecost, in the period of transition characterized by God's special dealings
with the Jews.
HEALINGS
So,
again, with the miraculous "gifts of healings," these were designed for the
same period of apostolic testimony, whereas those gifts, the purpose of which
was the ministry and unfolding of the Scriptures, were of a permanent
character. The limitations of the gifts of healings as sign gifts are shown by
the fact that Timothy, Trophimus, Gaius, and others were not healed of their
physical infirmities. Yet these were certainly Spirit-filled men. Moreover, in
the same period the supernatural power was imparted of raising the dead (Acts
9:40; 20:9, 10), all attempts at which since have been unsuccessful. Undeniably
God does heal the sick in answer to prayer and such ministry as is enjoined in
James 5:14, 15, but the distinction between that and the supernatural gifts
temporarily bestowed in the churches in the times of the Apostles, is clear
from the Scriptures themselves. The Apostle lays it down as a general principle
that "when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done
away" (I Cor. 13:10). Wherever the principle holds good it is applicable. It
will be applicable at the coming of the Lord, after the completion of the
Church. It was primarily applicable when the sacred Volume consisting of the
Scriptures of truth, the written Word of God, was complete. As the Word of God
it stands perfect. With this communication of the full cycle of Divine truth,
the temporary gifts, imparted as supernatural sips, were done away.
The
professed possession of supernatural power is always attractive to the mind of
man, and imparts a glamour to any so-called "Movement" which claims to use such
powers and even performs supernatural deeds. Those, however, who are living in
the light of God's Word, and know the fellowship with Him which the indwelling
Spirit of God imparts through its pages, will ever test all things by its
teachings, and will "prove the spirits, whether they are of God: because many
false prophets are gone out into the world," and even Satan "fashioneth himself
into an angel of light."
THE CARE OF THE
CHURCHES
The New Testament gives a constant and uniform
testimony of the mind of God concerning the provision and work of those to whom
is committed the care of local churches. The various passages relating to this
subject are not merely the records of facts; what is written is the Divine will
for all churches, not only in apostolic times but throughout the present era.
As in other matters, the Word of God not only is sufficient for all, it is
binding upon all, and those who desire to be conformed to His will and to act
in loyalty to Christ, will adhere to the teaching in subjection to Him. The
instruction given does not admit of human accretions. The devices of men,
however specious and plausible, fail to accomplish the designs of the Lord, as
revealed in the Holy Scriptures. The teaching, unvarying as it is throughout
the canon of the New Testament and the apostolic ministry which it records,
should have been heeded and followed throughout subsequent centuries, instead
of being modified or adapted to suit human opinions and convenience. If we hope
to receive the approval of the Head of the Church hereafter, let us submit to
the claims of the Word of God, and follow it at all costs, in devotedness to
Him whom we recognize and own as Lord.
BISHOPS IN EVERY CHURCH
We turn, then, to what
is set forth in the Word of Truth. It requires no laborious scrutiny to observe
from Acts 20, that elders are bishops (or overseers), that there are more than
one exercising the care of a single church, and that they receive their
function from the Holy Spirit. From Miletus the Apostle sent to Ephesus, and
called to him the "elders of the church" (verse 17) obviously the elders of the
church in that city (cp. Rev. 2:1). In his address he says, "Take heed unto
yourselves and to all the flock in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you
bishops" [25] (verse 28, R.V.). Not only, then, are the elders bishops, but
they are figuratively regarded as shepherds, for the local church is spoken of
as a flock, and their duty is to "tend it." The word in the original denotes
not simply "to feed," but to do all that devolves upon a shepherd. They are
therefore to exercise pastoral care, acting together as pastors over the local
company.
[25] AV "overseers" The word "overseer" is a literal
translation of episkopos from which also the word "bishop" is derived.
The case of the church at Ephesus is illustrative and not exceptional. In the
churches previously formed in Lycaonia "elders in every church" had been
"appointed"' [26] (14:23, R.V.). Again, the Epistle to the Philippians is
addressed to the saints there "with the bishops and deacons"--bishops acting in
one church. Later, in the island of Crete, Titus is enjoined to "set in order
things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city" (Tit. 1:5) never a
single elder or bishop over one church, much less over a number.
[26]
The word cheirotoneo, rendered "appointed" (A.V. "ordained"), is the
same as that in 2 Cor. 8:19 (the only other place where it is found in the New
Testament); at Corinth men were to be "chosen" to take a monetary gift to
Judea. Here in Acts 14:23 a formal ecclesiastical ordination is not in view.
The apostles chose men who were already evidently fitted for the work. The
churches did not choose their leaders. The context makes that clear. Sheep do
not choose their shepherds. This passage, again, shows that an elder is a
bishop; for, in describing the character requisite for an elder, the Apostle
immediately says, "for the bishop must be blameless" (verse 7). [27] The
postscript printed in the Authorized Version at the end of the Epistle, to the
effect that it was "written to Titus, ordained the first bishop of the church
of the Cretans," is false in two respects, to say nothing of the wrong
implication that he was to be resident there. For, firstly, Titus was not a
bishop, and, secondly, there was not "a church of the Cretans"; there were
churches in Crete.
[27] "The definite article here obviously does not
point to a particular individual, but represents a type (cp. 1 Cor. 12:12). The
passage clearly provides no ground for the functioning of a single bishop.
That a number of elders were exercising pastoral care of the church at
Thessalonica, is clear from the exhortation to that church, "But we beseech
you, brethren, to know them that labour among you, and are over you in the
Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for their
work's sake" (I Thess. 5:12, 13). This passage is very instructive. That the
recognition of the elders is urged shows that the well-being of the church
could not be maintained without them. On the other hand, it is clear that their
authority was based, not on human appointment, whether of an individual or by
the election of the church, but upon the relation of all to the Lord. When the
qualifications of overseers had been put on record, to guide the saints in the
recognition of those who had been put over them in the Lord, apostolic
appointment became unnecessary. That the elders "are over" them (lit. "stand
before," and so lead and care for "in the Lord') limits the scope of their
authority to matters spiritual. See also Heb. 13:7, 17.
TENDING THE KLEROS
Elders are to "tend the
flock of God, exercising the oversight, not of constraint, but willingly,
according unto God, nor yet for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as
lording it over the charge allotted to you, but making yourselves examples to
the flock" (I Pet. 5:2, 3). The three characteristics of church leaders are
again intimated here, namely, that the same persons are elders (men of
experience), bishops (exercising the oversight), and shepherds (exercising a
pastoral care of the flock). It is highly significant, too, that the word
kleros, from whence the word "clergy" is chiefly derived, and which is
here rendered "charge allotted," stands not for the church leaders but for
members who are cared for by them! How glaringly Christendom, owing to the
force of unscriptural influences and the bias of human opinion and tradition,
has reversed the situation! The medieval and modem ecclesiastical systems of
clerisy in its various forms, so far from being founded upon the Word of God,
are contraventions thereof.
THE RISE OF
CLERISY
The course of departure from apostolic teaching and
precept is easily traceable. Human pride and rivalry, a struggle for ascendancy
and power, early produced a class of ecclesiastical officials, who obtained
their position in a manner very different from what is set forth in Scripture.
The case of Diotrephes (3 John 9) provides an illustration. The method was
adopted, too, of electing church officials by vote. Hence the popular or the
strong man obtained the coveted position. Dependence on the Spirit of God and
the recognition of the evidences of His operation gave place to officialism and
formality. The evil spread gradually but surely, and eventually became general.
False teachers represented that the Christian faith was simply a development of
Judaism. Hence church leaders came to be regarded as priests in
contradistinction to the laity, a flagrant contradiction of apostolic doctrine,
which declares that all believers are priests; they are "a holy priesthood" (I
Pet. 2:5) 66a royal priesthood" (verse 9); Christ has made us "priests unto His
God and Father" (Rev. 1:6).
We can hardly be surprised that church
ecclesiastics were to the fore in furthering carnal ambition and in supporting
and promulgating clericalism. Writing to the church at Ephesus in 109 A.D.,
Ignatius says, "We ought to look upon the bishop even as we do upon the Lord
Himself." In his epistle to the church at Tralles (also in Asia), he says, "ye
are subject to your bishop as to Jesus Christ." In his epistle to the
Magnesians, he says, "I exhort you that ye study to do all things in a Divine
concord; your bishops presiding in the place of God; your presbyters in the
place of the council of the apostles." Again, to the church in Philadelphia,
"Give diligence to be established in the doctrine of our Lord and the apostles,
together with your most worthy bishop, and the well woven spiritual crown of
your presbytery."
The marked departure from the principles of the New
Testament and apostolic precept and practice has received candid admission by
many. Dean Alford's comment on the perversion of Acts 20:17, 28 by Irenaius
(who states that Paul called together the "bishops and elders (!), who were
from Ephesus and from the rest of the adjoining states (!)") is as follows: "So
early did interested and disingenuous interpretation begin to cloud the light
which Scripture might have thrown on ecclesiastical questions." He points out,
too, that verse 28 shows that elders and bishops were apostolically synonymous,
and remarks that the A.V. "overseers" instead of "bishops" conceals the
identification. Again, on Phil. 1:1, he says, "The simple juxtaposition of the
officers with the members of the church, and their being placed after those
members, shows the absence of hierarchical views such as those in the epistles
of the apostolic Fathers." Jerome, who died in A.D. 420, commenting on the
Epistle to Titus, and with reference to the times of the Apostles, says,
"elders were the same as bishops, but by degrees, that the plants of dissension
might be rooted up, all responsibility was transferred to one person."
THE CORRECTIVE POWER
The
remedy for evils is not to be found in human devices. To substitute clericalism
for the principles and instruction of the Word of God was a gross departure
from the faith. Nor did the humanly devised system remove the evil of
dissension. It existed, and still exists, even in the greatest religious
systems, notwithstanding an outward semblance of unification. The various
religious systems of Christendom are fast hastening to their appointed
destruction. The anticlerical forces are already fulfilling Scripture. If we
believe that the Bible is the Word of God, let us follow its teachings. Let us
beware of professing one thing and following another. Let us obey God rather
than men. Faithfulness to His truth may mean suffering here, but it means peace
and joy withal, and an eternal reward hereafter. Let us recognize and honour
the prerogatives of the Holy Spirit in the churches, and the principles
inculcated by Him in the Holy Scriptures.
CHAPTER TWELVE: MINISTRY AND DEACONS
We hear much of the need of
revival, and truly the need is great. Real revival can be brought about only by
adherence to the Word of God. There may be an ephemeral emotion, a transient
zeal, an ebullition of religious fervour and sentiment, but what is acceptable
to God, and therefore of real and permanent value, is a return to His will as
revealed in the Scriptures of truth. When the Psalmist prays, "Wilt Thou not
revive (or quicken) us again; that Thy people may rejoice in Thee?" and pleads
for mercy and salvation he goes on to say "I will hear what God the Lord will
speak" There lies the secret of spiritual reviving. The adversaries of God are
ever at work seeking to turn people away from the Scriptures, or to belittle
them, or to becloud their meaning by human traditions. Hence the perversions in
Christendom of what really is a church, as set forth in the New Testament, and
the departure from the revealed will of the Lord regarding the functioning of
church members.
MINISTRATIONS
We have seen the provision made by the Spirit of God in the exercise of His
Divine prerogatives, for the spiritual care of churches by bishops, otherwise
called overseers or elders, each church being provided with a number of such.
These are among "the diversities of gifts" spoken of in I Corinthians 12:4.
They are bestowed in the designs of God's love and grace towards His saints,
for their spiritual welfare, and are for the Holy Spirit's use in the churches.
Next there is mention of "diversities of ministrations" (verse 5, R.V.). The
word diakonia, "ministration, " is used thirty-four times in the New
Testament. It is first found in Luke 10:40, in the Lord's word to Martha as to
her being cumbered (or distracted) about. much "serving." It is said in Hebrews
1:14 of the angels who are sent forth "to do service for the sake of them that
shall inherit salvation." Nowhere in the New Testament is it used in the
ecclesiastical, official sense, with which it has been vested in Christendom,
of "the ministry." Nor again is the corresponding noun diakonos
"servant," "minister," "deacon" (which is employed thirty times in the New
Testament), used in the sense of a clerical functionary known as "the
minister." Just as, in regard to the churches, "ministry" is said of the
actions of believers in their service one to another, so the word rendered
"minister" describes them as servants, whether of God or of Christ, or of one
another.
A COMPREHENSIVE TERM
Thus the Lord says, "Whosoever would become great among you shall be your
minister" (diakonos), Matt. 20:26; again, "If any man would be first, he
shall be last of all and minister (servant) of all" (Mark 9:35); and again,
"Where I am, there shall also My servant be" (John 12:26). Diakonos is
used of the domestic servants at the marriage in Cana of Galilee: "His mother
saith unto the servants, Whatsoever He saith unto you, do it (John 2:5; so
verse 9).
Phoebe, whom Paul commends to the saints at Rome, is
described as a servant, diakonos, of the church at Cenchrea (Rom. 16:1).
Paul describes himself and Apollos as servants, diaknoi, "ministers by
whom ye believed" (I Cor. 3:5) certainly not "ministers" in the clerical sense;
so, too, in speaking of himself and his fellow-workers as "ministers
(diakonoi, servants) of a new covenant" (2 Cor. 3:6). Tychichus, again,
is spoken of as "a faithful minister (servant) in the Lord" (Eph. 6:21); and so
with regard to Timothy (I Thess. 3:2).
That diakonos is a term
used in the New Testament to express service in general is clear from these
instances, and the word might well have been rendered "servant" in all of them,
rather than "servant" in one place and "minister" in another. Even in the two
passages where in the English Versions the word is rendered "deacons" there is
no mention in the original of anything like an office in connection with the
term. In the passage in I Timothy 3, which describes the qualities necessary
for what are termed deacons (the deacons there referred to are those who render
any service of a definite character in connection with a local church),
ecclesiastical bias inserted the term "office" in the Authorized Version, to
suit the clerical traditions of Christendom. Hence the Revisers have rendered
as follows: "And let these also first be proved, then let them serve as
deacons, [28]" if they be blameless" (v. 10). Even the phrase "Let them serve
as deacons" represents one word only in the original, and it would have been
quite sufficient to translate by "let them serve." So again in verse 13,
instead of the preposterous rendering, "They that have used the office of a
deacon well," the RV. puts, "they that have served well as deacons." It would
have been quite sufficient to say, "they that have served well."
[28]
The word is diakoneitosan, which is a form of the verb diakoneo,
to serve, and means "let them serve" in verse 13, the word is
diakonesantes, which simply means "having served."
