Are You Asking the Right Questions?
To ask “how” or “what” is an appeal to authority. To ask “why” is an appeal to reason!
Andy
Why Are You “Dissing” the Church?
Originally published April 16, 2015
Leaving the institutional church has been one of the best decisions our family has made. Granted, there are the social aspects that we miss (my wife especially, she’s a people person), but it doesn’t take much searching to admit that real friendships have to be based on more than just a weekly formal gathering. Want to know who your real friends are? Just try leaving your church for whatever reason. See how many of them still keep in contact with you. In fact, it was a comment very similar to that which I posted on Facebook a few weeks ago, which prompted quite a debate.
There is a young man with whom I am friends, let’s call him “Trevor”. I have personally known Trevor for many years. Trevor has come to me with many questions about some of the things I post on Facebook, and we have had some very edifying discussions. We’ve talked at length about the differences between Justification and Sanctification. He is genuinely seeking answers, and I am grateful for the opportunities to help disciple him.
But a few weeks ago, Trevor sent me the following private message on Facebook:
“Hey Andy I keep seeing you dissing on churches and even though you are probably right why not use your intelligence and abilities on helping teach people about God. There are a lot of people who need God that I’m sure are reading that and when people see hostility amongst Christians towards other Christians it turns them off to it completely and isn’t that contradictory to what we want for people”
I understand the motivation behind his response, and I don’t hold it against him. It is typical from anyone who sits under the orthodoxy of the institutional church. Trevor has probably even spoken with his pastor about some of these issues I’ve brought up, and maybe this response comes after the result of one of those conversations. Either way, his tone of concern is well noted and appreciated. So below you will find my response to Trevor. I apologize that it is rather lengthy, but I hope that it will be edifying.
Dear Trevor,
I’m sure you will agree that it is hard to give a full-orbed treatise within the confines of a simple Facebook status message. It doesn’t lend itself well for going into details. So the goal is to try and make your point in the most direct and concise manner possible. For that reason, a simple matter-of-fact statement may come across as curt and abrasive. That is unavoidable. Nevertheless, statements such as these should prompt people to think. But often times, rather than think, people respond defensively because they automatically assume I am attacking them. I am not attacking people, I am challenging ideas. But most people are too lazy to differentiate the two because they have too much ego invested in their ideas, and therefore take any attack on an idea as a personal attack. This is true of both Christians and non-Christians alike. And actually I have found that those who call themselves “Christian” have an even greater tendency toward ego investment, and there is a very good explanation for that, which leads me to the next point.
When you challenge what a “Christian” has traditionally been taught, you are indeed challenging their very salvation. And this is a frightening prospect for them. But it is for this very reason that these notions need to be challenged, because what it boils down to is that their faith is in a “belief system” rather than belief in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. That which passes for “the church” is the very embodiment of this belief system. Is it any wonder then that people have such a knee jerk reaction? For someone to even raise the question that what they have been taught might be wrong scares the crap out of them!
This is why I criticize the institutional church, because it embodies this system that has kept people in the spiritual dark ages for centuries! The institutional church is based on “authority”, and the system is needed to maintain the authority. But this is so contrary to scripture. There is to be no authority among the brethren of Christ. Christ is the authority! And he is the only mediator between God and man. Now that is not to say that there is not leadership, but leadership is not the same as authority. Authority implies “power”, while leadership implies “example”. But the emphasis within the traditional “church” model is predicated on power and authority, and everything that happens within the confines of these institutions is designed to maintain that power structure. It has been that way since the very early beginnings of the Roman Catholic church in the 4th century. And Protestantism is no different.
I see many good genuine Christian people languishing away within the walls of the institutional church, and it grieves me deeply, for there are eternal consequences at stake. Not as far as salvation goes, but with regard to eternal rewards. You have spiritually illiterate Christians looking to some authority to tell them what to believe, who have never been equipped to carry out the task that was given to them from the first day they were born again- to go out and make disciples. They are not exercising their gifts. Instead they hide their talent in the ground, waiting for the Master to return and say, “here Lord, here’s what you gave me.” And there will be no eternal reward for them. And the church is purposefully keeping them in this state of immaturity. How I long for believers to realize their full potential as Children of God! But that will never happen in the “church”. The church serves itself.
