The Community Of Believers: 2nd Edition

By Timothy Glover

This book is about identifying the people of God and questioning whether the word "church" correctly describes them. The religious landscape in America is filled with different churches hoping to build their membership. They all have requirements that are expected in order to be in good standing with the

• Language: English
• Publisher: URLink Print & Media, LLC
• Release date: Aug 31, 2021
• ISBN: 9781647539245

Book preview

THE

COMMUNITY

OF

BELIEVERS

An Assessment of the Church from the Beginning of the Ekklesia to the Development of the Church Institution

TIMOTHY J. GLOVER

The Community of Believers

Copyright © 2021 by Timothy J. Glover. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any way by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the author except as provided by USA copyright law.

The opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily those of URLink Print and Media.

1603 Capitol Ave., Suite 310 Cheyenne, Wyoming USA 82001

1-888-980-6523 | [e-mail]

URLink Print and Media is committed to excellence in the publishing industry.

Book design copyright © 2021 by URLink Print and Media. All rights reserved.

Published in the United States of America

Library of Congress Control Number: 2021916323

ISBN 978-1-64753-923-8 (Paperback)

ISBN 978-1-64753-924-5 (Digital)

13.07.21

Contents

Preface

Introduction

Chapter 1: The Tradition Of The Apostles

Pattern Of Inspired Words

Pattern Of Approved Practice

Human Tradition

Chapter 2: Historical Development Of Human Traditions

Value Of Traditions

Use Of Traditions

Predictions Of Apostacy

The Era Of The Church Fathers

The Church And Politics

Protestant Inheritance

The Influence Of Pagan Culture On The Institutional Church

The Unreformed Error Of The Reformation

Glossary Of Terms

Chapter 3: The Called-Out

Definition: Ekklesia

Use Of The Word Ekklesia

Earthly Pictures Of A Spiritual Reality

Chapter 4: The Institutional Church

Definition Of The Word Institution

Identifying Marks Of The Church Institution

Individuals Vs. The Institution

Admittance Into The Body Of Christ Vs. The Local Church Organization

The Work Of The People Of God (Ekklesia)

Chapter 5: Saints In A Specified Location

Saints Living In A City

The Beginning at Jerusalem

Other Saints Living In Various Cities

Interaction Of Saints In A Given Area

Translating Ekklesia With Our English Word Congregation

The Pattern Of Togetherness And Its Importance

The Place Of Togetherness

Purpose Of Gatherings

Work Of The Saints

Three Areas Of Work For Saints Usurped By Local Churches

Chapter 6: The Alternative

Individual Responsibilty

Today’s Application Of Workers In First Century

Conclusion Of Today’s Application

Bibliography

Appendix: Features Of The House-Church Movement

PREFACE

Many books have been written that writing another seems to contribute nothing that has not already been expressed. I wrote this back in 2002 while living in Springfield, Missouri. Since then, I’ve divided the material into three books and have made a few corrections. Otherwise, very little has been added since the first typing. After much prayer and thought, however, I have decided to share it in hopes to free those steeped in their denominational trappings. It is designed to introduce thoughts for further review and study, rather than answering all questions regarding the topic of the church. It is only designed to create an opportunity for future evaluation and study.

The goal is that it causes the conscientious disciple of Christ to reevaluate his or her understanding of our relationship to God and one another. Its emphasis is on individual responsibility in a community fellowship of believers. Some will be able to relate to these concepts, while others will not only relate but agree with them, whole-heartedly. I have observed that many Bible students have accepted in private what they would never acknowledge in public. Most all of us have been conditioned to think a certain way without questioning its origins because we are deeply rooted in our religious tradition. Most are often forced into a situation wherein we are forced to "say and do not. I was one of those preachers who attempted to teach from the pulpit and in-class discussions to make God real in our daily lives. Realizing that I needed to be a model of what I was preaching, I came to believe that it was not possible to be that example and continue to be a hired preacher for a local church.