THE CASE OF TIMOTHY
Only a few verses further
on the Apostle says to Timothy, "If thou put the brethren in mind of these
things, thou shalt be a good minister (deacon) of Jesus Christ." Timothy, then,
himself is spoken of as a servant of Christ. He certainly was not, as the A.V.
note at the end of the 2nd Epistle describes him, "Ordained the first bishop of
the Church of the Ephesians." Nor was he, as has been supposed by certain
advocates of the sacerdotal order, "the Primate of all Asia"! On the contrary,
surely if Timothy himself is spoken of as a servant of Christ Jesus, then those
who, in the passage just before, are spoken of as having served well, were not
functionaries holding an ecclesiastical office. They were rather, as has
already been said, such as rendered service on behalf of the saints in a local
church, and any such service demands that those who render it should be known
to be possessed of the qualities mentioned in verses 8 and 9.
One form of
such service will consist in the handling of the money gifts of a church,
though ministry is by no means confined to this. For instance, in the second
Epistle to the Corinthians the Apostle speaks of the monetary gifts of the
churches in Macedonia for the poor saints in Judea, as "service," or
administration" (diakonia, rendered "ministering" in 8:4 and 9:1, and
"ministration" in 9:12 not "administration," as in the AX.):so again in verse
13, "the proving of you by this ministration." One of the brethren who was
appointed by the churches to convey the gift is described as one "whose praise
in the gospel is spread through all the churches" (8:18). It was a matter of
principle, not only that men of good repute should undertake such business, but
that in regard to money the service should be undertaken at least by two;
"avoiding this," as verse 20 says, "that any man should blame us in the matter
of this bounty which is ministered by us: for we take thought for things
honourable, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of man."
A GUIDING PRINCIPLE
As a
general principle, the prerogative belongs to the giver of a gift of choosing
the channel of its ministration. Thus, in regard to spiritual gifts, such as
elders, pastors, teachers, and evangelists, these are human channels for that
ministry which is provided by the Spirit of God, and it is His prerogative and
not that of man, to choose those who shall act as the servants of God in this
capacity. This again, by the way, rules out ecclesiastical ordination, lay
patronage, or the election of a pastor, according to the traditional methods of
Christendom. So, then, with regard to financial gifts contributed by a local
church for one purpose and another, since the church is the bestower of the
gift in kind, it is the prerogative of the church to choose the channel of its
ministration. Take the earliest case that is mentioned in the Acts. When
difficulties arose in regard to the care of the numerous poor in Jerusalem, the
saints were exhorted to look out from among them seven men of good report, full
of the Spirit and of wisdom. The church in Jerusalem was responsible for
choosing the men. These seven have been called "deacons," in the technical
sense of the term. There is no reason for so describing them. In point of fact
they were servants of the church, and, as they handled gifts of the church, so
the church was entitled to choose them. The same principle is illustrated in
the case of the gifts from churches in Greece for poor saints in Judea. Such
gifts are primarily offerings to the Lord, but those who handle them are the
servants of the church that provides them, and such should be chosen by it.
THE REAL VALUE
It is the
Person of Christ Himself who imparts both dignity and value to service of
whatever character. No matter how insignificant it may be in the eyes of men,
no matter how little noticed, all service for God is measured by Him according
to the standards of the Sanctuary, and is treasured by Him for commendation and
reward in the day to come. "Ye did it unto Me," says the Lord, or, if it was
withheld, "Ye did it not unto Me." We can understand the surprise of those who
will say, "When saw we Thee an hungered, and fed Thee, or athirst, and gave
Thee drink? And when saw we Thee a stranger, and took Thee in, or naked and
clothed Thee? And when saw we Thee sick or in prison, and came unto Thee? And
the King shall answer and say unto them,. "Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as
ye did it unto one of these My brethren, even these least, ye did it unto ME"
(Matt. 25:37).
HUMAN TRADITIONS
A careful perusal of the Scriptures on the subject of ministry makes clear
that to be rightly understood it requires to be divested of the clerical
accretions which it has received from the traditions of ecclesiasticism. How
important it is, in view of the Judgment Seat of Christ, to test matters by the
instructions and precepts of the Word of God! The extent to which we have
obeyed its truth, instead of following the precepts and practices of men, will
determine for each believer the abiding results of that solemn Tribunal.
WHAT IS MINISTRY?
Let us
consider something of what Scripture teaches on the subject of ministry, in
contrast to the traditional usage which has obtained in Christendom. The
following passage is at once indicative of the will of God: "according as each
hath received a gift, ministering it among yourselves, as good stewards of the
manifold grace of God; if any man speaketh, speaking as it were oracles of God;
if any man ministereth, ministering as of the strength which God supplieth:
that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ" (I Pet. 4:10, 11,
R.V.). Certain facts stand out clearly here. Obviously spiritual gifts are
distributed by the Holy Spirit amongst the churches; the ministry is to be
exercised "among yourselves." While "speaking" that is to say, oral instruction
from the Scriptures, is to be of the character of "oracles of God,"
ministering, or rendering service, is to be by God given strength. Thus
ministry is of a wider scope, both in its nature and in the number who exercise
it, than that of giving discourses or sermons. Ministry is here, indeed,
distinguished from this latter activity.
Again, the passage in I Cor.
12, which enumerates the diversities of spiritual gifts in a local church, and
the "diversities of ministrations" and of "workings," says, "but all these
worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as He
will" (verse 11). Ministry is service rendered to God on behalf of others.
There is no allusion to any special minister in charge of a church or
congregation, nor is there to any pastor appointed or chosen by a church. The
instructions are imparted to the entire local church itself as the ministering
body, and prominence is given to the prerogatives and operation of the Spirit
of God in and through the members. Indeed, none of the Epistles to churches are
directed to "the minister," nor is any such individual named in them.
A DISTINCTION
There is a
similar passage in the Epistle to the saints in Rome. "For even as we have many
members in one body, and all the members have not the same office: so we, who
are many, are one body in Christ, and severally members one of another. And
having gifts differing according to the grace that was given to us, whether
prophecy (i.e., 'telling forth' the mind of God), let us prophesy according to
the proportion of our faith; or ministry, let us give ourselves to our
ministry; or he that teacheth, to his teaching; or he that exhorteth, to his
exhorting" (Rom. 12:4-8). Here, again, ministry is distinguished from oral
testimony, instruction and admonition. Whatever form the service to be rendered
takes, the saints are to "give themselves" to it. Moreover, teaching,
exhortation and other forms of spiritual ministration are not assigned to one
person, either in this passage or any other. They vary in the members of a
church, according to the grace imparted.
ECCLESIASTICISM
With such a widely distributed
exercise of gift among the members of churches, by the provision of the Holy
Spirit, and functioning under His control and guidance, the sacerdotal and
clerical systems of Christendom are entirely inconsistent. They are due to a
very marked and historically well known departure from the Word of God. Such
early apostasy had been foretold by the Apostles themselves. Scripture knows
nothing of an ecclesiastical official set apart to act as the "minister" in
distinction from a congregation, and appointed amongst other things to
"administer the sacraments." Plainly the spiritual gifts raised up according to
the teaching of the Word of God, differ widely from what prevails in the
clerical systems that have sprung up by human arrangement and tradition.
DIAKONOS, DOULOS AND LEITOURGOS
There are today evangelists, pastors and teachers, as there
were apostles and prophets (Eph. 4:11), and they are given by the ascended Lord
"for the perfecting of the saints, unto the work of ministering, unto the
building up of the body of Christ." The word is diakonia, "ministering."
The corresponding word diakonos, "servant," and the verb
diakoneo, "to minister," are derived from the word diako, "to
pursue" (not from dia, "through," and konis, "dust," as has been
supposed). They describe service in general. A servant of Christ is most
frequently spoken of as a doulos, a word which primarily signified a
bondservant, but which has not always and necessarily the idea of bondage. The
Apostles so described themselves in relation to God (Tit. 1:1; Jas. 1:1) and to
Christ (Rom. 1:1; Jude 1, e.g.), and again in relation to the saints whom they
taught (2 Cor. 4:5). Believers who were slaves were to regard themselves as
bondservants of Christ (Eph. 6:6), and all believers are so designated (I Pet.
2:16).
Speaking of himself in connection with his missionary service, Paul
describes himself as a "minister of Christ Jesus unto the Gentiles" (Rom.
15:16), and the word he employs is leitourgos, one who discharges public
duties, whether religious or otherwise; here he uses it of the ministry of the
gospel of God as a spiritual sacrifice. When in writing to the church at
Corinth he speaks of himself and his fellow apostles as "ministers of Christ"
(I Cor. 4:1), he uses a different word huperetes, which originally
signified an under-rower in a war galley and subsequently came to denote any
subordinate official who waited on the commands of his superior. [29]
[29] "Speaking generally, the diakonos is a servant viewed in
relationship to his work; the doulos is a servant viewed in relationship
to his master; the huperetes is a servant viewed in relationship to his
superior; the leitourgos is a servant viewed in relationship to public
duties." (Notes on the Epistles to the Thessalonians. by C. F. Hogg and the
writer. p. 92.)
TEACHING
As to
the service of teaching the Scriptures, when a church was assembled the
edification of the assembled company was received through a variety of ministry
(see I Thess. 5:11, RX., and I Cor. 12:7, 8), those who thus handled the
Scriptures being called and fitted of God to do so (Eph. 4:8, 11-14; 1 Cor.
12:18, 28-30). This kind of ministry was confined to such (14:29), and was
exercised under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (12:11), and with self-control
(14:32). The teacher was not to be himself the judge of the value of his
ministry (v. 29), and teachers were to defer one to another (v. 30). Teaching
was to be exercised both with discretion, "according to the proportion of
faith" (Rom. 12:6), and with diligence; for the teacher was "to give himself to
his teaching" (v. 7), and to do so with a due realization of the dignity and
solemnity of the service he was rendering, speaking "as it were oracles of God"
(I Pet. 4:11). These injunctions and principles were given as permanently
binding upon churches and should never have been abandoned. The argument that
the instructions given in the New Testament required development in subsequent
periods under the guidance of Church leaders is utterly invalid, and is
contradicted by the internal testimony of Scripture itself. The injunctions
given concerning "prophesying" apply to "teaching." The principles underlying
each are the same. Upon the completion of the Scriptures, prophesying passed
away, and the teacher took the place of the prophet. This is intimated in the
statement in 2 Pet. 2:1, "there arose false prophets among the people, as among
you also there shall be false teachers." A prophet spoke by immediate
revelation of the mind of God; a teacher delivers his message from and in
accordance with the Scriptures.
QUENCHING THE
SPIRIT
The exhortation given to the church in Thessalonica, not
to quench the Spirit (I Thess. 5:19), had particular reference, as the context
shows, to the work of the Holy Spirit in the exercise of His prerogatives and
guidance through such as were qualified to minister the Word of God when the
church was assembled. The Spirit would be quenched, either by refusal, through
self-will, to acknowledge His will and way, or by yielding to the impulse of
the flesh, whether ignorantly or presumptuously, instead of submitting to the
guidance of the Spirit. To replace dependence on the Holy Spirit's leading by
the substitution of a system of clericalism was derogatory to the honour of
Christ as Lord. To appoint a minister over a congregation was an easy way out
of a difficulty, but it was a departure from the Word of God. Failure in a
local gathering calls for humiliation, self-judgment and waiting upon God, and
if necessary, faithful and yet gracious rebuke, and not for the introduction of
humanly devised means of correcting an abuse. One deviation from the Divine
will cannot be rightly removed by another. The Scriptures remain today as the
mind of God for us. The systems of religion in Christendom have not developed
the doctrines and truths of the Word of God. Additional doctrines have been
introduced distinctly contradictory to it. Where false principles are supported
they should be left and not connived at even by silent acquiescence.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN: BAPTISM
"Baptism," a word
transliterated from Greek into English, is derived from the verb bapto,
to dip, and among the Greek-speaking peoples the lengthened form
baptizo, to baptize, signified the acts of immersion, submersion, and
emergence; no other meaning was attached to the word till a considerable time
after the first century of the Christian era. The Greeks used the word, for
instance, of the dyeing of a garment, in which the whole material was plunged
in and taken out from the element used, or, again, of a boat which had been
wrecked by being submerged and then stranded on the shore. To substitute the
words "immerse," "immersion," for "baptize" and "baptism" is a mistake, for
immersion is only part of the process, and a person merely immersed would not
remain alive. We need, therefore, the transliterated words, for which no
adequate English equivalent existed. It is necessary, moreover, to understand
them in their Scriptural significance and not as.they have been interpreted by
ecclesiastical tradition. The mode and meaning of baptism is clear from the
Scriptures relating to the ordinance. These speak of death, burial and
resurrection (Rom. 6:3, 4; Col. 2:12). Thus, figuratively, the people of Israel
were "baptized in the cloud and in the sea" (I Cor. 10:2).
THE COMMANDMENT
The ordinance was instituted by
the Lord in the following command: "Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all
the nations, baptizing them into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of
the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you:
and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (or age)" (Matt.
28:19, 20). The order is significant. The fulfillment of the command on the
part of the Apostles, as recorded in the Acts, makes clear that baptism was to
be preceded by repentance and faith, essential preliminaries to discipleship.
To translate this passage by inserting the word "by" before "baptizing," thus
making the passage mean that baptism was to be the means of making disciples,
is to force a doctrine into the command which is contradicted by other
Scriptures, and to read a meaning into it which it was never intended to
convey. On the Day of Pentecost those who were baptized were those who received
the Apostle's word (Acts 2:41). Again, when Philip preached in Samaria, those
who believed were baptized (Acts 8:12). The subsequent narrative in that
chapter, about the eunuch, shows that he was baptized only after the exercise
of faith. So with the jailer at Philippi and the members of his house (Acts
16:32, 33); the record leaves no room for doubt that all those who were
baptized were believers. For when the word of the Lord had been spoken to all
in the house, all the household both believed and rejoiced greatly, statements
entirely inapplicable to those who were in infancy. Again, at Corinth, "many of
the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized" (Acts 18:8).
These
and other Scriptures not only show that baptism is for believers only, but make
clear that the Apostle's words at Pentecost, "Repent ye, and be baptized every
one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins," are
not to be taken to indicate that the remission of sins is obtained by baptism.
The remission of sins is granted on the ground of faith. The same Apostle
declares that everyone that believeth on Christ shall receive remission of sins
(Acts 10:43). So, too, in the message of the Apostle Paul at Antioch: "through
this Man is proclaimed unto you the remission of sins: and by Him every one
that believeth is justified" (Acts 13:38, 39). [30]
[30] The case of
Saul of Tarsus is confirmatory. Acts 9 records first his conversion and then
his baptism (verse 18). In his own narrative of this, recorded in chapter 22,
the command of Ananias, "arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins," by no
means implies that God had not remitted his sins already at his conversion, nor
does it afford ground for the doctrine that Divine remission of sins is granted
on the ground of baptism. Saul, who had judged Christ to be an impostor, had
actually accepted Him as Lord, and was now to give acknowledgment of this in
his baptism, thus publicly testifying to his fellow nationals his changed
attitude, and symbolically washing away by his own act the sins of his former
rejection of, and antagonism to, Christ. In no case is such language used of a
Gentile; for a Jew thus to testify to Jews would have a special significance in
relation to ceremonial washing.