So, even having said all of that, I still haven’t fully been able to explain the depth of this all. But your concern is how this arguing among believers will turn off others. I contend that what turns of the unsaved is not the fact that they see Christians argue, but rather that Christians don’t even know what they believe. Furthermore, what they do claim to believe is not even rational. Christianity for the past 1500 years has simply failed to produce a fully rational explanation for why someone should believe in Jesus. There must be more to it that just, “well you just have to have faith.” Faith must be grounded in reality. So we don’t simply lay aside arguments regarding contending for truth just for the sake of presenting the illusion of a unified front to the world.
In addition, the traditional excuse for evangelism is simply nothing more than who has the better sales pitch for getting someone to attend their church versus another. This ties in directly with the notion of salvation being in the church. Christians are more interested in getting people into their church than they are with teaching people about the gospel of the Kingdom. By definition, the church cannot be comprised of unbelievers. The body of Christ, the “assembly”, is only made up of believers. The purpose of believers assembling is for edification, and that happens by four functions: instruction in the word, fellowship, sharing meals (including the Lord’s table), and praying together. (Acts 2:42). How can an unbeliever possibly be any part of that? He shares nothing in common. He is not a part of the Body. 2 Corinthians 6:14-15 says, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?” Unbelievers have no part in the fellowship of God’s people.
Now the excuse has been that we need to bring unsaved to church so that they can get saved. But that is simply a lazy excuse for evangelism. It is not what Christ’s instructions were. Believers gather in fellowship to be edified. Having then been properly equipped, WE can go OUT into the world to take the gospel TO the lost so that they can HEAR it from US. Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. How then shall they believe in whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they be SENT? (Romans 10:14-15, 17) Every believer is a preacher- and ambassador from God’s heavenly Kingdom – sent forth with the message of reconciliation to the world. It is our mandate as individuals, NOT the function of an institution!
And so seeing how the “church” has utterly failed in every way in all of these areas, I hope you can better understand now why I have such disdain for it and am so critical of it. But the answer is not reform. It doesn’t need to be reformed, it needs to be defeated because it is not what God intended for His people. The answer is, to come out from among them and be separate. And that is what I have done, and that is what I want to encourage all believers to do. Come out from this institution and join in genuine fellowship with other like-minded believers and start exercising your gifts. There is no horizontal authority between men among believers. All authority is in Christ.
Andy
Ministry and the Unregenerate Spouse
When you are born again, it is impossible to be unborn. And that’s a good thing because if there is anything that could unborn you it is what I suffered in the church for over 25 years.
On the one hand, I diligently studied the plain sense of Scripture on my own; on the other hand, I was constantly experiencing the contradictions thereof in the Baptist church. The plain contradictions were many tips of many icebergs while massive presuppositions of orthodoxy kept the rest submerged. This post regards the following presumptuous tradition:
“If God has called you, He has also called your wife.”
Really?
The apostle Paul addressed the issue of unregenerate spouses and ministry in 1Corinthians chapter 7 which can also be applied to spouses who may be saved but reject your convictions for any number of reasons.
This isn’t complicated, Paul instructed us to put ministry first while giving the spouse due respect and love. No spouse has the authority or precedent to circumvent what God has called one to do. This is what Paul meant when he wrote,
1 Corinthians 7:29 – This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, 30 and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, 31 and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away.
32 I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. 33 But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord.
Paul was writing about the benefits of being single so one can focus on ministry, but also stated in the same chapter that in either case when things are done via God’s counsel, one does well. In chapter 7, Paul explains the guidelines for every situation regarding marriage relationships, but with the final goal in all cases being, “undivided devotion to the Lord” without “restraint” in regard to what is lawful. Notice that Paul operated according to what benefitted believers, not to lord it over them. This is THE general rule whether we are talking about marriage, ministry, or assembling together.
But isn’t the man, or husband, the head of the wife according to Ephesians chapter 5? That is referring to the head of a body, not authority. The point of Ephesians 5 is oneness of body, and the direction of the body; authority is nowhere in this chapter. In this chapter, “head” should be thought of as the primary direction for life, and the same word is used in “cornerstone” or the foundational stone of a building. The word for a single rock as a foundation (Matthew 7:24, 16:18) refers to a cornerstone which is “the first stone set in the construction of a masonry foundation, important since all other stones will be set in reference to this stone, thus determining the position of the entire structure”(Wikipedia).