Another problem is the tendency to segment our lives into neatly packaged categories of responsibility. As a result, we wear many different hats that we are constantly changing to fit the occasion. One of those categories is church-life. This life consists of the meetings at the appointed times for worship services, the rare potlucks or singing at someone’s home, or some proposed program of church-work. It was all treated as a church function and all the membership would wear the right hat because it fell within that category. To my dismay, on the rare occasions that members met outside of a church function to shop or for entertainment, a different hat was worn. In that context, little or no reference was made to God and His Word, and rarely did someone think to say, Let’s talk to the Lord, together. If preachers entered this context, one of two things happens. The preacher will either fit in with them, providing another side of him that is not often seen, or he will casually mention God, refer to a passage of Scripture, and seek to engage them in spiritual thoughts. If they are about to eat something together, he may offer to lead them in prayer. Having company with him may be awkward or catch some off guard with hesitation about whether they need to find their other hat or change the conversation. After all, they’re not in church. Others will politely listen without being engaged because preachers are expected to do this kind of thing. So, if they are comfortable leaving God out of their thoughts and conversations, they know not to ask the preacher a biblical question because he will stifle the party.

The above example illustrates the disconnection between God and many church members who are only interested in spiritual things when going to church at the appointed times. Consequently, it is foreign for them to consider singing to one another and praying with one another in their daily walk of life because it is associated with the context of church-life. Consequently, when reading Colossians 3:17and Ephesians 5:19, they will apply it to church-life. When reading 1Timothy 2:12, they will apply it to their own home and husband, because Paul is addressing an individual, rather than a church.

So, we hope to debunk society’s standards of living and the expectations of church membership that will challenge the status quo and the measure of true discipleship.

Another related purpose of this work is to develop a close-knit relationship with brethren daily and offer some solutions that may affect our thoughts about leadership. A call for spiritual leadership in the fellowship of everyday life is not accomplished by highly emotional sermons on a Sunday morning. Edification is accomplished by a daily spiritual diet of sharing the Word of God. Those who merely go to church to get their pep rally for the week to get them back on track need to keep coming back as it has no lasting effect. The masses still keep coming to church to get their fix by ingesting just the right dosage of religion for the week. I have observed, after thirty years of preaching, that those who are growing in the Lord are those who have committed themselves to be disciples of Christ and are being transformed without my pulpit work. The general effect of pulpit preaching is not transforming their daily life. They are continuously off track or indifferent to the need to repent. Yet, many among both leaders and non-leaders seem to be content with this method that measures faithfulness by the human criteria of faithful church membership. Yet, these faithful members of the church make little or no life-altering changes in conforming themselves to the image of Christ. The message that is sent is this: Just keep coming to hear those toe-stomping sermons, and you’re OK.

Among those who are motivated to do more or give more are already living that sacrificial life of service. Encouraging members to give only encouraged the members who were already giving to give more.

In seeking solutions to these sundry problems, it occurs to this writer that the solutions are found in a basic return to New Testament teaching and practice that raises the expectations of individual discipleship above that of church membership in a local organization. In the first edition of this book, I confused the reader by using the word church and defined it by a careful study of the Greek word and its usage.

In this edition, I have chosen to reserve the word church not only as an English mistranslation, but as the proper word to describe the institutional view that was established by man, promoted by false teachers and the church fathers, and defended by reformers of later generations. Anytime we use the word church, we will be using it to define the institution or organization in contradistinction to the body of saved individuals (ekklesia).

I have so many to thank but special mention is warranted to my wife Diane, Grady and Jackie Partin, and Mack Meeks for their support, and feedback during these past few years. Covid 19 has certainly impacted our fellowship but not our longing to be together to share our faith and work in the kingdom.