BINDING UPON
ALL BELIEVERS
Further, while none but those who professed faith
in Christ were baptized, no believer remained unbaptized. An unbaptized
believer is not contemplated in the New Testament. It could not be otherwise in
view of the Lord's command. When the Apostle Paul says, concerning the saints
in Corinth, "I thank God that I baptized none of you save Crispus and Gaius,"
the context gives proof that he was not in any way minimizing the value of
baptism, or setting little value on it. He immediately states as his reason,
"lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name" (I Cor. 1:15).
That there was no unbaptized believer in the church at Corinth is clear from
his preceding question, "Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?" He does not
say, "Were those of you who were baptized, baptized into the name of Paul?" as
if distinguishing the baptized from the unbaptized. Again, when he says,
"Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel," he simply means that
he did not himself administer the rite in all cases, but that, while he
baptized a few, the carrying out of the ordinance by his own hand was not his
special work. All those who were not baptized by him were baptized by others,
as Acts 18:8 shows.
THE GREAT ERROR
That a person should be regarded as having become regenerate
through having been baptized cannot be rightly deduced from the Lord's words in
John 3:5, "Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into
the kingdom of God." The Lord immediately says, in confirmation of this
statement, "That which is born of the Spirit is spirit." The Apostle Peter
testifies that we have been "begotten againthrough the Word of God, which
liveth and abideth" (I Pet. 1:23, R.V.; Cp. James 1:18). It is therefore
consistent to understand the water as symbolizing the Word of God. [31]
[31] Water is also a symbol of the Holy Spirit (see the Lord's words
to the woman of Samaria, John 4:14, and again to the Jews, 7:38, 39). In that
case the kai, "and," is epexegetic and signifies "even." As against this
the objection is raised that a word used symbolically is not coupled with that
which denotes what is symbolized. The objection, however, is invalid; for
instance, "soul and spirit" (actual) "and joints and marrow" (symbolic) are
thus associated in Hebrews 4:12. On the other hand, the Spirit, the water and
the blood are distinguished in I John 5:8.
There is no intimation in
the New Testament that baptism as the means of regeneration was ever taught in
the churches. The testimony, as we have seen, is to the contrary. The error
arose in a later period, through departure from apostolic teaching, and by the
introduction of rites and practices adopted from oriental religions. After the
early persecutions of immediately post-apostolic times, measures were taken to
incorporate people into the churches in a wholesale manner, in order that the
Christian religion might outrival its competitors. The mode of baptism by the
sprinkling of water was thus adopted, contrary to the teaching of Holy
Scripture, and the doctrine was promulgated that salvation was secured by the
rite, and that unbaptized persons must perish. In this and other respects the
Christian faith, as taught by Christ and His Apostles, became generally
replaced in Christendom by an admixture of paganism with the faith, with
disastrous results.
THE CAUSE OF THE
ERROR
That salvation could be obtained by a mere outward form
or ceremony, appealed to pagan ideas, and would ever prove attractive to the
natural mind. Moreover, the perversion of the ordinance was contingent upon the
substitution of priestcraft for those forms of spiritual ministry set forth in
the New Testament, the teaching of which is directly opposed to a system of
clerisy. The ordinance of baptism, with its profound significance for the
believer, became changed into a rite which was practised for the maintenance of
priestcraft, and fostered superstition. Baptism is a testimony on the part of a
believer that he has, through faith in Christ, become identified with Him in
His death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:3-5). It is an acknowledgment that
Christ is his Lord, that he belongs to Him as such, and that, having formerly
served sin, he reckons himself as having died to it and as being alive unto God
in Christ Jesus (verse 11).
To take the words of the Apostle Peter (in I
Pet. 3:21), that baptism "saves us," as signifying that baptism is the means of
regeneration, is to miss the meaning of the passage completely. For he declares
at once that baptism is "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but
the appeal (R.V. margin) of a good conscience towards God, through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ." Baptism provides the believer with an appeal
against everything contrary to his identification with Christ in His death and
resurrection. The very significance of the ordinance, to which he voluntarily
submits himself, in the fulfillment of the will of the Lord is an appeal
against yielding to sin. Thus the believer is thereby saved, not from the doom
of his sins, but from an evil conscience through having by thought, word or
deed contravened the meaning of the ordinance. The passage just referred to is
likewise a testimony to the Scriptural mode of baptism; for it speaks of the
ordinance as "a corresponding figure" (lit., "a corresponding type") to the
similarly typical representation set forth by the ark and those who were
brought therein through the flood in a figurative burial and resurrection.
Baptism bears no relation to the Jewish rite of circumcision, nor has baptism
taken the place of circumcision. Jews, who, as such, had been circumcised on
the eighth day, were baptized after they had believed on Christ; and, vice
versa, Timothy, who had become a disciple and therefore had been baptized, was
circumcised by the Apostle Paul just before going forth with him in missionary
service. If there is any analogy, then, as Jews were circumcised because they
were children of Abraham, so believers are baptized because they are children
of God.
In connection with the significance of baptism, the twenty-ninth
verse of 1 Corinthians 15 has been usually understood to refer to a certain
ceremony which took place on the occasion of the burial of a believer. In view,
however, of the absence of any other intimation in Scripture regarding such a
ceremony, and the absence of any historical evidence thereof in apostolic
times, or those which immediately followed, another meaning must be sought.
Bearing in mind that the original was written without punctuation marks, let
the first question mark in the verse be placed after the word "baptized," and
the verse gives a meaning at once consistent with the doctrine of Scripture.
The reading will thus be: "Else what shall they do which are baptized? It is
for (i.e., 'in the interests of') the dead, if the dead are not raised at all.
Why then are they baptized for them?" The first question, "What shall they do
... ?' is a way of asking what is the use or value of being baptized. The
insertion of the words "It is," to provide the answer, is consistent with the
fact that the verb "to be" is frequently omitted in the original, as is shown
by the italicized words in several places in this very chapter. If there is no
resurrection of the dead, the ordinance, instead of setting forth the
identification of believers with the risen Christ, has no meaning at all either
for Him or for them; for all perish at death: see verse 18. Both His command
and their witness in the ordinance are null and void. They testify to doctrines
that have no significance. Their baptism is therefore in the interests of dead
ones." [32]
[32] The next question follows appropriately, "Why do we
also stand in jeopardy every hour." If there is no resurrection, why lead a
life which involves "dying daily?"
Ecclesiasticism, so far from
developing the truth relating to baptism, has perverted the ordinance both in
its mode and its meaning.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN: "THE
TABLE OF THE LORD" AND "THE LORD'S SUPPER"
The phrases "The table of
the Lord" and "The Lord's supper" are found once only in Scripture, the former
in I Cor. 10:21 and the latter in 11:20. There is a difference, in the first
place, in the significance of the terms. For while the word "supper" stands
actually for that which it denotes, the word "table" stands, not simply for the
material of the table, but also for that with which it is connected. This is an
illustration of that principle of language by which a word is used to signify
that with which it is associated. Another instance of this is to be found in
those phrases which make mention of the blood of Christ. The blood does not
simply denote the physical material, it stands for the Death of Christ by the
shedding of His blood in propitiatory sacrifice. Associated with the table of
the Lord are, firstly, the sacrifice of the Cross, through which what is set on
the table is provided; secondly, the materials thereon which set forth the body
and blood of Christ; thirdly, the privileges and spiritual blessings bestowed
upon those who partake. This at once will serve to show how wide is the scope
of the significance attaching to the phrase.
THREE TABLES
There are three "tables" spoken of in Scripture:(1)
the table provided for Israel, which signifies the privileges Divinely bestowed
upon God's earthly people, through the provision He made for them. Owing to the
hardness of their hearts their table became "a snare, and a trap, and a
stumbling-block, and a recompense unto them" (Rom. 11:9); (2) "the table of
demons," which is in sharp and divisive contrast to (3) "the table of the
Lord." "The table of demons" stands for that which is provided for idolaters by
these powers of darkness. The parallel is clear. The various heathen altars of
sacrifice supplied "the table," in its spiritual significance, for the devotees
of this or that god or goddess. Actually the provision was made by demons. The
activity of these beings in this respect, however, is more extensive than what
appertains to the idolatrous cults of the heathen. For idolatry does not
consist merely of the worship or veneration of images. There are many forms of
idolatry. The table is spread for the worldling with a variety of supplies, and
believers are warned that they cannot partake of this table as well as of the
table of the Lord.
In the Church at Corinth there was a temptation, while
partaking of the Lord's table, to revert to the former conditions of
unregenerate days, and to associate in idolatrous practices and customs.
Against this the Apostle remonstrates. Hence the warning against attempting to
participate in both tables. Moreover, such an attempt is to provoke the Lord to
jealousy (verse 22), a spiritual application of the jealousy-offering mentioned
in Numbers 5. The believer who thus transgresses renders himself liable to
drink a cup of judgment instead of the cup of blessing.
THE BASIS OF SUPPLY
With regard more
particularly to the table of the Lord, the Old Testament foreshadowing of this
is given in such passages as Deuteronomy 12:27, "Thou shalt offer thy burnt
offerings, the flesh and the blood, upon the altar of the Lord thy God and the
blood of thy sacrifice shall be poured out upon the altar of the Lord thy God,
and thou shalt eat the flesh." As the altar of burnt offering supplied Israel
with that upon which they were to feed, so the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross
is the means of supplying us who sit at His table, not only with the materials
which are put thereon, but with the corresponding spiritual provision made for
us in Christ Himself. Hence the Apostle says, "Behold Israel after the flesh:
have not they which eat the sacrifices communion [33] (or fellowship) with the
altar?" (verse 18). The spiritual application of this is mentioned in the
preceding verse, in that, in the unity which we enjoy, "we all partake of the
one bread (or loaf)."
[33] The word rendered "Partakes of" is
metecho, to have a share in, whereas in verse 18 the word rendered "have
communion" is koinonos, one who has something in common with others.
AN IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE
Chapter 10 is not primarily occupied with the details of the actual
partaking of the Lord's Supper, as in chapter 11, but with the privileges and
responsibilities which believers enjoy as those who have fellowship with one
another in that which the death of Christ has provided for them. We are, in the
more comprehensive sense of the term, always at the Table. This helps to
explain the order in verse 16, the cup first, the bread after: "The cup of
blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The
bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ?" This is
especially a fellowship of His death. The subject throughout chapter 10 is
twofold, namely, the separating power of His death, dissociating believers from
the world, and the close bond of their union in Him through His sacrifice.
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ORDER
That the cup is mentioned first, then, is very significant. The passage
lays stress on the sacrificial aspect of His death. The blood of Christ is that
which met the claims of Divine righteousness, the claims of God as Judge, while
at the same time the love of God was therein manifested. The realization of
that comes first in the matter of fellowship with one another, a fellowship
which we enjoy as those who have come under the cleansing power of the precious
blood of Christ. By way of consequent experience, this fellowship is then set
forth by the bread which we break: it is a communion of the body of Christ,
"seeing that we, who are many, are one bread (one loaf), one body."
Chapter 10 treats of the subject more from the external point of view, while
chapter 11 views it internally. What is conveyed by "the table of the Lord,"
while referring immediately to the cup and the bread of which we partake at the
Lord's Supper, points especially to our responsibilities and privileges all the
week, and the provision made to enable us to fulfil and enjoy them. This is
borne out by the immediately ensuing context, where the Apostle points out the
necessity of so ordering our life, that we shall abstain from anything
inconsistent with the table of the Lord. We cannot partake of that and then go
and compromise our relationship. We are to remember that we have a fellowship
to maintain, and we are to seek not our own, but one another's good, avoiding
everything that would cause our brother to stumble. Indeed, to partake of the
table of the Lord involves this, that whatsoever we do we shall do "all to the
glory of God," and that we shall give no occasion of stumbling, either to Jews
or Gentiles, or to the church of God (verse 32). Any such act belies that
fellowship into which we have been brought with other believers, and dishonours
the name of Him whom we own as Lord.
THE
MORAL ASPECT
The table of the Lord presents a moral aspect.
There are moral responsibilities attached to it. To partake of it means that we
accept the death of Christ as our own death, the destruction of the body of
sin, the death by which we are crucified to the world and the world to us, the
world in all its phases religious, political, social. The arch foe of God is
its prince, and he will continue to be "the god of this world" till he is
removed hence to his appointed doom. Hence the importance of maintaining our
identification with Christ as those who, being privileged to sit at His table
and enjoy all that He is to the Father for us and the fulness of the provision
that there is in Him for us, have at the same time become dead, through His
Cross, to all that stands in alienation from Him. The order in chapter 11 is
that in which Christ instituted the Supper, and the subject there is the
partaking of it in remembrance of the Lord, and as a proclamation of His death,
till He come. We call Him to mind as the Living One, who was dead, and we
proclaim the efficacy and the purpose of His death. The contrast in chapter 11
is not between the table of the Lord and the table of demons, but between the
Lord's Supper and our own supper. It can only be the Lord's Supper when we
acknowledge Him as Lord thereat and, fulfilling His commands as He instituted
it, enter into the significance of that of which we are partaking.
FOR THE WHOLE ERA
The
teaching given in this Epistle to the Corinthians concerning the table of the
Lord and the Lord's Supper, was not intended simply for the church at Corinth.
The Apostle associates the church there "with all that call upon the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their Lord and ours" (1:2). He definitely
states that the instructions he gives are not simply for that church but for
all the churches (7:17); so 11:16; he says, too, that what he teaches there he
teaches everywhere in every church (4:17). Moreover, the Lord's Supper is
appointed as a proclamation of His death "till He come" (11:26). It was
therefore not designed simply for the early period of the testimony of the
churches. As in the case of the ordinance of baptism, ecclesiastical tradition
has changed the character of the feast, with regard both to its mode and its
meaning, so that what prevails in organized religious systems in Christendom
bears little resemblance to that which is laid down for us in the New Testament
Scriptures.
A CUSTOM TRANSFORMED
The Lord's Supper, as instituted by the Lord Jesus, was in one respect not
altogether new. The breaking of bread and the drinking of a cup had been
customary in connection with burials. [34]. By way of contrast, the Lord
appointed these acts as a feast of joy. His followers were to partake of the
Supper in remembrance, not of His death, but of Himself (I Cor. 11:11 -25).
They were indeed to enter into the significance of His death as set forth in
the bread and the cup and were to proclaim His death in the act of partaking.
"Proclaim," be it noted, not "shew" or "shew forth." The word
(katangello) is used of proclaiming a message, as in this very Epistle,
in 2:1 and 9:16, in the latter verse of preaching the gospel. Not
representation but proclamation is intended; not, as has been wrongly
interpreted, a showing to God, but a witness to men.
[34] For the
breaking of bread in this respect in the Old Testament see the R.V. of Jeremiah
16:7, where "break bread" is the rendering; Ezek. 24:17; Hos. 9:4; Deut. 26:14.
Again, the Lord's words are "in remembrance of Me" (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor.
11:24,25) not in memory of an absent person, though He is corporeally absent,
nor as a memorial of an act, but in vivid realization of the Lord Himself,
spiritually present, according to His promise; yet ever on the ground of the
fact, the purpose and the effect of His vicarious sacrifice at Calvary. The
force of the word "remembrance" may be gathered from its only other occurrence
in the New Testament, viz., Heb. 10:3, "in those sacrifices there is a
remembrance made of sins year by year." The effect of the sacrifices under the
Mosaic economy was to bring "iniquity to remembrance" (Num. 5:15); the design
of the breaking of bread and drinking of the cup is to bring to the hearts of
the partakers the realization of what Christ is to them as Lord and Saviour,
and what they are to Him through His redeeming blood. He appointed the Supper,
not simply "lest we forget," but in order that He might Himself, as the outcome
of His finished work on the Cross, communicate to us a fresh impulse of His
grace and love.
NOT TRANSUBSTANTIATION
As to His words upon giving the broken loaf to the disciples,
"Take, eat; this is My body" (Matt. 26:26), certain considerations should be
sufficient to make clear that any idea of the actual transmutation of the
material elements of the bread into the substance of His body, was by no means
His intention. Firstly, the Lord in bodily
Presence was there, reclining with His disciples at the table, His hands that
broke the bread and handed it to them being members of His body. The disciples
certainly did not conceive of His having, or creating, another body in any
sense, shape or form, in addition to that in which He was present with them.
Secondly, the parallel statement concerning
the cup cannot be taken as conveying the thought of transmutation. The
following reason is sufficient to show this. The Lord, upon giving the
disciples the cup, said, "For this is My blood. . ." The narratives in Luke
22:20 and I Cor. 11:25, are given as His words, "This cup is the new covenant
in My blood." In whatever language Christ spoke to the disciples in the upper
room, it thus becomes plain that He spoke of the cup as symbolizing the new
covenant. Plainly His words here, therefore, signify representation and not
transubstantiation. The word "this" (neuter in the original) in Matt. 26:28
refers back to the cup (poterion, also neuter), which the narrative records Him
having just taken. "He took a cup ... saying ... Drink ye all of it; for this
is My blood of the new covenant." The four narratives are all thus in
agreement. The Lord's language shows that He had no idea of the transmutation
of the contents of the cup itself. Since the cup was undeniably a
representation of the new covenant in His blood, the preceding and parallel
phrase "this is My body" never should have been interpreted as indicating a
change of the actual substance from bread into His body. Clearly, what the Lord
meant was, "This bread represents My body, and this cup with its contents
represents the new covenant to be made in My death and to be ratified by the
shedding of My blood." In regard to the cup, this is again confirmed by what is
said of the cup and of the bread in I Cor. 10:16, "The cup of blessing ... is
it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread ... is it not a communion
of the body of Christ?" Neither the cup nor the bread is the actual communion.
They stand for, or represent, the communion (that which we have in common as
believers), and precisely so the bread represents His body.
Thirdly, in all statements with the verb "to be"
as the connecting predicate, the verb is never used to signify that one thing
is changed into another. In other words, it is never used as the equivalent of
ginomai, "to become." In all such usage either (a) the object is actually what
it is said to be, apart from any change from the one thing to another (as,
e.g., "This is the witness of John," John 1:19), or (b) the object represents
what it is said to be (as, e.g., "the field is the world," Matt. 13:38; "these
women are two covenants," Gal. 4:24; "the seven heads are seven mountains,"
Rev. 17:9). Obviously (a) is not the case in the statement, "this is My body"
(for the doctrine of transubstantiation does suppose a change from one thing to
another). We are therefore confined to the meaning as set forth in the examples
under (b), and the statement is to be understood as meaning "This bread
represents My body."
Fourthly, there is not
the slightest intimation in any writing of apostolic times, or of post
apostolic times for some centuries, that believers either were taught, or
understood, that any change took place in the substance either of the bread or
of the wine. On the contrary, the testimony of the Apostle Paul is against the
theory of transubstantiation; for throughout the passage, and with reference
even to the actual partaking, which would be after the alleged pronouncement of
the blessing, the elements are spoken of still as the bread and the cup, and
not as the body and the blood.
Fifthly, the
Lord's words concerning the cup were, "Drink ye all of it." That this was not
intended simply for the Apostles but for all believers, is clear from the
testimony of I Cor. I 1:26, where the Apostle, speaking of the whole church at
Corinth, says, "as often as yedrink the cup." Now, to say nothing of the
audacious decree promulgated in 1415 A.D., forbidding laymen to partake of the
wine in the Lord's Supper, there is a very direct testimony against the
supposition that the wine ever became changed into blood. The Law of God given
to the people of Israel forbade the drinking of blood (Lev. 17:10, 14). Nor was
the prohibition ever removed. On the contrary, it was enforced by the decree
issued for the churches by the Apostles at their gathering at Jerusalem. The
churches were to abstain from what is strangled and from blood (Acts 15:20).
Any ecclesiastical fiat, therefore, confining the cup to a sacerdotal partaking
(which is itself a breach of the Lord's own institution of the cup) simply made
the priests of the religious organization guilty, under the supposition of
transubstantiation, of disobeying the Divine prohibition against partaking of
blood. But the idea is preposterous. The Lord never instituted a feast which
would involve a breach of Divine prohibitions.
Sixthly, the statement "Ye proclaim the Lord's death," taken with the
Lord's own words on the subject, teaches that the elements are emblems of
Christ in His death, and not in His exaltation and presence in Heaven as the
ascended Lord. For, while in bodily presence He is at the right hand of the
Throne of God, He is at the same time, in fulfillment of His promise, Himself
spiritually in the midst of His people, not in the elements on the table, but
Personally with them. That He "took bread" and "took" [35] a cup, afforded no
ground whatever for the sacerdotal practice of elevating the emblems, either
for presentation or veneration. There is no stress upon the word in the
original, rendered "took." What is recorded is simply an act in the ordinary
sense of the word.
[35] Lambano is the ordinary word denoting either
.'to take" or "to receive." It never conveys the suggestion of elevating.
Seventhly, whereas attempts have been
made to explain the breaking of bread by the interpretation of the sixth
chapter of the Gospel of John, a careful perusal of that passage, in which
Christ speaks of His being the Living Bread, shows that there is no reference
there to the Lord's Supper. Christ was on that occasion speaking of the means
whereby a person obtains eternal life, which is granted on the ground of faith,
and not on the ground of partaking of the bread in the Lord's Supper. Moreover,
when He said, "The bread which I shall give is My flesh, for the life of the
world" (verse 51, R.V.), and the Jews made the mistake of taking His words
literally, He rebuked them, with the remark, "It is the Spirit that
quickeneththe words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life. But
there are some of you that believe not." To take His words therefore in the
literal sense is to support what has become one of the greatest errors in
Christendom. Plainly the Lord was drawing the analogy between material support
of the body by bread and the spiritual support of the soul by faith.
The partaking of the Lord's Supper, as set forth in the New Testament, is
marked by an entire absence of officialism. There is no hint of the appointment
of anyone for the administration of the elements. Both the breaking of the
bread and the drinking of the cup are for the whole company. The cup is "the
cup of blessing which we bless" (or "give thanks for," as is the meaning in I
Cor. 14:16); the bread is that which "we break." The argument that the "we"
stands for the Apostles and their successors is refuted by the context; for the
Apostle immediately says, "seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one
body: for we all partake of the one bread." Again, when he points out to the
church at Corinth the inconsistency of partaking of the cup of demons and the
cup of the Lord (10:21), the implication in the "ye" is obvious (save to those
who have some unscriptural theory to advance) that the whole church partook of
the cup.
The sacerdotalism which, by mere human tradition, has intruded
human mediators for official ministrations of the elements to all the
partakers, has marred the character of the feast as appointed by the Lord, and
has perverted the carrying out of His intentions. The solemn responsibility,
yea, happy privilege, of believers is to follow His will and adhere to the
teaching which He has left on record for us in the Scriptures of Truth.
CHAPTER FIFTEEN: "RECEPTION"
Local
churches are spoken of in the New Testament not only as "churches of God" (I
Cor. 11:16) but also as "churches of Christ" (Rom. 16:16). They belong to the
Father and to the Son, from whom they derive their existence and whose
sustaining power and care are ministered to them. They consist of those who are
both "for God's own possession" (I Pet. 2:9, R.V.), having been purchased with
the blood of Christ (Acts 20:28), and "for Christ's own possession" (Titus
2:14). The churches are His by right of His redemptive work on the Cross and by
the operation of the Holy Spirit. They are not the property or possession of
any ecclesiastical organization or religious body or society or denomination.
As we have already observed, the Word of God knows nothing of such
organizations or associations of churches in any shape or form; its testimony
is distinctly against the formation of any such federation or combination with
earthly headquarters. Each church, as the property of Christ, is designed to
acknowledge His authority as its Lord (I Cor. 12:5).
Nor again does any
local church belong to those who, as its spiritual guides, elders or bishops
(see, e.g., Acts 20, verse 17 with verse 28, R.V., Phil. 1:1, etc.), are
appointed by the Spirit of God to exercise oversight and to take care of it (I
Tim. 3:5). They are the Lord's servants, answerable to Him for the discharge of
their functions in tending the flock under their care, which they are to regard
as His. The local church in which they are bishops or elders is spoken of, not
as "their flock," but as "God's flock" (I Pet. v. 2).
CREDENTIALS NECESSARY
Having then a care for
the "charge allotted" to them, they are justified, when a person applies for
reception into local church fellowship, in asking the applicant for credentials
as to matters of faith and conduct; indeed, such a demand is necessary,
especially in times of confusion and apostasy like the present, times of
rampant modernism, numerous religious cults and abounding lawlessness. When
such credentials are forthcoming, the command holds good, "receive ye one
another, even as Christ also received you, to the glory of God" (Rom. 15:7);
reception is to be "in the Lord" and "worthily of the saints" (16:2). The
decision of the spiritual guides of a church that an applicant is to be
received, should be sufficient for the tacit agreement of the assembly. Yet, as
it is the church that receives and puts away, the ultimate responsibility rests
upon the church (Rev. 2 and 3). Granted that those who have a spiritual care
for the assembly are satisfied with the evidences, not only of life in Christ
but of soundness in the fundamental doctrines of the faith and of a life
consistent therewith, one who, through faith in Christ, has been received by
Him and become a member of His body, the Church, is entitled to the fellowship
of an assembly, and so to a place at the Lord's Table. The privilege of
partaking of the Lord's Supper involves the enjoyment of all the privileges of
a church, and not only so but the fulfillment of the responsibilities attaching
to such fellowship. As to permanency or otherwise, this is conditioned by local
or personal circumstances. This is particularly so in days characterized by the
confusion which prevails in Christendom.
THE
NEED OF CARE
The greatest care needs to be exercised to avoid
the dangers of introducing elements of error or division, and of laxity in
adherence to the Lord's will as revealed in the Word of God and the principles
contained therein. As to fundamental doctrine, one is not to be received who
"abideth not in the teaching of Christ" (2 John 9), that is to say, all that He
taught, and therefore also the doctrine relating to His Person. This warning
was against false teachers, not against believers who were seeking light, or
genuinely endeavouring to understand the will of the Lord. The Apostle Paul
similarly denounces anyone who should preach any gospel other than that which
he and his fellow apostles had preached; such a one was to be "anathema" (Gal.
1:8). Special instances of such errorists were Hymenius and Alexander, whom the
Apostle "delivered unto Satan, that they might be taught not to blaspheme" (I
Tim. 1:20). So, too, the Lord reproves the church at Pergamos for having in
their midst some that held the teaching of Balaam, instead of putting them away
from them (Rev. 2:14). Teaching which perverts the gospel is called "leaven"
(Gal. 5:9) and thus receives the same denunciation as immorality (1 Cor. 5:6).
On the other hand, the case of the attitude of the disciples at
Jerusalem towards Saul of Tarsus after his conversion, when "he essayed to join
himself" to them and "they were all afraid of him," cannot rightly be taken as
the regular course of procedure to be adopted in the matter of reception. The
saints in Jerusalem had had experience of Saul's methods and had good ground
for their fears and for "not believing that He was a disciple," until Barnabas
allayed their apprehensions (Acts 9:26, 27). To make such a case a guiding line
of procedure would be unscriptural. Evidence is necessary, but not suspicion.
WHOM NOT TO REFUSE
Apart from
cases of false teaching and immorality, the adoption of rigid regulations is
precarious. The desire of a believer may be limited, either through lack of fun
understanding or owing to other circumstances, to the privilege of partaking of
the Lord's Supper and of enjoying the worship of fellow-believers on that
occasion. To refuse a believer simply on the ground of the temporary and
limited character of his desires would be to grieve the Spirit of God. To
receive such a one is not to be guilty of laxity. No regulations unprovided in
Scripture can be sufficient to debar evil. In Jude's time certain ungodly men
had crept in unawares. That indeed affords no reason for carelessness in these
matters; at the same time it affords no ground for erecting a humanly devised
barrier. Principles of Scripture ever hold good; their application is always
safe. What is needed is watchfulness and care on the part of those who are
appointed by God to exercise oversight--watchfulness against the reception of
those whose life or teaching is inconsistent with the gospel, and those who
give evidence of being such as to cause division. To go beyond this is to usurp
the authority of Christ.
The following words of J. N. Darby are
cogent in this respect: "Suppose a person, known to be godly and sound in
faith, who has not left some ecclesiastical system, nay, thinks Scripture
favours an ordained ministry, is glad, when the occasion occurs (i.e., to
partake of the Lord Supper), suppose we alone are in the place, or he is not in
connection with any other body in the place (staying with a brother or the
like), is he to be excluded because he is of some system as to which his
conscience is not enlightened, nay, which he may think more right? He is a
godly member of the body, known as such; is he to be shut out? If so, the
degree of light is title to communion, and the unity of the body is denied by
the assembly which refuses him. The principle of meeting as members of Christ
walking in godliness is given up, agreement with us is made the rule, and the
assembly becomes a sect with its members like any other.... It may give more
trouble, requiring more care to treat every case on its merits, on the
principle of the unity of all Christ's members, than to say, 'You do not belong
to us, you cannot come,' but the whole principle of meeting is gone."
