FOUR CHURCHES
INTRODUCTION
The word “church” refers to people who are called out on some definite principle(s), and come together for some definite purpose(s). In the Scriptures, the particular people(s) who are thus called out, and the principle(s), and purpose(s) under which they are called out, must be determined from the context of the particular passage(s) (local context) you are studying. A common mistake made by many Baptists (as I identify with Baptist peoples) in our day is that of applying the same grand usage of the word to every context where the word “church” is found. This kind of failure to rightly divide the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), and failure to compare spiritual things with spiritual (1 Corinthians 2:13), has led to Baptist “Bride-ism,” Romanism, Campbellism (”Church of Christ” and “Disciples of Christ,” American denominations which teach baptismal regeneration) and many other cults and factions. Failure to distinguish between various usages and the difference between peoples according to context (see 1 Corinthians 10:32) is also the cause of the general weakness, in our times, with regard to Scripture knowledge and application. Many pastors, and others, spiritualize and devotionalize the Scriptures away, to hold either to a modern evangelical or ecumenical use for the word “church” (sometimes called the “Universal Church”), or to a century-old, hyper-local church position (which I call “Carrollism” after B.H. Carroll), which tends to promote an extreme successionism and, in the end, denies the fullness of Christ. Both extremes come preconceived to the Scriptures, based on motive: the motive of the given adherents.
Temples (or gatherings) of Pagan worship are called “churches” (Acts 19:37), because they housed (or included) people called out and assembled; and that, to worship a false deity. They were meeting the basic definition of the word “church” as they were called out and assembled. Is the King James Bible mistaken by using the word “churches” in Acts 19:37? Certainly not! The Holy Spirit gave us such references so that we would know better than to believe that the word “church” always fits the “Baptist Brider’s” or the Vatican’s definitions (there are similarities between the doctrines and leadership styles of Rome and those of the “Baptist Briders,” especially in Roman Catholic-dominated countries where Baptist Briders have operated).
The root of the English word “church” is akin to the Scottish and Old English “kirk,” identifying something that “belongs to the Lord.” The word itself, as used in the English King James Bible, however, does not determine which lord, the true Lord God, or a false deity. This must be determined (and properly so) from the context.
It is interesting to note the New Testament books in which the word “church” is never used. They are Mark, Luke, John, 2 Timothy, Titus, 2 Peter, 2 John and Jude. The books containing the most frequent uses of the word “church” are Acts, Revelation, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians and Ephesians. The reasons will yield fruitful study, and so we give this listing. We don’t have space here, however, to follow this line of study out. You may want to do that yourself.
I ask my readers to consider one additional thing by way of introduction to our subject. If you were a Grecian, reading a Greek Bible, you would run across the Greek word “ekklesia” in the Old Testament for congregation or assembly. If you were a Hebrew, reading a New Testament translated into Hebrew, you would read the word “kahal” instead of either the word church or ekklesia. This is interesting in that it means that it would be difficult for Baptist-Briders to use the same arguments in those languages that they use by their manipulation and construction of English definitions.
James Christopher Smith was correct when he wrote that the word “church” “is never applied to a building or edifice, but always to people; never to the place of assembly, but to those assembled; not to the place of worship, but to the worshippers.”
The following will be a study from the exact words of the King James Bible. It will disregard tradition and the Baptist handbooks. The author encourages all readers to examine the Scripture references as you come across them.
Now on to visit the Four Churches. First we meet........
THE CHURCH IN THE WILDERNESS
Acts 7:38
The first “church” in the Bible consisted of the Children of Israel; an assembly which was called out of Egypt into the wilderness for definite purposes (e.g. Deuteronomy 4:1-13). This is the church in the wilderness, led by God’s servant Moses (Acts 7:38). Israel was corporately God’s firstborn son (Ex. 4:22) and God called that son out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1). Yes, Hosea prophesied of God’s only begotten Son, Jesus (Matthew 2:15), because Israel itself, as a corporate Nation, was an Old Testament type of Christ, according to the flesh. The fact that Hosea chapter 11 refers to the Nation of Israel coming out from under Pharaoh’s bondage, however, is in no way negated. The “church in the wilderness” (Acts 7:38) consisted of a single chosen and assembled Nation. In the case of Israel, not all of its individual members were saved, especially not in any New Testament sense. Not all of the Israelites in that “church” were the spiritual seed of Abraham.