INTRODUCTION

As the title suggests, we are emphasizing the need for community fellowship rather than church membership. The unfortunate translation of the Greek word, ekklesia has most people using the word church as an adjective. It has reached a point where a church building is now the church, even though most devout members know the difference. When people are not using the term as an adjective, they are using it to describe an organization. The unfortunate translation of the Greek word, ekklesia has caused much confusion about just exactly what Christ built when he built the ekklesia. The key proposition of this paper is that the ekklesia (the Greek word that is translated church) is made up of individuals who have been called out of the world and into a life of holiness.

Many biblical metaphors are used to capture their identity. For example, in relationship to one another; they are family with brothers and sisters, a heavenly father, and an elder brother in the person of Jesus. Concerning their purpose, they are saints, or holy ones. This purpose is not so much accomplished when they congregate in one place, but when each presents his or her bodies as a living sacrifice (cf. Romans 12:1-2). Seen as a body of saved people, they are the called-out ones (ekklesia), chosen of God in Christ. This concept may be properly defined as a collectivity of saved people grouped, congregated, or assembled by God. The use of the word by apostolic writings has nothing to do with congregating physically. Instead, it describes the work of God that collects them into one body, family, or kingdom.

The called out ones can be used in two different contexts; one without limits of time and space or in describing the saved who live in a particular place and time. Caution is advised at this point because the language does not demand that this later use be physically congregated into an organization. They are simply the called out who live in a certain fixed location. If we may speak of a local called out, it is simply the same definition given when applied to the universal concept; that is, saints living among each other and interacting as a wholesome spiritual family would operate.

How we handle the Word of God will determine His approval of us. It requires diligence (2 Timothy 2:15). One of the challenges for every Bible student is drawing out of a first-century context the principles of truth that are applicable today. We are fully aware of not trying to duplicate first-century culture in twentieth-century America. In other instances, the specific conditions of the text are applicable only under the same conditions that are present in the text. Still, other principles have universal application under all circumstances. These principles compose the patterns and examples to follow. Admittedly, even while agreeing on some fundamentals of interpretation, we may still differ. My plea is for an open investigation of truth rather than offering the patented answers customarily given that represent our views and the views of our church. For example, someone asks, What is your position on marriage, divorce, and remarriage? It often resembles a multiple choice question that has four possible answers. Such options force us to choose the best answer from the expected responses. Once we are satisfied with our answer, we begin to think it is the correct answer when it is only the best among the given choices. Serving God is not a multiple-choice test where we pick the best answer offered. We should not be forced to take a position from popular choices, thinking we have no other alternative. If, upon further reflection, the best answer offered does not represent the teaching of the Holy Spirit, why blindly continue in the tradition? Consequently, I am not calling on people to choose the best church among churches. I’m calling people to come out from among them and be separate. As already noted, I do not propose to have all the answers but I appeal to us all to examine the things presented here with an open mind.

Unfortunately, when one offers a view not listed in the multiple-choice question, someone will suggest that the author thinks he has come up with something that no one else has ever seen. The truth of the matter is that several good men and women have been brought to similar conclusions as I, but because the view is not taken seriously as a viable answer, we may be unwilling to present it for fear of causing unnecessary trouble or division. Fear has always suppressed man from following the unconventional as there are too many social and financial repercussions that affect us.

Admittedly, some do appear to seek something new that may excite people and offer an alternative to dead formality. Seeking some unknown solution, a variety of religious trends has relied on marketing methods that do the same thing in different ways. For example, a few have joined the house-church movement for reasons that do not ultimately solve the problems that most disturb them. The mere changing from a church building into a private dwelling does not offer any solutions by itself. Given enough time, some develop a following of people too large for a house to accommodate, and end up at the same place they once despised. Rather than promoting mere change in a frantic search for some missing element, my focus is on personal transformation from the reign of King Jesus in our lives. Therefore, we are neither promoting the house-church movement nor the divisive renegades who are never satisfied unless they are leading the way.