A sectarian connection would not of itself justify refusal of fellowship at the
Lord's Table. At Corinth there were those who were guilty of a sectarian
spirit, yet no admonition as to exclusion was given as with the delinquent in
chapter 5. How much less should a believer be refused who, fulfilling the above
conditions, has been hindered by denominational association from receiving
light upon the Scriptural principles relating to a church! Fellowship is not
conditional upon the measure of light received. Deficiency of spiritual
understanding in this respect affords no reason for the rejection of one who is
a member of the Body of Christ and walking in godliness of life. Reception of
such does not involve carelessness or looseness in doctrine or in the
fulfillment of God's will.
LETTERS OF
COMMENDATION
It is needful for all that they should bring
satisfactory evidence, and, in the case of one who has been identified with
another assembly, professedly constituted on Scriptural lines, that a letter of
commendation, such as is intimated in 2 Cor. 3:1 and other Scriptures, should
be forthcoming, unless there is any valid reason for its absence. Those who are
moving from one place to another, who have been so identified, do well to see
to it that they are so commended, not simply for the sake of being admitted to
fellowship, but that the saints where they are received may have the joy of the
expression of goodwill from the commending assembly, and the link of fellowship
which such a letter involves. While ecclesiastical bonds of human organization
are not countenanced in Scripture, yet any means of Christian intercourse
affords an occasion of manifesting that spiritual unity which eternally binds
believers together.
CHAPTER SIXTEEN: CHURCH
DISCIPLINE
What is true of the whole Church, the Body of Christ
(never spoken of in Scripture or to be regarded as "the Church on earth"), is
in many respects likewise true of the earthly, local and temporary portions of
it, the churches. An evidence of this lies in the very name ekklesia, given to
both the whole and its parts, with its suggestive literal significance, "called
out." Those who comprise the parts, and therefore the whole, are called out
from one sphere into another, out from the world in its alienation from God,
and "into the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord" (I Cor. 1:9).
EACH CHURCH A TEMPLE
Again,
the whole Church is spoken of as a temple, and so is each local church. As to
the whole, "each several building, fitly framed together groweth into a holy
temple in the Lord" (Eph. 2:21) that is a process; of a local church, whenever
formed, the statement holds good, "ye are a temple of God" (I Cor. 3:16; cp. 2
Cor. 6:16, where the reference is to the individual believer). God's temple is
called His house, a frequent description of the temple in Jerusalem. So a local
church is described as "the house of God ... the church of the living God" (I
Tim. 3:15). That the local assembly is there referred to is clear from the fact
that the Apostle was giving instructions to Timothy as to the circumstances and
testimony of the church at Ephesus (the instruction is of course applicable to
every assembly). He was exhorting him, as he had done before, to remain there
for a time (I Tim. 1:3, R.V.; 2 Tim. 4:9). As the temple or house of God, the
assembly is God's dwelling place. That is the root meaning of the word oikos,
"house" (from oikeo "to dwell"; the same meaning is contained in the word
oikodome, "building," lit., house, building), as, e.g., in I Cor. 3:9. Being
such, a local church is essentially a place of holiness. "Holiness becometh
Thine house, 0 Lord, for ever" (Ps. 93:5). Whatever is inconsistent with the
character and claims of God must be absent from it. In such a community it is
necessary for each believer to know how to behave himself. That is what the
Apostle expresses as the object for which he wrote the first Epistle to
Timothy. That this was not intended merely to refer to Timothy's individual
conduct in the church, but to that of all the saints therein, both the
immediate context and the general tenor of the Epistle indicate.
The
awesome holiness of the Sanctuary, wherein God dwelt in the midst of His people
Israel, was ever impressed upon them, and that with the beneficent design that
His character might find reflection in theirs. They were to be holy as He is
holy. Precisely so with an assembly. The very reason for its existence demands
that it be kept fit for the presence of God. The spiritual power and glory of
the Lord's presence cannot be experienced where holiness is not maintained. To
harbour anything contrary to the character and claims of God is to do despite
to the Holy Spirit.
THE BASIS OF DISCIPLINE
Consistently with the maintenance of holiness, with its
consequent blessing, the church at Corinth was enjoined to put away from among
themselves the "wicked person" who had defiled God's spiritual temple. The
command to do so was based not only upon the character of God but upon the
claims of the death of Christ. On this ground they were to "purge out the old
leaven." "For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ: wherefore
let us keep the feast (or, as in the margin, 'keep festival' not here the
Lord's Supper but the constant and joyous maintenance of a life and testimony
well pleasing to God and effective in its witness in the world), not with old
leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the
unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" (I Cor. 5:8). That was what the
passover lamb had meant to Israel. Only so could they be His people, separated
to Him by sanctification and cleansing. "Purge out the old leaven," says the
Apostle, "that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened." Spiritual
standing must find its counterpart in conduct.
THE SCOPE OF DISCIPLINE
One who was so
disciplined was not merely debarred from the Lord's Supper, but was put away
from amongst the assembly, and therefore excluded from the fellowship of the
believers in their daily life and intercourse, a fellowship of which the
breaking of bread is only one expression. For any member of the assembly to
ignore the act and continue social intercourse as if there had been no sin,
would be merely carnal sentiment, void both of holy love and righteousness, and
grieving to the Spirit of God. So with seeking spiritual help from the ministry
of one from whom it has been necessary to separate on account of evil doctrine.
He who has missed his way is ill suited to be a guide. The command concerning
such is, "If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching (i.e., the
teaching of Christ), receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting:
for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works" (2 John 10, 11).
Further, for a person to be under the discipline of expulsion from an
assembly involves his being outside every other assembly. No circles of
fellowship are required for the maintenance of this, nor are they Scriptural.
Human devices may prove effectual in preventing one evil, but they do so only
by introducing another. The restrictions of men, however rigid, ever fail to
fulfil the will of God. Unscriptural barriers against a spiritual evil prove
barriers to real blessings. Due care on the part of the spiritual guides in the
churches should be sufficient to obviate the intrusion of one under discipline
into any particular assembly. Let a note of commendation be required. For such
a person simply to go off and seek the fellowship of another assembly and there
to be received, is to ignore the authority of Christ and to contravene the
unity of the Spirit, which we are enjoined to endeavour to keep (Eph. 4:3). An
act of church discipline is not simply the act of the assembly; when rightly
used it is the exercise of the authority of Christ carried out in His Name and
power (I Cor. 5:4). The realization of that is itself sufficient to enforce the
solemn and binding character of the discipline.
THE OBJECT OF DISCIPLINE
Godly discipline ever
has restoration in view. There is a double purpose, immediate and ultimate:
immediate, that the erring one may learn the mind of the Lord in deep exercise
of heart, be brought to a new apprehension of the sinfulness of sin, and be
granted the grace of repentance and confession; ultimate, that complete
restoration may be established. "All chastening seemeth for the present to be
not joyous but grievous; yet afterward it yieldeth peaceable fruit unto them
that have been exercised thereby, even the fruit of righteousness." The saints
are to see to it that "that which is lame be not turned out of the way, but
rather be healed" (Heb. 12:11-13).
Following on, and in contrast to, the
solemn warning in Gal. 5:19-21, that those who practise the works of the flesh
shall not inherit the Kingdom of God, comes the earnest command concerning a
believer, who, being off his guard, has fallen into sin: "Brethren, even if a
man (i.e., any member, of either sex, of the church) be overtaken in any
trespass, ye which are spiritual restore (a metaphor from the setting of a
dislocated or broken bone) such an one in a spirit of meekness; looking to
thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another's burdens (here
especially the burden of the sense of shame and dishonour), and so fulfil the
law of Christ" (Gal. 6:1, 2). Where such pastoral care brings the erring one to
judge his sin, he will have been "gained."
That the restoration of an
erring one is to be the earnest and prayerful desire of the whole assembly is
touchingly set before us in the second chapter of the second Epistle to the
Corinthians. Punishment had duly been inflicted, as enjoined in the first
Epistle (2 Cor. 2:6), but the grief which had been caused was to be succeeded
not only by forgiveness but by a ministry of comfort, "lest by any means such
an one should be swallowed up with his overmuch sorrow" (verse 7). Nay, more,
the saints were to confirm their love toward him. A wholehearted and godly
restoration indeed! But this had another purpose, that of preventing Satan from
getting an advantage of the saints. The adversary is persistently set against
the spiritual welfare and testimony of a church; not only by marring the
witness through sin, but by preventing, either through a spirit of harshness,
or through negligence, the restoration of one who has been disciplined.
THE EFFECT ON THE ASSEMBLY
The necessity for the act of discipline should bring an assembly down before
God in deep heart-searching and humiliation. There is need of this, if only for
this reason that had the saints been in a healthy spiritual condition, walking
in fellowship with the Lord and in separation from the world, the sin for which
the expulsion had become necessary might never have occurred. The church at
Corinth had failed at first in this, and had not rather mourned. Besides, the
loss of a fellow-believer under such circumstances means essentially a defect
in the church as such. For, as with the physical body, if one member suffers,
"all the members suffer with it" (I Cor. 12:26).
Further, unjudged sin in
the church mars the testimony in the eyes of the world, and gives "occasion for
the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme." Achan's sin prevented Israel from
standing before their enemies (Josh. 7:13). To be evil spoken of for the sake
of the Name of Christ is to have "the Spirit of glory and the Spirit of God"
resting upon us (I Pet. 4:14). But where the fair escutcheon of His Name is
marred, and legitimate ground is given to the world to point the finger of
derision, there is call for deep and constant humiliation in the sight of God,
and for such measures as will do all that is possible for the removal of the
blot. Where there is a real sorrow and brokenness of spirit on the part of the
gathering, the act of expulsion will not be simply looked upon as the removal
of an offender; instead, the priestly service will be undertaken of eating the
sin offering in the holy place, making the sin our own and judging it as though
it had been committed by us; judging, too, the lack of that spiritual power
which might have prevented the erring one from falling into sin. "If we
discerned ourselves, we should not be judged."
AS TO DOCTRINAL ERROR
The Apostle speaks of
delivering the offender unto Satan. There was probably special apostolic
authority in that respect. Such an act cannot be regarded as simply involving
the alternative of being put into the sphere of the world (as that which lies
in the evil one) instead of the church, for the object of that particular
discipline in the case of I Cor. 5 was "for the destruction of the flesh."
Again, in regard to the evil of the doctrinal error by which Hymenmus and
Alexander were guilty of making shipwreck concerning the faith, the act of
delivering them to Satan was wrought by the Apostle himself and not by a
church. Yet one who holds evil doctrine is to be the subject of church
discipline equally with one who is guilty of the sin of immorality. The church
at Pergamos received blame from the Lord for having in their midst those that
held the doctrine of Balaam and those that held the doctrine of the
Nicolaitans. His reproach makes clear that the church was to put them away
(Rev. 2:14-16).
Similar discipline is enjoined where a believer is "a
fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an
extortioner." No company is to be kept with such; the saints are not to eat
with them; that is to say, they are not to have social intercourse with them.
Such dissociation necessarily involves the same attitude as in the particular
instance dealt with in the chapter. In all these cases a course of unjudged sin
is indicated, not sin that has been repented of.
Certain forms of
discipline called for are of a less severe nature than that of excommunication.
Those who are disorderly are to be admonished (I Thess. 5:14). Believers are to
withdraw themselves "from every brother that walketh disorderly" (2 Thess.
3:6). Timothy is exhorted to reprove them that sin, in the sight of all, "that
the rest also may be in fear" (I Tim. 5:20). "Unruly men, vain talkers and
deceivers" are to have their mouths stopped. Those who are so careless and
unspiritual as to give ear to such, are to receive a sharp reproof (Tit. 1:10,
11, 13).
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN: GIVING
The opening verses of the Epistle of James contain a description of God as "the
giving God." That is the literal rendering of the phrase "God who giveth," in
the statement "God, who giveth to all liberally" (verse 5). "The giving God" it
is almost a title. How abundantly it is illustrated in the Scriptures! "He gave
His only begotten Son"; "How shall He not also with Him freely give us all
things T' His giving is the outflow of His love "God so lovedthat He gave." He
gives "liberally" (James 1:5), "freely" (Rom. 8:32), "richly" (I Tim. 6:17).
LIKENESS TO THE FATHER
One of
the prominent lessons in the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount, is that by
shaping our conduct in obedience to the Lord's precepts our character will be
conformed to that of our Heavenly Father. We shall be truly "Sons of our Father
which is in heaven" (see, e.g., Matt. 5:45). Not merely children but "sons."
That is to say, those who not only are born of God but share His character, and
so represent Him worthily, bearing the impress of the Divine parentage. As then
His grace is such that He is "the giving God," liberal in His giving, the same
spirit of liberality is to characterize us. When Christ sat over against the
treasury and observed "how the people cast money into the treasury," He was
really noticing the kind of giving which corresponded to God's mode of giving.
The poor widow cast in all that she had. Was not that like the gift the Father
gave in giving His Son? He was His all. Giving is a test of character.
MOTIVES
The world forms its
estimate according to the getting: Christ's estimate is measured by the giving.
The world reckons what sum is given. Men consider the amount: Christ considers
the motive. With the world the great question is: What does a person own ? The
Lord takes notice as to the use a person makes of it. How much is suggested by
the Lord's remarks about the widow's offering! "This poor widow cast in more
than they all: for all these did of their superfluity cast in unto the gifts:
but she of her want did cast in all the living that she had" (Luke 21:3, 4).
There was little, if any, sacrifice in their case. They were as comfortably off
afterwards as before. She had nothing left. Theirs was a matter of religion;
hers was a matter of love and devotion to God. After all, the great criterion
was, not how much she gave, but how much she kept. What a difference between
their balance and her nothing!
Love and devotion to God! That imparts the
real value to giving. And this perhaps serves to explain why no command as to
the amount is laid down for believers. To obey a command stating the amount or
proportion would be easy, but what exercise of heart would there be? Where
would the motive he? Loyalty would be superseded by mechanical religion. Love
would be replaced by formalism. Both individuals and local churches would lose
their sense of the high motive which should inspire in the offering a loving
response to the love of the great Giver Himself.
TITHES
It may be asked, Was there not a Divine
command for the Israelites? Was it not enjoined upon them to give tithes? And
if so, is it not appropriate for the Christian to give tithes? In the first
place, the Israelites paid much more than a tithe. In addition to the three
tithes specifically mentioned, namely, that given to the Levite (Lev. 27:30,
with Num. 18:21-24; Deut. 14:22-27), there was the further tithe at the end of
every three years, which was also for the stranger, the fatherless and the
widow (verses 28, 29). Some hold, indeed, that the tithes mentioned in the
three passages referred to, were disconnected, and this is supported by the
Talmud. To these tithes, however, there must be added other offerings; those of
the sin offering, the burnt offering, and the firstfruits. Mal. 3:8, for
instance, speaks of "tithes and offerings" (lit. heave offerings). It has been
computed that an Israelite's total offerings would amount to about one-sixth of
his income. One writer has even put it at a fourth. If such was the case with
those who were under moral obligations, what response should there be on the
part of those who are under the power of the love that expressed itself at
Calvary, and still burns in the heart of Him who gave Himself there, and is
ministered by the indwelling Spirit of God!