The fact that Christ has authority is beside the point in Ephesians chapter 5; in the same way that Christ is the chief cornerstone of the building, or the head of the body, supplying it with life-giving direction, so it should be with the husband in regard to his wife. Like Christ and the church, the husband should sanctify his wife with the word. If he fails in that endeavor, he hates his own body; the husband and wife are one body. The wife should respect the husband as the head as the church respects Christ as the head. She should seek his leadership accordingly as the husband is led by Christ. And excuse me, but this pertains to being led by Christ, THE head of THE body (notice the emphasis on the singular), not a bunch of narcissistic Reformed elders. They, that is, elders, are nowhere to be found in Ephesians five. The elders are in no wise the cornerstone of your family nor does Scripture ever give them that authority by any stretch of the imagination.
But, in the same way that it does not benefit the husband in not following Christ, it does not benefit the wife in not following the husband IF, I repeat, “IF” he is making a reasonable and truthful attempt to follow Christ. A wife is NOT, I repeat “NOT” obligated to obey a foolish husband who professes a false gospel, nor does he have the authority to prevent her from following Christ in spirit and truth.
Even the apostle Paul said, “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ” (NIV). Husbands get no special privilege on this wise. “Head” doesn’t mean “boss,” it means “leader.” It refers to the role of being a true cornerstone that results in a strong building or in this case, body. Viz, a house that can withstand the storms of life. Wives should not reject a good cornerstone like the Jews rejected Christ.
Note that in cases where the husband is clearly lost, but pleased to dwell with the saved wife, the saved wife has a sanctifying effect on the family and the children are not defiled:
1Corinthians 7:12 – To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
Great help is gained here if we will take note of what Andy Young taught about sanctification at our TANC 2014 conference: holiness, or sanctification, has to do with being set apart as “unordinary.” Because of the saved spouse’s unity with a family that is pleased to live with her/him, to some degree, the family is set apart and blessed because of the presence of the saved spouse.
Of course, this would be of no effect if the saved spouse is being led by the lost family members. If a saved wife is following a lost husband in every regard, there is no sanctifying effect; sanctification is not merely a label, but an active reality. To a degree contrary to what would normally take place, the sanctifying effect of the saved spouse prevents the children from being defiled by unholy living. This also puts the unsaved family members in a more favorable position for possible salvation, but if the unsaved spouse departs…
“…let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?”
I contend that the departing of the unsaved should be directly contrasted with being pleased (“consent”) to dwell with the saved spouse. The word in verses 12 and 13 follows:
g4909. συνευδοκέω syneudokeō; from 4862 and 2106; to think well of in common, i.e. assent to, feel gratified with: — allow, assent, be pleased, have pleasure. To be pleased together with, to approve together (with others) to be pleased at the same time with, consent, agree, applaud.
A mere living under the same roof is not in view here. The separation refers to disapproval in living with the other spouse as something to be rejected and not applauded. Additionally, if adultery can be committed in one’s heart, so can divorce. Remaining in the same house for ulterior motives does not constitute non-departure or lack of divorce; the saved spouse is not enslaved to that situation either, and in contrast, is called to peace.
Moreover, and back to Ephesians chapter 5, authority is not in view, but rather mutual submission to needs. Emphasis mine:
15 Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, 16 making the best use of the time because the days are evil. [Like 1Cor 7 and emphasis on the shortness of time.] 17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. 18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, 19 addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, 20 giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.[This all goes back to verse 21 concerning mutual submission.]
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,[Submission to a need.] 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body.[Oneness is the issue, not authority] 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.[Like the church has reverence for Christ.]
In summation, though Christ has authority, it is not His application to the body, nor is there any authoritative or rulership gifts in the body or marriage. Christ always submitted to need, exhorted, taught, rebuked, and persuaded, but never exercised authority or compelled His assembly to obey by force. There are but a precious few examples among the combined activities of Christ and the apostles where a possible argument could be made, but they are the exceptions and far from being the rule.
Lack of oneness among spouses should not circumvent ministry or our debt of love to the body. Period. However, in these very difficult situations, every believer needs to weigh the Scriptures carefully and stay true to their consciences.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment