THE CHURCH

By Timothy Glover


The church is the body of Christ, according to Ephesians 1:22,23. This is obviously not literal. The church has the likeness of a physical body where Christ is its head and those in Christ, the saints, are the members of that body. The church as a body is descriptive of certain characteristics of Christ’s followers. It points to the rule and authority of Christ who directs the body and the body’s submission to Him. It also is used to refer to the oneness of the body (unity). There is one body (Eph. 4:4). Finally, it is used in the Bible to describe the value of each member, various abilities or gifts that each member possesses and the care that is shown by each member for every other member.

The church is also called the temple of God (1 Cor. 2:16-17), the kingdom (Col. 1:13, Mathew 16:19), the bride of Christ (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:23-32) and other descriptive terms that illustrate its nature. As noticed last month, these figures represent the people rather that some institution apart from people. The institutional concept of the church is illustrated by Catholicism who understands the church as the means of salvation. Not only do they conceive of the church as the means of salvation, they also believe the New Testament to be the product of the church instead of the church being the product of the New Testament. The institutional view of the church puts a society between Christ and his people. If people want the blessings of forgiveness and other blessings of God’s grace, they must come to the church who alone can give the sacraments. This is not taught in the New Testament. Nothing stands between the people and God except Jesus Christ, our great High Priest (Heb. 4:14; 8:1). A person can learn the truth from the revelation of God, obey it, and be saved without ever being contact with a local church. Just read of the Ethiopian in Acts 8 as an example. When he obeyed the gospel, the Lord added him to the church, a saved body of people (Acts 2:47).

As the church grew and maintained its identity through the years, it has slipped into another institution/denomination. For example, many people would think that if a “church of Christ” preacher did not baptize you, you just were not scripturally baptized. (Others may think that if you have a sign on the church property that does not say CHURCH OF CHRIST on it, you just do not have a scriptural name.) Some have the concept of preachers needing to be sent by the church in order for their work to be approved. Still, language betrays institutional thinking when we speak of going to a Church of Christ when we were away on vacation. Would we expect anything less? And, wouldn’t it suffice to say that we met with the brethren at Southside or assembled with the saints in Knoxville or worshipped with the church at Republic? Others use the phrase, “what the church teaches” or “what the church believes.” A common conversation may sound like this: “What does your church teach about _______?” “Well, our church teaches …..…..” We should not be interested in what the church teaches or believes but what the Bible teaches. How many will answer someone who inquires of your religious affiliation, “I’m Church of Christ.” I have heard my brethren justify the giving of a work to the local church that would replace individual obligation by saying, “Let the church get the glory.” Unintentionally, we may have accepted the institutional concept. Not wanting to make light of the importance of the church, we have made statements that logically imply the institutional idea of the church. My friends, Jesus did not shed his blood for and purchase for himself an institution. He died for every individual Christian.

If the “churches of Christ” went into complete apostasy, would an individual have the right to study the Bible for himself and learning what he must do to be saved, obey it without resorting to that apostate church? Could he, then, teach others what he learned and baptize them? Could they form themselves into a local church and take the Lord’s Supper without the approval of any man or group of men? If service to God hinged upon the approval of an institutional “church of Christ,” then the answer would be “NO!” If those two men had to claim succession from the mother church to serve God acceptably, they could not form themselves into a local church. But, succession is not the sower. It is in the seed (Luke 8:11-15). The seed is the word of God and that word has the power to produce a child of God. That child can teach others who may become children through the same process.

These obedient believers are members of Christ’s church throughout the world and throughout every generation, the church of Christ that is non-denominational and non-institutional. When two or more individuals of this kind associate with each other to worship and advance the gospel individually by teaching and collectively by supporting men in the fields, then they form an organized entity, the local church. This entity has oversight and work and it is authorized to act according to God’s decree. Yet, Christ has not abrogated his throne for elders to rule over local churches. Some think that if the elders propose a work for the church whether authorized or not, members are obliged to follow them. This is not the teaching of the word of God! We are individually and directly responsible to our king because no man or group of men (institution) stands between us and God either now or in the judgment day.



Return Home




LESSONS ON THE CHURCH

The Church The Kingdom Belongs to: Restoration
Standard Local Members of Unity of
Authority First Day Lord's Day Stephen