Again, were giving in the case
of the believer simply a matter of tithes, those whose income is very
considerable would give far less proportionately to their income than those
whose income is very small. The former, of their abundance, would so give that
there was little sacrifice. With the latter there might be a danger lest the
regulation might militate against the inspiring motive. Yet, if the Israelites
paid tithes, that amount may well be regarded as a minimum of our offerings,
and from the willing heart there will be a further response according to the
ability that God gives. Whatever set proportion there may be as a firstfruits,
the proportion will be increased with increasing facilities and possibilities.
ROBBING GOD
How intensely
solemn is the closing book of the Old Testament, written about one thousand
years after the giving of the Law! The people of Israel, instead of charging
themselves, in a spirit of repentance towards God, with their own sins as being
the cause of the troubles that had come upon them, were adding to their guilt
by reproaching God and blaming His prophets. Among the various sins by which
they were transgressing the Law, there was the non-payment of tithes. How
grievous an offence this was in His sight, is made known in the stirring
remonstrance in chapter 3. To His gracious command and promise, "Return unto
Me, and I will return unto you," they asked, "Wherein shall we return?" To this
the Lord replied, "Will a man rob God? Yet ye rob Me. But ye say, Wherein have
we robbed Thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse; for ye rob
Me, even this whole nation. Bring ye the whole tithe into the storehouse, that
there may be meat in Mine house, and prove Me now herewith, saith the Lord of
hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a
blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. And I will rebuke
the devourer for your sakes." What a gracious attitude! There was God, waiting
all the time to pour out upon them a copious blessing. Their selfishness was
hindering their own prosperity. In their meanness they were acting against
their own real interests. Let them give God His due. Let them bring both their
tithes and their offerings, and they would find that what was retained for
their own requirements would far more than meet their needs.
THE WINDOWS OF HEAVEN
The opening of the
windows of heaven! How significant a metaphor! Had not the windows of heaven
been opened in judgment in such a manner that the waters prevailed greatly upon
the earth (Gen. 7:18)? The language that describes that act of judgment becomes
used to depict a promise of blessing. "Prove Me now herewith." The command is
an appeal to faith. It holds good today. Shall we not take God at His Word? To
say that we are not under the Law but under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as
if thus to make an excuse for doing less than what was done under the Law is to
ignore the words of the Lord Jesus, "Think not that I came to destroy the Law
or the prophets: I came not to destroy but to fulfil." The Lord spoke eighteen
parables, and no less than sixteen of these deal with the use of money. Let us
remember His remarks at the conclusion of one of them: "If therefore ye have
not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the
true riches? And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another's, who
will give you that which is your own?"
(Luke 16:11, 12).
CORPORATE GIVING
Turning now to the Epistles, it is well to remind ourselves
that Divine grace has not only placed us individually in Christ, He has made us
members of churches, or assemblies, giving us local corporate privileges and
responsibilities. There is this also to bear in mind, that what is recorded of
the circumstances, for example, in the church at Corinth, is not simply an
account of what took place there, but, as part of the God-breathed Word, is
permanently left for the instruction of the saints throughout the present era.
The circumstances may vary, but the principles and commands remain binding.
When the Apostle wrote his first Epistle to that church, there was deep poverty
among the saints in Judea, and the churches in different lands were called upon
to send relief to them. Their very poverty has been the means of giving us
permanent instruction on the subject of giving. That the call for assistance
was not limited to Corinth, but was given to other churches in Greece, and to
the churches in Galatia, marks the universality of the instruction.
CERTAIN PRINCIPLES
The injunction
given to the churches in Corinth and else. where to have fellowship with the
needs of their brethren in another country, was as follows: "Now concerning the
collection for the saints, as I gave order to the churches at Galatia, so also
do ye. Upon the first day of the week let each one of you lay by him in store,
as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come" (I Cor. 16:1, 2).
More closely to the original the command is, "Let each one of you lay by him,
storing as he may prosper." While this conveys the thought of storing at home,
yet whatever was laid by was to form part of a united offering, as in verse 1.
However varied the details may be in differing circumstances, the
principles are clear. The giving was to be regular ("upon the first day of the
week"), universal ("each one of you"), proportionate ("as he may prosper"). As
to the first of these, there is clearly an intimation that liabilities were to
have been duly met, and that a fresh week was to be begun by an offering to the
Lord as each had prospered. There was to be a definite purpose of heart (2 Cor.
9:11), and, as the giving was to be "to the Lord," there would be a constant
exercise of heart to avoid anything like extravagance or carelessness in the
matter of spending, so that there might be the more set aside for the Lord
instead of less. Thus the gift would be "an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice
acceptable, well pleasing to God."
OUT OF
DEEP POVERTY
While there had been a readiness on the part of
the church at Corinth to respond to the exhortation given them at the close of
the first Epistle regarding their offerings, and their immediate zeal had
stirred up the churches of Macedonia, yet the latter had evidently responded
still more thoroughly to the appeal made to them; and this notwithstanding that
they were in much affliction and were suffering great privations. In addition
to their immediate hardships, three civil wars, waged in their territory by
rival claimants either to Dictatorship or Imperial power in the Roman world,
had devastated the whole district. Yet "their deep poverty" (lit., poverty down
to the depth), and with it, indeed, "the abundance of their joy," had "abounded
unto the riches of their liberality" (2 Cor. 8:2). They are accordingly set
forth as an example to the church at Corinth.
THE GREAT EXAMPLE
Appeal is made, however, to a higher standard
than even the liberality of those churches. The great incentive is the grace
shown in the poverty of Christ and the enrichment we have derived from it. "For
ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for
your sakes He became poor that ye though His poverty might become rich" (2 Cor
8:9). With this we may put into connection that other word on grace in 9:8,
"And God is able to make all grace abound unto you; that ye, having always all
sufficiency in everything, may abound unto every good work" (five comprehensive
"all's" and "every's," representing various forms of one word in the original).
The example of Christ (8:9) and the power of God (9:8)! These are designed to
kindle our liberality. That the grace of ministering to need is specially in
view is clear from what follows: "As it is written, He hath scattered abroad,
he hath given to the poor: his righteousness abideth for ever."
VARIOUS TERMS
There are seven
different words used in these two chapters to describe this ministry. (1) The
first indicates the spirit which characterized the saints: haplotes,
rendered "liberality," is really singleness" (8:2; see R.V. margin, and 9:13);
it suggests that Godwardness in the giving that makes His will and glory the
one great motive. (2) The gift is called a charis, "a grace" (verses 4,
7, 19); the word also denotes "thanks" (see 9:15), and the suggestion may be
that their gift of grace was the outcome of gratitude to God. (3) The same
verse speaks of the gift as "fellowship" (koinonia, a having in common,
8:4, and 9:14; the word is rendered "contribution" in Rom. 15:26), indicating
that it is not simply a matter of giving to others what we have and what they
have not, but of sharing what belongs to us all. (4) Again, it is called a
diakonia, a "ministry," or administration" (8:4; 9:1, 12, 13); the root
meaning of this word is "to pursue"; it suggests earnestness in the
undertaking. (5) In 8:14 it is spoken of as "an abundance" (perisseuma,
lit., that which exceeds, and so, in this respect, that which is more than
one's actual requirements). (6) In 8:20 it is described as a "bounty"
(hadrotes, not simply "an abundance," but that which is full, fat, rich,
bountiful). (7) In 9:5 it is called "a blessing" (eulogia, see margin);
what is indicated now is the goodwill which finds expression in the gift; the
spirit of the giving is thus transferred to the gift itself.
Cumulatively the description is very full. It marks four great aspects of the
giving. These are:(a) the Godward view in (1) and (2); (b) the attitude towards
the recipients in (3) and (7); (c) the character of the act itself in (4); (d)
the nature of the offering in (5) and (6).
CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY
Now while the offering
especially in view in the Epistles to the church at Corinth was contributed by
individuals, each according to his ability, it was an expression of the
fellowship of the local church. So were the gifts sent to Paul from Philippi
(Phil. 4:14, 18). Since, then, in addition to our giving privately for any
particular object about which the Lord may exercise our hearts, we also have a
corporate responsibility as members of assemblies or churches, some means must
be adopted of collecting the contributions. There is no method particularized
in the Scripture for the actual "collection." The method, whether by passing
round a receptacle or otherwise, is not the important point. What matters are
the principles laid down in the Word of God to guide each believer and the
whole company in its united offering.
All things are to be done "decently
and in order." We may render this injunction as follows: "Let everything be
done in a becoming manner and according to Divine ordering." Honesty is to
characterize us collectively as well as individually. We are to take thought
for "things honourable in the sight of all men" (Rom. 12:17). There are
liabilities, such as rent, heat, lighting, and caretaking, to be met. These
must not be allowed to get into arrears.
THE
POOR
Nor must we neglect "to do good and to communicate." There
are the indigent widows and other poor saints to be cared for, according to the
teaching of such passages as I Timothy 5. There are the claims of poverty in
other localities, claims enforced by the Epistles to the Corinthians. There are
servants of God who "for the sake of the Name" have gone forth, "taking nothing
of the Gentiles" (3 John 7); in the case of those who visit churches for the
ministry of the Word, as called of God for such service, honesty will provide
their travelling expenses (unless the gift is for any reason refused),
liberality will rejoice to do more, it will set them forward on the journey
"worthily of God" (verse 6), welcoming them so as to be "fellow-workers with
the truth" (verse 8). There may be those who, giving themselves to pastoral
work, and recognized in that capacity, stand thereby in need of material
assistance.
THE WORK OF THE GOSPEL
As to those who have gone forth to "regions beyond," the
exhortation in 2 Cor. 10:15, 16, is significant in the matter of practical
fellowship in this respect. With what delicate suggestiveness the Apostle says,
"having hope that, as your faith groweth we shall be magnified in you. . . so
as to preach the gospel even unto the parts beyond you" I Their faith was to
find its increase in practical cooperation in the furtherance of the gospel.
Were they to be content with having received its benefits themselves? What
about the people lying in darkness beyond them? The object of the appeal was
not personal support; nor was it made merely for the sake of evangelism; it
did, however, bring home the responsibility of an assembly regarding material
assistance in gospel work in other regions, and it remains on record as a
message to all assemblies. There can be no more suitable time for the offering
collectively to be made than at the gathering for the Lord's Supper; for the
material offering is associated with the worship and praise which characterize
the occasion. Yet the fact remains that, according to I Cor. 16:2, the money
then brought together is but the united application of what has already been
set aside for the Lord at home.
THE HANDLING
OF GIFTS
As to the handling of the gifts which have been
brought together, how important are the Apostle's words, "avoiding this, that
any man should blame us in the matter of this bounty which is ministered by us:
for we take thought for things honourable, not only in the sight of the Lord,
but also in the sight of men" (2 Cor. 8:20, 21)! Ezra's care provides a lesson
for us in this connection. He separates twelve "of the chiefs (R.V.) of the
priests," weighing the offering, reminding them of their holy character, and
charging them to watch, and keep the gifts until they weighed them before those
responsible in Jerusalem (Ezra 8:24-29). So Paul sees to it that at least more
than one brother should deal with the offering from the church at Corinth.
"Whomsoever ye shall approve by letters (i.e., to the saints in Jerusalem),
them," he says, "will I send to carry your bounty to Jerusalem," "and if it be
meet for me to go also, they shall go with me" (I Cor. 16:3, 4).
In all
our giving we do well to follow the example of the saints in Macedonia, who
"first gave their own selves to the Lord" (2 Cor. 8:5). They were His already
by redemptive grace, but they evidently made it a special matter of realizing,
in this presentation of themselves, that they were not simply giving for a
particular purpose, but were doing it unto Him. Just as we are individually and
collectively in true fellowship with the Lord, so we shall be "faithful in the
unrighteous mammon" and so we shall be entrusted "with the true riches." If
that attitude towards Him characterizes our giving, we shall be cheerful
givers, whom "the Lord loveth." "The liberal deviseth liberal things; and in
liberal things shall he continue" (Isa. 32:8).
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN: THE CHURCH, THE CHURCHES, AND THE SCRIPTURES
The
opinion is sometimes advanced that we owe the Bible to the Church, and that the
authority of the Church is superior to that of the Scriptures. Certain facts
and considerations will serve to disprove the validity of such a view. They say
that Christ did not write a book but founded a Church. That, however, does not
serve to show how the New Testament Scriptures were produced or by what
authority they come to us.
THE PREPARATION
What the Lord accomplished in the days of His flesh prepared
the way for the production of these Scriptures after His Ascension, and under
His authority, by the operation of the Holy Spirit. They were written at
intervals, not by the Church, but to the churches and to individual believers
by Apostles or those associated with them, each writer acting in his individual
capacity under the power of the Spirit of God. By Divine providence the work
was accomplished during the lifetime of the Apostles, the period in which local
churches were first being formed. Thus the Spirit's operation was twofold, one,
the planting of local churches by oral ministry, the other, the addition of
"God-breathed" writings to the similarly produced Scriptures of the Old
Testament. By this means the oral instruction was put in permanent form for
believers generally.
THE NECESSITY FOR THE
SCRIPTURES
An inference sometimes drawn, that the oral
instruction would have continued in its pristine purity, even had there been no
Bible, is without foundation; it is disproved indeed both by apostolic
forewarnings and by facts of history. Already the Apostles were speaking of
"the many corrupting the Word of God" (2 Cor. 2:17), of those who were wresting
the Scriptures (2 Pet. 3:16); they were foretelling of men who would arise from
within the churches, "speaking perverse things" (Acts 20:30), and of the advent
of "false teachers" bringing in "destructive heresies" (2 Pet. 2:1),
predictions which subsequent events fully substantiated. The teaching of Christ
and His Apostles was designed, then, not to remain merely oral, to lie open to
the variable and wayward traditions of men and the seductive antagonism of
errorists. The Apostle Peter definitely states, for example, that one great
object of his Second Epistle was, that after his decease the things of which he
wrote should be called to remembrance (2 Pet. 1:15). There was tremendous
opposition to the spread of the Scriptures, yet the activities of false
teachers and the production of spurious writings was a means of stirring the
faithful to assiduous efforts to keep the true and reject the false. Thus, the
Divinely inspired writings of the New Testament stood out in their true
character as such in immediately post-apostolic times.
THE MODE OF PRODUCTION
The churches were the
recipients (and therefore so with the Church), not the producers of the
Scriptures. Nor were they produced by the subsequently organized system of
ecclesiasticism known as the Church. While the general recognition of the
writings of the New Testament, as being inspired of God alike with those of the
Old Testament, was progressive, yet the principle by which they respectively
received recognition was acknowledged from the first.
THE CANON AND THE APOCRYPHA
The limits of the
Canon were fixed in the earliest times, not by hostile attack, but by usage,
and that long before the convening of ecclesiastical Councils and their
decisions. The usage, too, was based, not on tradition, but on immediate and
Divinely imparted knowledge of the authenticity and Divine authority of the
writings. Their general and regular use in the churches was determined, not by
the issues of controversy, but by their recognition as Divinely given, by
spiritual men (I Cor. 2:14).
As to the Apocryphal books and the writings
of the Apostolic Fathers, certain facts mark a radical distinction between them
and the inspired writings of the New Testament. As external witness, the
Canonical books as thus incorporated are supported by the concurrent testimony
of believers from the earliest days; in contrast to this, for the support of
the Apocryphal writings only scant and isolated opinions can be adduced.
Further external evidence lies in this, that, under the stress of Imperial and
inquisitorial persecution, while Apocryphal writings were readily handed over,
as superfluous, to officials for destruction, no pains were spared to preserve
these of the New Testament.
As to internal evidence, an unbiased perusal
of the contents sufficiently reveals the gulf which separates the two both in
character and in time, both in the relation of the books one to another and in
matters of doctrine. The Apocryphal writers themselves bear testimony to this.
Further, there is an essential, untransferable unity in the inspired Canonical
writings which is conspicuous by its absence from Apocryphal books, to say
nothing of the convicting, soul-transforming effects of the former, with their
appeal to the conscience, and the fellowship they establish with the Father and
with His Son Jesus Christ. These Scriptures endorse no doctrine not visibly
embodied in the lives of true believers.
The earliest references to the
New Testament writings show that they were received as of Divine authority by
the churches, and that a complete Canon of truth, conveyed orally by the
Apostles, providentially became fixed in their writings by the immediate
operation of the Spirit of God.
THE CANONS OF
TRUTH AND SCRIPTURE
Thus there was an indissociable connection
between the Canon of truth orally taught and the Canon of Scripture. The
contents were identical as long as the oral teaching was adhered to, and was
free from perverting influence. Neither the Canon of truth nor the Canon of
Scripture derived its authority from the churches, much less from the Church as
an organized body. The Scriptures, then, were given by the individual writers
raised up of God for the purpose, and were not imparted through the Church as
such. From the earliest post-apostolic times the churches lapsed from their
purity. Yet the authority and value of the Bible remained unaffected by the
apostasy. The written truth stands out, indeed, all the more clearly in its
permanent value by reason of the promulgation of error.
There is ample
evidence, too, that copies of all the books comprising the New Testament were
made in abundance and circulated in all the churches from the very first. The
work of copying them out was carried on assiduously by numerous copyists. So
that at the beginning of the second century the Scriptures as we have them were
in general recognition and use. The production of spurious writings served only
to throw into contrast those that were genuine. Hence the God-breathed
Scriptures of the New Testament, issued, in their manifest authenticity and
Divine imprimatur, from the conflict of the contending forces of truth against
error. What the Apostle Paul had declared concerning divisions in the church at
Corinth, is true of the Scriptures, "There must be heresies ... that they which
are approved may be made manifest among you" (I Cor. 11:19). The exposure of
the false served but to manifest the true.
NOT BY CHURCH COUNCILS
It was not the Church that settled the
Canon of the New Testament. It is true that the Council of Laodicea, held in
the latter part of the fourth century, gave in its sixtieth canon a list of the
books of the Old Testament, and that the third Council of Carthage, held in
A.D. 397, gave a list of all the books in the present Canon of Scripture, but
it is not due to ecclesiastical councils that we possess the Bible as we have
it. The Canon had been practically fixed by the common use of Christians long
before, and was not formally marked out by any combined investigation. These
ecclesiastical Councils only confirmed the antecedent recognition of the
Canonical books, a recognition manifest in earlier post-apostolic writings and
acknowledged in general by the earliest churches in contrast to writings which
had received no such general recognition. The recognition was primarily the
effect of the testimony, in this very respect, of the Scriptures themselves.
They bear, to the spiritually minded, their own witness to their validity.
Thus, for instance, the Apostle Peter bears witness at the end of his second
Epistle to the validity of all the Epistles of the Apostle Paul as being of
equal authority with "the other Scriptures," a clear intimation as to the
existence, among the churches, of a well-known and recognized number of
inspired Scriptures.
To show how worthless the decisions of Church
Councils regarding the Canon can be, the Council of Trent went so far as to
admit the Apocrypha into the Old Testament Canon. The authority of Church
Councils was derived and enforced, not as the result of a process of
Spirit-guided conformity to the teaching of Christ and His Apostles, nor by way
of development in adherence thereto, but through departure from the faith and
through prejudicial influences. The traditions of men, were as contradictory to
the revealed will of the Lord as the traditions of the Pharisees and Scribes
were in the nation of Israel in its degenerate state.
Appeal is made to the
analogy of the Church Council in Jerusalem recorded in Acts 15. But the record
given in that chapter shows that the nature of that gathering was vastly
different from that of the ecclesiastical Councils established in later
centuries. When the Apostles and elders met in Jerusalem to decide a question
that was troubling the saints, their decision was given, not as from their own
authority, but in the light of Holy Scripture. They did not add to truth which
had already been given by God and recorded in the Scriptures. They simply
confirmed what had already been revealed.
It becomes us, then, in days
when the sufficiency of the Bible is being called in question, to adhere to the
instruction of these Holy Scriptures, and to hear constantly the voice of God
through them, remembering that they are able to make us "wise unto salvation
through faith which is in Christ Jesus," and are "profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness: that the
man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work" (2 Tim.
3:15-17).
CHAPTER NINETEEN: LOCAL CHURCH
CHARACTERISTICS
The object of this chapter is to give a brief
statement of some special characteristics of a "church of God," that is, a
local church formed according to the Scriptures.
JESUS IS LORD
A local church is, firstly, a
company of believers where Jesus Christ is acknowledged as Lord. This is
stressed, for instance, in the opening of the first Epistle to the Corinthians,
where "the church of God at Corinth" is addressed as "them that are sanctified
in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that call upon the Name of our
Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their Lord and ours." Six times in the first
few verses the title "Lord" is mentioned, and it forms an outstanding feature
of several parts of the Epistle. At the beginning of the twelfth chapter the
acknowledgment of His authority as Lord is noted as the distinguishing mark of
believers, and the Apostle terminates that section, at the end of chapter 14,
by declaring that the things which he has written are "the commandment (sing.
number) of the Lord." Subjection to His will, as revealed in the Scriptures is,
then, to be the guiding principle in all matters.
THE HOLY SPIRIT'S PREROGATIVES
Secondly, the
prerogatives of the Holy Spirit in His presiding and directing power are
acknowledged. To Him it belongs, for example, to raise up, qualify and equip
bishops (otherwise spoken of as overseers, or elders) in each local church.
Thus to the elders of the church at Ephesus the apostle says, "the Holy Ghost
hath made you bishops, to feed (or, rather, 'tend,' i.e., act as pastors in)
the church of God" (Acts 20:17, 28). To Him it belongs to control the exercise
of the functions of oral ministry in the assembly, "dividing to each one
severally even as He will" (1 Cor. 12:8-11), and to lead the worship of the
saints. They "worship by the Spirit of God" (Phil. 3:3, R.V.). If we relegate
the direction of collective worship and the oral ministry of the Word of God to
a presiding minister, we quench the Spirit, deny His prerogatives and hinder
the free operation of His power. So is this the case, on the other hand, where,
even if such ministerialism does not exist, men act in the impulse and energy
of the flesh, under a sense of imagined freedom! But two wrongs do not make a
right. The will of the Lord is served neither by spurious liberty nor by
ministerial officialism.
THE WHOLE WORD OF
GOD
Thirdly, there is scope for the teaching and practice of
the whole Word of God. A local church is spoken of as "the pillar and ground
(or 'stay) of the truth" (I Tim. 3:15); that is to say, of whatsoever is taught
in the Holy Scriptures, each truth being apprehended and maintained
consistently with the unity of doctrine contained in the whole Volume. A church
will adhere to the Word of God as such, not to a creed or set of doctrines
drawn up therefrom, nor to the dictates of a Synod or ecclesiastical Council,
or other form of centralized authority governing a number of churches. Guided
by the Scriptures of truth, a church is the Divinely appointed medium by which
the truth relating both to doctrine and godliness of life is maintained and
practised. In this connection we may mention the ordinances of Baptism and the
Lord's Supper, which should be taught and carried out according to what is set
forth in Scripture.
THE PRIESTHOOD OF
BELIEVERS
Fourthly, the priesthood of all believers is
recognized. The teaching of Christ and His Apostles is plainly contrary to the
appointment of an order of human priests acting in and on behalf of a church.
The Apostle Peter testifies that all believers are constituted "a holy
priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus
Christ." They are likewise "a royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:5, 9). The Apostle
John testifies that Christ has "made us to be a kingdom, to be priests unto His
God and Father" (Rev. 1:6). That anyone should be appointed to administer the
sacraments, or dispense the elements, contravenes the character of that which
was instituted by Christ; it is a departure from apostolic instruction, and is
the outcome of mere human tradition. There are not two orders of human priests
in the Church. All believers are constituted priests "to offer up spiritual
sacrifices," such as the "sacrifice of praise" and the presentation of
themselves to the Lord for His service. An overseer, or bishop, is not a priest
in virtue of his being a bishop. He is a priest with all the members of the
church as being together set apart for this purpose.
SEPARATION FROM THE WORLD
Fifthly, separation
from the world is maintained. The character of the gatherings, whether in the
matter of worship or in any other respect, is to be free from that which
characterizes the world. Both in collective testimony and in that of individual
life the exhortation applies, "Be not unequally yoked together with
unbelievers" (2 Cor. 6:14-18). In this passage the relationship of believers to
God as Father receives special stress, as that which is made good in the
experience of believers, in the fulfillment, on God's part, of all that He
designs to be as a Father to His children. The rhetorical questions "What
fellowship have righteousness and iniquity? or what communion hath light with
darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what portion hath a
believer with an unbeliever?" (verses 14, 15) are accompanied by the following
command with promise: "Wherefore come ye out from among them, and be ye
separate, saith the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; and I will receive you,
and will be to you a Father, and ye shall be to Me sons and daughters, saith
the Lord Almighty" (verses 17, 18). This can be enjoyed only where separation
from the world is maintained, and where the testimony of the assembly is not
marred by worldly schemes, arrangements and methods. For the assembly, as well
as for the individuals who compose it, the exhortation of the Apostle John
holds good: "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If
any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is
in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the vainglory of
life, is not of the Father, but is of the world" (I John 2:15, 16). Where the
fear of the Lord is not realized in the fulfillment of this exhortation, there
may be a form of godliness, but the power of it will be denied and wanting (2
Tim. 3:5).
HOLY LOVE
Sixthly,
the saints dwell together in holy love. This is the Divine hall mark for
believers. It is what the Apostle cans the 46still more excellent way" than
even the possession of "greater gifts" (I Cor. 12:31). Believers are indeed to
"desire earnestly spiritual gifts," but they are to "follow after love" (14:1).
"Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace," they will
learn to walk in love even as Christ also loved them, a love that, negatively,
refrains from all that is inconsistent with the claims of Christ, and,
positively, is exercised in denying self and seeking the good of others.
THE POWER OF GOD
Seventhly,
the power of God is manifested. Only where believers dwell together in love,
and where the Holy Spirit is not grieved by that which is inconsistent with the
Word of God and the character of Christ, can such power actually be manifested.
There may be a show of power without that real possession and exercise the
effect of which will meet with approval at the Judgment Seat of Christ. Divine
power is both repellent and attractive, keeping out that which is false and
corrupting, and drawing sinners to the feet of Christ and restoring backsliders
to repentance and acknowledgment of the truth.
GOSPEL ACTIVITY
Eighthly, an aggressive Gospel
activity is maintained, not only in connection with the testimony of the
assembly itself, but in the spread of the truth in other regions. The church of
the Thessalonians is a standing example in this respect. The company had not
long been formed. The assembly there was comparatively in its infancy, and yet
the Apostle could say, "from you hath sounded forth the word of the Lord, not
only in Macedonia and Achaia, but in every place your faith to Godward is gone
forth." To show to what extent their testimony had proceeded, the two provinces
mentioned were together about the size of England. The church at Corinth does
not seem to have been so aggressive, and the Apostle found it necessary to
exhort them to cooperate in regard to his desire to preach the gospel even in
the parts beyond them (2 Cor. 10:15,16, RV)
THE HOPE
Ninethly, the saints live in constant and earnest
expectation of the return of Christ. In this the church of the Thessalonians is
again commended; they had "turned unto God from idols, to serve a living and
true God," and "to wait for His Son from Heaven" (I Tbess. 1:10). The Lord
keeps His coming before the church in Philadelphia as an incentive to their
maintenance of the faith. He says, "I come quickly: hold fast that which thou
hast, that no one take thy crown" (Rev. 3:11). The weekly remembrance of the
Lord in "the breaking of bread" likewise has this in view: assemblies are
commanded thus to proclaim the Lord's death "till He come" (I Cor. 11:26).
CHAPTER TWENTY: THE POSITION AND SERVICE OF
SISTERS
What is put as the second verse in the eleventh chapter of
I Corinthians really begins a new section of the Epistle; here the Apostle
takes up matters concerning the relative position of men and women in the
church, and certain abuses which had arisen in other respects as well. He
introduces the subject by a threefold statement regarding headships. "The head
of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of
Christ is God."
A SIGN OF
AUTHORITY
This forms the basis of injunctions concerning the
gatherings of assemblies that the heads of men are to be uncovered and those of
women are to be veiled. The reasons given are connected with the creation of
man: "For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is
the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man
is not of the woman; but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created
for the woman; but the woman for the man."
The reference is to the
Divine designs regarding authority and subjection; there is no suggestion of
any distinction between men and women in their individual relation to Christ as
believers. In that respect there is equality: "Neither is the woman without the
man, nor the man without the woman, in the Lord" (verse 11). In regard,
however, to the subject dealt with in the chapter, it is otherwise. Under the
Headship of Christ man acts in his capacity as "the image and glory of God." He
is not only a visible representation (image) of God, but is in himself a
manifestation of God's excellence. There may be a representation without glory;
or there may be a manifestation of glory without a visible representation. Both
are combined in man. In the assembly, therefore, man is to be unveiled.
"The woman is the glory of the man." This signifies that without her there is
not the full manifestation of what the man is. She is his counterpart and
complement. The woman, too, sets forth the higher relationship of the Church to
Christ. When Rebekah learned from her servant that the man who was walking in
the field to meet them was his master, "she took her veil and covered herself"
(Gen. 24:65) not only an indication of her position with regard to him who was
to become her husband, but an intimation that her beauty was for him alone. The
Church is not only derived from Christ but is designed to be set apart entirely
for Him.