I anticipate some will offer a warning cry about this new false teacher and his new teaching. It has never been my desire to present something new for the sake of being different. However, when I began to see my practices as being different than what can be read in my Bible, the irony is that I was the promoter of a new way. Newness is not measured by the length of our practice or the practice of generations before us. It is only defined as being whatever is contrary to the Word of God. This is a proposition that is distinguished by Catholic teaching that we will briefly explore in the early section of this book. If we espouse another gospel (cf. Gal. 1:6-9), it is new from the standpoint of it being different than what the Spirit revealed, not because it is a recent view reintroduced in our era. The possession of truth is not based on whether you or I am familiar with it or how long it has been taught. Therefore, it is a grave error to assume anything new to us as being unsupported in the Scriptures.

As certain concepts become entrenched in our thinking over time, we may regard them as being equivalent to the Word of God and, therefore, anything different is dismissed and labeled ERROR. For example, Catholicism has, historically, labeled teaching as ERROR when it doesn’t align with the teaching of the church institution. Of course, they live under the assumption that the church institution produced the truth. Protestants and Catholics, alike, are trained to support their practices by proof-texting, a practice that takes passages out of context to prove that our practice is supported in the Bible. Our creeds, whether written or unwritten, become the standard whereby people are labeled liberal or conservative, and radical, extremist or, digressive." These labels are intended to prejudice minds to sway people in our direction. All we need to do is to associate an opposing view to a known heretic or religious movement that is unpopular among our listeners, and we can turn them aside from investigation. For example, who wants to be associated with a movement that thinks they are the only ones going to heaven? By stereotyping and labeling, we can shut down any further consideration for review without ever engaging in a textual study of the Bible.

One naïve approach to this or any other biblical theme is to claim that all we need to do is go by the Bible. Implying that all who differ with us are not going by the Bible solves nothing because those with opposing views claim that going by the Bible is precisely what they are doing, too. It should be a concern of every Christian to be objective and study our own views, critically. The truth is not the truth because we believe it. It’s the truth whether we believe it or not and it is the truth whether we practice it or not. The delusion described in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11 is a description of people who believe they have the truth when they do not. Avoiding this condition requires everyone to love the truth and to long for it like infants that long to be fed (1 Peter 2:2). Loving the truth will cause us to make whatever sacrifice necessary toward not only a better understanding but a willingness to change our views and practices to conform to it. Among the brethren of Asia (Revelation 2-3) who needed to repent, Laodicea arrogantly denied the reality of their sickness. It is so despicable that God is graphically pictured as spewing them out of his mouth. If you are repulsed by it, then you have been led to the appropriate response designed by God. When anything despicable enters our mouth, we will immediately spit and sputter to remove it. God likens those who blindly follow their own way with great confidence as distasteful and worthy of nothing but to be discarded as spittle on the ground. Such people deserve our greatest pity because they are self-deceived and self-condemned.

CHAPTER 1

THE TRADITION OF THE APOSTLES

PATTERN OF INSPIRED WORDS

In any writing, one must begin with certain propositions that serve as a foundation for the writing, such as the existence of God and the inspiration of Scripture, both of which are presumed here. The first proposition is that the Scriptures are verbally inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16-17). The apostles of Christ were Christ’s ambassadors (2 Cor. 5:20) and were promised by the Lord that their teaching would be guided by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26, 15:26; 16:12-13). Paul, who was chosen by the Lord after the twelve (1 Cor. 15:8, Acts 9:15, 26:16-18), explains that the gift of revelation which they speak was in words which the Spirit teaches combining spiritual things with spiritual words (1 Cor. 2:10-13). The Holy Spirit chose the words that would reveal the mind of God to the apostles so that we might read and understand the revelation of God (Ephesians 3:1-3). As was true then, it is still true today that if any man speak, let him speaks as the oracles of God (2 Peter 4:11). These oracles were chosen words of the Spirit that communicated the ideas of God. Paul wrote letters to both Timothy and Titus that they speak things that befit sound teaching (2 Tim 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1) and to hold the pattern of sound words" that was heard from Paul (2 Tim. 1:13-14). I urge you to adopt the words of the Spirit in your speech to convey His thoughts and maintain the ideas and concepts that He has revealed.