To emphasize once again, in Acts 7:38 we read about a church that was a nation. This church was a political as well as a spiritual entity, and at times the spiritual part was all but non-existent. This church was a kingdom among the kingdoms of the earth. This church had earthly geographic and political boundaries. This nation-church had physical land grant promises made to it by God Himself. This church had laws that governed all earthly aspects of day-to-day life, similar to civil and criminal codes in modern nations. The Church of the current dispensation, the Body of Christ, on the other hand, has no earthly political position, as did Israel, because the Body Church is a heavenly people, not an earthly people. Also, no local church can be likened to the political earthly church spoken of in Acts 7:38 as far as its geopolitical presence. God promised no territory, political or otherwise, to either the Church which is Christ’s Body, or to any New Testament local assembly! The New Testament Church, while made up of “strangers and pilgrims on the earth” (Hebrews 11:13; 1 Peter 2:11), is subject to the laws of the various countries where Christians might be residing.
Christians in our current dispensation are not instructed to build separate Christian political entities reminiscent of Old Testament Israel. This mistake was made by Calvin in Geneva, and is attempted by the British Israelites and Postmillennial Reconstructionist cults. A nation may be overwhelmingly Bible-influenced and Christian-influenced, as was the United States at the time of its founding, but the New Testament Church has no land or territory promises, the likes of those God made to Abraham and his physical seed. Pastors are not kings on earth, nor are they earthly priests. Although faithful believers shall reign as kings and as priests unto God in the Millennial Kingdom, we do not assume any such position before we have our new bodies (Philippians 3:21). Pastors, therefore, are wrong to take to themselves the prestige or stature of kings or of priests. The error of men in the ministry assuming priestly position over other believers began to occur more and more from the third century, and that is why there is a Vatican State as a political entity with a king sitting, calling himself the Bishop of Rome and the Vicar of Christ. There are many pastors today who use Old Testament Israeli national kingdom passages to give themselves superiority and power over common people in their churches. They are mini-popes and their churches are mini-Vaticans.
Some of the Israelites were mere specks of the “dust of the earth” (Genesis 13:14-17), enjoying in their earthly lives God’s blessings and protection upon the physical Nation through which He would bring forth His Savior and King Son (the promised Seed of Genesis 3:15; Galatians 3:16). Those were mere earthly seed. Others, though, followed the faith of Abraham, and are typified by the untellable stars of heaven (Genesis 15:5, 6). Those will, in the resurrection and regeneration of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-7; 54:13-17; Jeremiah 31:34; Hebrews ch. 8; Ezekiel 36, 37; etc.), ascend to be more than a mere earthly people, along with receiving the land and Kingdom promises made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, and Christ. This, though, is not the New Testament Church (the Body of Christ).
Israel was a called out “congregation,” and thus could be called a “church” when mentioned in historical reference in the New Testament. It is the use of New Testament literary terminology to describe an Old Testament entity. See Exodus 16:2; 29:44; 33:7; Lev. 10:17; 16:33; Psalm 22:22; Isaiah 14:13; Joel 2:16. Just take your concordance and start looking up all of the Old Testament references to “congregation,” and you will see that this word describes Israel.
Israel was an “assembly,” again meeting the definition of a church (See Ecclesiastes title). As with “congregation” use your concordance and run the words “assembly” and “solemn assembly(ies)” and “assemble.” Examples include Isa. 11:12; 48:14; Jer. 4:5; Eze. 11:17; Deu. 9:10; 10:4; 18:16; Ps. 107:32; 111:1; Lev. 23:36; Num. 29:35; Neh. 8:18.
Treat what we are writing here with this caution: Israel, as an Old Testament “church,” should never be mistaken for any New Testament Church, or for the local churches of the New Testament era. Israel must never be equated with the “church” of Covenant Theology (of the Calvinistic, Amillennial or Postmillennial Reformers). We are allowing contexts to determine the usage of the term, “church.” We are not mixing up distinct bodies of people. The Holy Spirit keeps distinct bodies of people distinct (1 Cor. 10:32).