HEADSHIP AND SUBJECTION
In a gathering of the saints, then, the veiled head of the
woman symbolizes the Headship of Christ and the subjection of the Church to
Him. Her place of subordination is thus at the same time a position of glory
and honour. It is one of subordination indeed, "for the man is not of the
woman; but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created for the woman;
but the woman for the man" (verses 8 and 9). What the woman possesses is
derived from him. Eve was formed from Adam; she was bone of his bone and flesh
of his flesh (Gen. 2:23). Her name "Isshah" was derived from his, "Ish." The
first "I will" in the Bible is in God's declaration concerning Adam: "I will
make him a help meet for (i.e., answering to) him" (Gen. 2:18). The last "I
will" is in the invitation to John: "Come hither, I will shew thee the bride
the wife of the Lamb" (Rev. 21:9). There is a significant connection between
the two "I will's."
In the assembly, therefore, that the women have their
heads covered is emblematic of the higher relationship of the Church to Christ.
The matters of praying and prophesying in the gatherings of the saints are
referred to in this passage incidentally. They do not here form the special
subject with which the Apostle is dealing. What are in view here are general
principles concerning the position of men and women in the church. Injunctions
regarding the public utterances of men and women on occasions when the church
assembles are laid down in the 14th chapter. Obviously the present passage does
not state that women are to veil their heads at a given time during the
gathering of the church, for their heads are to be veiled throughout the whole
time of such gatherings, and in this respect he says, "For this cause ought a
woman to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels" (verse
10, R.V.).
The witness given to the angels in the display of the Divine
counsels of grace is of the utmost importance in God's sight. The Lord is now
making known, through the Church, "unto the principalities and the powers in
the heavenly places the manifold wisdom of God" (Eph. 3:10). The veiled
condition of the woman, then, betokens the authority of Christ. She has a
twofold covering. There is the temporary one, that of the veil, in regard to a
gathering of the church, and put on for the immediate purpose, and there is the
permanent one consisting of her long hair. "Doth not even nature itself teach
you that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonour to him? But if a woman
have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given to her for a
covering." It is the glory of a Christian woman in this, that she thereby
symbolically sets forth the Headship of Christ and the subjection of the Church
to Him.
The careful consideration of the details of this passage in the
light of the great principles of verse 3 will show that this is no
insignificant matter. How could it be so when it is the express will of the
Lord? Again and again, things which may seem to be of comparative
insignificance, are, when brought within the scope of the teaching of Holy
Scripture, seen to comprehend truths of the very highest order.
When the
Apostle says, in the conclusion of this part of his subject, "If any man
seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God"
(verse 16), he is not by any means suggesting the abandonment of the injunction
as to the veiled condition of the woman and the unveiled condition of the man,
but to a custom of contending. This will be clear from the true significance of
the word "seemeth." It has the meaning of "making a show," not, that is to say,
merely of appearing to do something, but of making a display of it. People at
Corinth would know exactly to what Paul was referring. Instead, therefore, of
saying anything by way of retracting what he had just taught, he is confirming
it by stating that these things do not come within the scope of contention.
A SECOND SIGN
With regard to
the second principle, that "the head of the woman is the man," what was said in
regard to chapter I I in connection with the significance of the veiled heads
of the women in the gatherings of the church, likewise applies to the
injunction given at the close of chapter 14, "Let the women keep silence in the
churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in
subjection, as also saith the law" (verse 34). Subjection implies authority, or
headship. Accordingly, as the veil is a sign of authority (11:10) so is the
silence of the women. That this injunction does not refer to abstention from
conversation or chattering, is shown both in the context and in the use of the
word rendered "keep silence" in verse 28. There it is a command for men under
certain circumstances, to refrain from oral ministry. Exactly the same meaning
attaches to the word here. Moreover, if the reference was to conversation it
would be equally unsuitable for men to engage in it during a meeting as for
women. Their position of subjection would not be exhibited by their abstaining
from chattering while the men did so.
THE
GLORY OF THE SIGNIFICANCE
Nor, again, is the prohibition a case
of curtailment of what some consider to be women's rights. On the contrary,
when understood in the light of the teaching concerning Christ and the Church,
the silence of the woman, in respect of oral ministry in the gathering, is seen
to be a matter of holy privilege and high honour. This must be the case with
anything that sets forth the glory of Christ, and it holds good in the
circumstance, as it did in chapter I I regarding the veil on the head, that
"the woman is the glory of the man." The Apostle does indeed base his
injunction upon God's decree recorded in Gen. 3:16, "thy desire shall be to thy
husband, and he shall rule over thee" (for it is to that verse that the words,
"as also saith the law" apply). Yet what was decreed of God in the garden of
Eden, as a result of transgression, is, while still binding, transformed into a
matter of glory and honour, as a result of the work of the Cross and the
exaltation of Christ as "Head over all things to the Church." The subjection of
the woman remains, but it is a subjection which sets forth the relation of the
Church to Christ.
FALSE IDEAS
All theories advocating that these exhortations were Paul's prejudiced
opinions, are at once ruled out by what the Apostle himself says, as are those
which argue the inapplicability and impracticability of the teaching in regard
to the present time. "If any man," says the Apostle, "thinketh himself to be a
prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto
you, that they are the commandment of the Lord" (verse 37). It is not therefore
a case of the opinion of Paul, or of an out dated restriction, but of the
binding will of the Head of the Church. The interpretation that the injunction
was simply a prohibition against chattering on the part of women is not borne
out by the context; it is largely an inference derived from a supposed custom
of the time, always a precarious way of handling Scripture. As was pointed out
above, the word rendered "keep silence" is the same as that in verse 28, and is
not to be understood in any different sense; there the meaning is obvious; the
silence enjoined was abstention from the form of ministry referred to unless
there was an interpreter.
Again, in regard to the explanation, "for it is
not permitted unto them to speak," the idea that the speaking was chattering or
conversation is quite arbitrary and unreasonable. The word rendered "speak" is
the same as in verse 27. We must avoid, therefore, any paraphrasing of the
passage which gives the idea of a prohibition against mere conversation. If
that were the case the good behaviour of the men, in their abstention from
conversation during the meeting, would likewise indicate that they were thereby
in subjection, a conclusion patently contrary to the significance of the
passage.
Again, the Apostle is not simply dealing with disorder in the
gatherings of the church; he is doing much more, he is giving instruction as to
varying forms of ministry. The additional injunction that, if the women desired
to learn anything, they were to ask their own husbands at home, is a
continuation of the instruction concerning the attitude of subjection, and not
an enforcing of a supposed prohibition against conversation. Whatever was said
in the eleventh chapter as to the praying or prophesying of women must
therefore be read in the light of the injunction in this fourteenth chapter,
where the phrase "in the church" is added. It was absent in 11:4. Broad
principles were laid down there; here details of the actual assembling are
taken up.
The injunction is confirmed in the second chapter of I Timothy.
That the Apostle is dealing in that Epistle with the behaviour of women in the
church and not simply in the home, is clear both from the context in that
chapter and from what is said in the third chapter as to the object for which
the Epistle is written. There he says that he is writing to give instruction
"how it is necessary (i.e., for believers the word "thou" as in the A.V. is not
in the original; nor is the word 64men" as in the R.V. the reference is to the
conduct of all in the church) to behave in the house of God, which is the
church of the living God (i.e., the local assembly), the pillar and ground of
the truth" (3:15).
PRAYING AND
TEACHING
The 8th verse of the 2nd chapter enjoins that "the men
pray in every place, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and disputing." The
exhortation is especially, then, as to a manner of life or conduct, and in
connection with this the consistent conduct of women follows immediately: "In
like manner, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefastness
and sobriety; not with braided hair, and gold or pearls or costly raiment; but
(which becometh women professing godliness) through good works."
There is
no reference here to public prayers on the part of women. This is mentioned
only in regard to men. That not merely conduct in general is in view, but also
those occasions when the church assembles, is clear from what follows: "Let a
woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to
teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness."
Here
again the admonition is not against chattering, but against public teaching on
the part of women in mixed gatherings. This is not a case of undue literalism,
but of a plain meaning. That there is no reference to singing and no
possibility of any inconsistency with such a meaning where women join in
singing, should be perfectly clear, where mere quibbling is avoided. The same
is to be said in regard to Bible Class and Sunday School work.
THE GREAT OBJECT
What the Epistle is enjoining
is the need of holiness on the part of all in the assembly. The reasons given
for the injunction that a woman is not to teach or to have dominion over a man,
but to be in subjection, are, firstly, the order in which God created man,
"Adam was first formed, then Eve;" secondly, that Eve, the second in creation,
was the first in transgression, "Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being
beguiled hath fallen into transgression." The effect of her transgression was
the Divine declaration that she should bring forth children with sorrow. Here
the Apostle says, "She shall be saved through the childbearing, if they
continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety." This assurance
has been understood in different ways. It seems not unlikely that what is
referred to is that, by bearing children and so being saved from becoming a
prey to the vices which characterized the world at that time, and which are far
from being absent today, the woman who brought up a family for God would thus
take her place in the maintenance of the witness given by the local church.
WIDOWS AND AGED WOMEN
In the
5th chapter of this Epistle special injunctions are given concerning the
responsibility of the local church with regard to widows. Incidental to the
main instructions there are set in striking contrast the godly manner of life
of women who fear the Lord and those who fall into the snare of the Adversary.
The former obtain a good report through having diligently followed every good
work, both in their home life and in ministering to the needs of others,
washing the feet of the saints and relieving the afflicted. Those who turn
aside after Satan are such as "learn to be idle, going about from house to
house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things
which they ought not" (verses 10-13).
The Apostle is occupied here as
elsewhere, not with the spiritual privileges and blessings of the believers,
but with the moral duties which are essential to a good witness in the world on
the part of the church. The enemy must not have just cause for casting
aspersion upon the saints. Widows, indeed, that is to say, who were in indigent
circumstances and lacked relatives to support them, were to be maintained by
church gifts. Those who had children or grandchildren were to be maintained by
them. If any one had widows in his household or family, and did not provide for
them he had "denied the faith" and was "worse than an unbeliever" (see the R.V.
of verse 8). A charge is given as to the age at which a widow was to be
enrolled, that is to say, put on the list of those who were recognized by the
assembly in the way referred to.
Whatever were the particular
circumstances of that time at Ephesus, including the possibility that there
were widows who gave themselves to the care of orphans, binding themselves to
abstain from marriage, the great point of instruction in the passage is that of
piety in the home and in the church. The women who marry are to bear children
and rule the household, and give none occasion to the adversary for railing.
Their manner of life is to be such that, should they arrive at a condition of
need, their circumstances may receive practical recognition on the part of the
assembly. Similar instructions concerning conduct are given in the Epistle to
Titus. The aged women are to be "reverent in demeanour, not slanderers nor
enslaved to much wine, teachers of that which is good; that they may train the
young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sober minded,
chaste, workers at home, kind, being in subjection to their own husbands, that
the word of God be not blasphemed"
(Titus 2:3-5, R.V.).
FAMILY
RELATIONSHIPS
In that section of the Epistle to the Ephesians in
which the obligations connected with family relations are enjoined, certain
facts are especially noticeable.
Firstly, in each case, whether of
husbands and wives, or parents and children, or masters and servants, the
obligation rests especially upon the spiritual connection with Christ. The
wives are to be in subjection unto their own husbands "as unto the Lord." The
husbands are to love their wives "even as Christ also loved the Church."
Children are to obey their parents "in the Lord." The fathers are to bring them
up "in the chastening and admonition of the Lord." Servants are to be obedient
to their masters "as unto Christ" and are to render service as "unto the Lord."
Masters are to act towards their servants in the realization that Christ is
Master both of themselves and of those who serve them, and that there is no
respect of persons with Him. Everything is to be regulated, then, not simply on
the ground of natural conditions but particularly in view of the relationship
to Christ and in recognition of His authority. Natural ties, so far from being
cancelled by spiritual conditions, are raised thereby to a higher level.
Secondly, the order, wife and husband, children a servants and masters, is not
given so as to stress particularly the duties of the weaker, but by way of
emphasizing the corresponding duties of the stronger. There is to be mutual
subjection in the fear of Christ (verse 21, R.V.).
Thirdly, the discharge
of all these duties comes under the great command, "be filled with the Spirit."
For believers are filled with the Spirit, not by passing into some ecstatic
state, but by ordering their lives in the apprehension of their relation to
Christ and of His authority as their Lord.
Fourthly, the obligations of
wives to husbands and husbands to wives are laid down first, inasmuch as that
relation is the very foundation of human life as Divinely designed. The Creator
of man and woman assigned to each that position which would fulfil His
beneficent will for each toward the other and for all the conditions of a well
ordered family life.
The adornment of the women was to be "the hidden man
of the heart, in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which is
in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner aforetime the holy
women ... who hoped in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their
own husbands: as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him Lord" (1 Pet. 3:4-6). The
Divinely appointed counterpart of this is that the husbands dwell with their
wives "according to knowledge, giving honour unto the woman, as unto the weaker
vessel, as being also joint-heirs of the grace of life" (verse
7).
THE SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE
Fifthly, it is the relation of husband and wife that is used to provide a
comparison of the relation between Christ and the Church. "The husband is the
head of the wife, as Christ also is the Head of the Church, being Himself the
Saviour of the Body" (Eph. 5:23). Authority and control rest in the husband.
From him the wife receives protection and counsel, just as the Church does from
Christ.
The second point of comparison in the simile is that "as the
Church is subject to Christ" so the wives are to be to their husbands in
everything; that is to say, in everything belonging to the sphere of conjugal
obligation. The third comparison has to do with affection. The husbands are to
love their wives, f4even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave Himself up
for it; that He might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water
with the Word, that He might present the Church to Himself a glorious Church,
not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and
without blemish. Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their
own bodies. He that loveth his own wife loveth himself."
The love that
leads to the union should perpetually maintain it in harmony and happiness. The
headship of the husband is never to be exercised at the expense of love to the
wife. The love of the husband towards his wife is to be a reflection of
Christ's love to the Church, self-abandoning, tender, ardent. In the glory and
purity of the Church the love of Christ finds the realization of the designs of
Divine grace.
The next point in the simile is that in nourishing and
cherishing his wife as himself, the husband is acting as Christ does towards
the Church, "because we are members of His body" (verses 29, 30). The
nourishment given by Christ is by the Holy Spirit through the Word, the Word of
God viewed here in its various parts, each part of the Holy Scriptures being
used from time to time for the required purpose. As Eve derived her being and
her life from Adam and physically was of his body, so spiritually are believers
of Christ. The very life of Christ is extended to all the members. He is made
unto them "wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and
redemption." "When Christ Who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall ye
also with Him be manifested in glory."