If we will agree to this, we will prefer biblical words to describe and define spiritual thoughts that the Spirit desired to convey. In time, speaking as the oracles of God will assist all to communicate more effectively and will prevent using words to convey thoughts that are foreign to the New Testament writers.

PATTERN OF APPROVED PRACTICE

In addition to the pattern of words, a pattern for practice is given through the examples of the apostles. It is our position that the tradition of the apostles forms the pattern for all to imitate. The pattern, however, was not so much concerning the pattern of public worship and the church organization but of the individual lifestyle of a disciple. Yet, it is common for institutionalized religious teachers to use these same examples and apply them to an organization and what it does when gathered. To give some semblance of biblical adherence, most denominational groups follow some of the patterns of the New Testament, and not always because they think they must, but because it accomplishes the image they want to create. For this reason, there is little consistency in the application of which patterns are followed and in what context they are executed. Still, in the face of much abuse, there are too many references to apostolic patterns to conclude that none exists. We will now establish this point from Scripture.

This principle of following the divine blueprint was first taught in the Old Testament.

Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, there is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. (Jeremiah 6:16).

The Lord councils man at the crossroads to ask for the old paths so that he may walk in them. As problems continue to be added to problems, our world is so far removed from the old paths due to layers of rubble as each generation says, We will not walk in the old paths. Refusing to walk in the old paths implies the choice to follow our own path. Yet, given the best construction possible, every proposed solution or thought to improve God’s standard is temporary at best. The reason for it is that each response of human wisdom that appears to improve one area opens new problems in other areas.

We propose a more solid foundation, a foundation built upon the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief cornerstone" (Eph. 2:20). All of us begin with a set of values and foundational principles from which we operate. Just as a building is only as good as its foundation, our practices are only as good as our foundational views. For this reason, we must learn to break through our theological blinders and explore outside our comforts to avoid adding one layer of human wisdom upon another. With each new layer of human advancement, the old paths are buried beneath layers of human wisdom. Often, no matter what decision is made to improve the present system, they are only patches. More meetings, books, and seminars are held to perfect the systems. New programs are developed or entire organizations erected to fill a void or to accommodate the ever-changing norms of our culture. There is only one direction to take – peel away the accumulation of the new and take the path back to the old way. This is not to encourage us to find a pattern for man-made institutions because a divine blueprint does not exist for every human practice. We are only stating that eternal principles of truth have been provided for each individual to apply to his or her life (2 Peter 1:3).

The Reformation era is a good illustration of trying to fix a man-made system. Despite the good intentions of men during that era, the only correct response was to retrace their steps past the Catholic Church to the very beginning. In other words, scrap the entire new system instead of tweaking it and return to God’s simple plan. This concept is foreign to the majority in our culture. They are not interested in returning to the old paths. Even among the few in our world who, like Luther, appeal to the old paths, the task is most difficult because we have accepted varied foundations handed down to us from our fathers. We often presume that an old tradition that identifies our sect/church is the place of origin from which we must begin. The Reformers did it in their day and we continue to do it in our day. I have listened to many a speaker in my tradition make this same mistake as they proudly speak of their fathers and the motto by which they lived and taught.

Lest there be any doubt that the tradition of the apostles form the old paths for us and the established pattern by which brethren lived and interacted with each other, consider the following passages. First, consider the evidence given in 1 Corinthians 11:1-2 that reads,

Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you (cf. Phil. 4:9).