The members of this Old Testament Church, Israel, were those physically born in the seed line of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob with the promises and privileges thereof. Members could be added from among Gentiles—”strangers,” under certain God-ordained conditions, including circumcision (Ex. 12:48; 33:34; Josh. 5:2-5; many other passages). Membership could also be stripped (Ex. 12:19; Lev. 17:8; Num. 15:30; 1 Corinthians 10:5; many other passages).
Secondly, we examine….
A GAP
At present, we are in a “prophecy gap,” which began with Israel’s final rejection of her King (Acts 7-28). As examples (among very many)….
A gap of centuries exists between “And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:”—gap—“But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.” (Isaiah 11:3, 4). Read from verse 1 through 9, and you will see both the First and Second Advents of Jesus Christ spoken of as if having taken place without any interruption. But we know that there was indeed an interruption—a gap—between the two. Verses 4-9 have yet to be fulfilled. Do you not see why it is important to teach that there is a prophetic gap in many Old Testament passages?
Note the gap in prophetic events between “Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen.”—gap—“For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground; I will pour my spirit upon thy seed,… (Isaiah 44:2, 3).
A gap in prophecy exists between “…and to make reconciliation for iniquity (the Cross of Christ),” — gap — “and to bring in everlasting righteousness,…” (Daniel 9:24).
We are living in a parenthetical period of time between “After threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself” – gap – “and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city...” (Daniel 9:26).
It is a gap between “the sufferings of Christ” – gap – “and the glory that should follow” (1 Peter 1:11).
We are in a gap between “save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns” – gap – and “I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation [church] will I praise thee” (Psalms 22:21, 22).
We are in a gap between “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to....proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD,” – gap – and “the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;...” (Isaiah 61:1, 2; Luke 4:18-21).
It is a gap even in Satan’s attempts at destroying the work of God between “…and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.” – gap – “and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God,….” (Revelation 12:5, 6).
This gap (or parentheses) will end with the removal of the Body of Christ (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 15:51, 52; Philippians 3:21; Titus 2:13).
AN ETERNAL PROVISION FOR PROPHECY’S INTERIM
But wait! God certainly knew that Israel would falter and reject the offer of the King and of the Kingdom. So there had to be a provision in the purposes of God for this eventuality. That provision was ‘something’ hid in God from the foundation of the world (Ephesians 3:1-7; Romans 16:25), but purposed in Christ from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:3-14; etc.). Christ’s Body has to do with God’s eternal purposes in Christ; as eternal as the relationship between the Father and the Son (See Ephesians 3:11 and compare Proverbs chapter 8.). Neither Israel nor the local churches of the present era are spoken of in the same fashion.
The ascended Head of the Body of Christ revealed this “provision” first and directly to the Apostle Paul from Heaven. It is altogether a new thing relative to the prophetic purposes for Israel and of our Lord’s earthly ministry. Paul emphasized that there is advanced revelation to what was given during Christ’s earthly sojourn –
“Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh
[regarding Christ’s earthly ministry]:….
“yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh
[Gospels, early Acts period (See Hebrews 2:3)],….
“yet now henceforth know we him no more.
[No man reading this can know Christ after the flesh]….
“Therefore if any man be in Christ
[’in Christ’ is a concept unrevealed in Matthew, Mark, Luke], ….
“he is a new creature: old things are passed away
[kingdom methods and principles, holy days, meats and drinks, new moons and sabbath days, carnal ordinances, &c. ] ….
“behold, all things are become new”
[a completely new thing, previously un-revealed] (2 Corinthians 5:16).”
This shows us also that 2 Cor. 5:17 has much more in view than an outwardly cleaned-up church member. We are certain that it includes God’s workings in the testimony of his children. Some preachers, however, are not aware that 2 Cor. 5:17 means much more than a hair cut, shave, shirt ‘n tie, and sitting on the front pew.
And that leads us to the third Church in our study.......