The traditions to hold fast were delivered to them by Paul and they were to imitate (mimic) him. The context of verse one probably goes back to 10:31 where Paul uses himself as an example of seeking the salvation of others rather than pleasing himself. The self-seeking individual would choose to exercise personal liberty without considering that it may cause another to stumble. So, he encourages them to mimic him as they had already done in the past by holding fast the traditions that he had given them. Later in the same chapter, as Paul writes of the Lord’s supper, he begins in verse 23,For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you … Two observations stand out: (1) since the traditions are, by definition, that which is handed down (Gr. paradosis), whatever Paul was passing on that he wanted them to mimic was passed down to him by the Lord. Continuing the reading, we learn that (2) they were not at liberty to choose which traditions they wanted to follow. Paul wrote, Remember me in all things. He then proceeds to hand down the will of God regarding headship.

This tradition passed down to them was not tailor-made to fit only their peculiar needs and problems. The pattern of teaching was not a smorgasbord of teaching from which they could choose. Instead, it was divine ordering applicable to God’s people everywhere. That there was a uniformity of teaching is clear from 1 Corinthians 4:14-17. It reads,

I write not these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though ye have ten thousand in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begat you through the gospel. I beseech you therefore, be ye imitators of me. For this cause have I sent unto you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which are in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in every church.

He also writes:

But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called everyone, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches (1 Corinthians 7:17).

We plan to write more on defining the word church used in these passages at some later time. For the present, the word speaks of saints living in particular cities. Though it may not meet your satisfaction, I hope you will allow me to use the word place. Not only is Paul’s teaching consistent with his practice, but his teaching was consistent with what he taught everywhere in every place (cf. 1 Cor. 11:16). Paul taught the same thing in every locality where saints lived or in every place. Here, we have uniformity of practice that grows out of uniform teaching (cf. 1 Cor. 11:16; 16:1). The practice forms the standard that Corinth was to imitate. Because the apostles, which included Paul, were guided into all the truth by the Holy Spirit (John 14-16), whatever they taught is reflected in the way they set up the work of saints in a given location. In case Paul stayed longer than intended, he wrote Timothy so he would know how he should behave himself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:14-15). Notice two things about this passage. First, his behavior in the house of God speaks to his being in the spiritual family, not to a physical church house. Second, the behavior was Timothy’s personal behavior, as can be shown by the content of the letter. He was to be an example to the believer. Similarly, Paul left Titus in Crete to set in order what was lacking and ordain elders in every city (Titus 1:5). This supports the thought that there was a definite arrangement, pattern, or tradition that Paul wanted Timothy and Titus to teach and put into practice. That the letter to Corinth was part of the pattern to be followed is clear from the comment, "the rest I will set in order when I come" (1 Cor. 11:34). In the areas of interaction with fellow Christians, the principles of love, edification, preferring of others, giving, physical work, the practice of encouraging each other daily, the remembrance of Christ, and the fellowship of the body in the taking of the Lord’s Supper are some of those guiding principles.

In arranging an atmosphere wherein all are edified, Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 14:33b-34, "As in all the churches of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches." Similarly, this text is talking about the places or cities of the saints, i.e., the cities or towns where saints lived. Aside from all other considerations about women in this passage, Paul clearly states that all saints are given the same tradition. This argues in favor of the uniformity of tradition. And, while Paul regulates spiritual gifts when saints come together to be edified, he offers no outline for a religious service in this text. It was about the edification of all the members by the mutual sharing of each gift. Finally, consider 2 Thessalonians 2:15:

So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions (paradosis) which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

Here’s an example of a command to hold the traditions of the apostles whether oral or written. Obviously, we were not there to hear Paul, personally. Are we to assume that what Paul wrote was different from what he said? This is hard to imagine, given the fact that what was written was explained by the New Testament writers as being adequate for understanding God’s will (Ephesians 3:1-5; cf. 2 Tim. 3:16-17). This tradition left for us in the pages of the New Testament form the pattern to be followed. The same book expresses the harmony of thought in 2 Thess. 3:6-7. It reads,

Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly, and not after the tradition which they received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to imitate us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you.

The pattern included Paul’s personal example of living regarding physical work. 2 Thessalonians 3:8-9 continues:

"… neither did we eat bread for nothing at any man’s hand, but in labor and travail, working night and day, that we might not burden any of you: not