Christians need to settle, once and for all, that irrespective of what the issue might be, God's Word is correct and they are wrong. It is that simple, and that is all there is to it. If more Christians did this, there would be less division in the Body. However, a large number of Christians either do not believe the Bible to be their absolute and final authority, or they evade and explain away whatever aspects of its teachings that they do not like.
What is your authority? Is it church history? Is it church tradition? Is it your creed? Is it your confession? Is it your constitution? Is it your statement of faith? Is it your system of theology? Is it what the “experts” tell you? Is it your personal "experiences"? Is it how you were raised? It is what you were taught? Is it your personal feelings and opinions? Or is it Scripture alone? As in everything, the Bible must be our sole and final authority on this issue.
Nobody has a monopoly on biblical truth—least of all myself. But that does not prevent me from striving to "search the Scriptures" and learn the truth irrespective of man's traditions. You see, regardless of how I was raised, what I was taught, or what I presently believe, I strive to conform myself and my beliefs entirely to the Word of God. Regardless of my opinions, my feelings, or my proclivities, I strive to subject myself and my beliefs entirely to the Word of God. If it contradicts me, then I am to submit myself to the Word of God—no matter the cost to myself. This is called death to self; taking up your cross daily. It is fundamental to being a Christian. The Word of God never submits to me, my culture, my ethnicity, or anything else. Now that we have made that clear, let us get to our subject.
The single most important issue facing Christians today is the recovery of New Testament church life and practice, and in spite of what everyone else chooses to do, "...as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Josh. 24:15). In other words, I am going to do what is best for my family regardless of what others think, say, and do. "One man with God is a majority." "One word of truth outweighs the entire world."
Inevitably, when you write on issues such as this, fellow believers will fire off trumped-up accusations against you, such as false arguments that you must have had a negative "church" experience. However, that simply is not the case, and could not be further from the truth. When you desire to conform to God's Word no matter what, as you study Scripture and the truth is revealed to you, you must then act upon it in obedience. Obedience to God's Word is obedience to Jesus Himself! The closer you stick to God's Word in both teaching and practice, the more you will become a target for fellow believers who are not living accordingly. The last thing they want is to be convicted by those who are, and so there is very little they will not do in order to attempt to silence you. Remember, men love darkness rather than light, and darkness is afraid of the light. A less-than-holy Christian will hate a Christian walking in holiness because that holiness highlights his evil deeds. Why do they hate such people? Pride. Envy. Could be a number of things.
Jesus said, "...I will build My Church..." (Matt. 16:18). He quite obviously had very specific ideas as to how His Church ought to look and function in actual practice. After all, the apostle Paul had said, "And so I direct in all the churches" (1 Cor. 7:17), and, "...as in all the churches of the saints...." (1 Cor. 14:33), meaning that they were all taught the same things and that they all practiced the same things. Paul had also said, "...we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God" (1 Cor. 11:16). According to Paul's words, the apostles of Jesus established and set up Churches to function in a particular manner. Again, according to Paul's words, this pattern was intended to be universal. All churches should be fundamentally identical when it comes to how they assemble and function as a congregation.
When Paul talks about "traditions" (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:4, 6; 1 Cor. 11:2), he is talking about the established practice (παράδοσις, paradosis) taught by the apostles of Christ. He is not talking about new traditions invented and handed down by the Catholics or the Lutherans or the Calvinists or the Anglicans or the Presbyterians or the Baptists or the Pentecostals. When Paul said to the Corinthians, "I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you," he was addressing how they met as a Church as well as the way they practiced things when they did so. In 1 Corinthians 11-14, Paul was correcting abuses that were occurring whenever they came together as a church. He was not addressing doctrinal beliefs or personal holiness. All churches were set up exactly the same. All churches were practicing in the exact same way.
When Paul gave direction as to how the Church was to meet and function, he also posed a rhetorical question that dripped with sarcasm: "Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?" (1 Cor. 14:36). Were there other ways of "doing church" than what the apostles had prescribed? Apparently not! "If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized" (1 Cor. 14:37-38). Church practice is a matter of the Lord's command. It is not optional! It is a matter of the Holy Spirit's leading, and the Holy Spirit will never lead people contrary to the Word of God. He inspired the Word of God to begin with. Paul informs us not to recognize anyone who teaches differently.
God does not want different types of churches meeting in different ways. This goes completely against the teachings of the New Testament. "Churches" that function as institutions/organizations/corporations are dysfunctional churches. "Churches" that make void the Word of God and "do church" the way they feel they want to conduct their assemblies are unbiblical churches. However, just because the Church meets in houses does not make them biblical churches. They could meet in houses and yet be unbiblical in every other way. So what determines a biblical Church, according to Scripture?
- New Testament churches met once a week on the first day of the week (Sunday; which for Jews began immediately after sundown on Saturday evening) to partake of the Lord's Supper.
- New Testament churches assembled in houses. Temple courts, such as Solomon's Porch, as public gathering spaces, were used for mass gatherings for teaching, evangelism, prayer, etc. They were used for multi-church gatherings.
- New Testament churches were completely open, spontaneous, and participatory in their corporate worship and sharing for the spiritual well-being of everyone present. No one was to control the proceedings and lead from the front. The format for how they were to function is outlined in 1 Corinthians 14:26, 29-31. The key to a healthy body is that each part function properly according to its design.
- New Testament churches ate the Lord's Supper as a full meal as part of their proceedings, which was commonly referred to as a "love feast."
- New Testament churches were extended family units; living organisms—not institutions/organizations/corporations, and they practiced non-hierarchical, plural, co-equal, indigenous male leadership (not controlling, subjugating, dominating) that had arisen from within the church they would subsequently shepherd. Eldership was understood to be purely functional and not positional (as a title or an office). Decision making was consensual and collective, made by the whole company of believers and not simply the “officials.”
These are the non-negotiable, irreducible minimum requirements for a church to be said to be biblical. If you really had to, if there were extenuating circumstances, you could still maintain the nature and function of a church while meeting somewhere other than in people's homes. Nevertheless, however, you would still need to meet all the other requirements of a biblical church. This means that you should sit in a circle so everyone can see and hear each other, and that worship should remain entirely open, spontaneous, and participatory. No one should be leading the proceedings (least of all from the front, elevated above everyone else as if they are somehow more important then everyone else). The meeting is to be a dialogue, as prescribed in 1 Corinthians 14:26, and not a monologue. If anyone understands the last three parts of the pattern, why would they want to play around with the first two parts (meeting on Sundays, and meeting in houses)—unless their were extenuating circumstances?
Is it not interesting that in countries where there is great animosity against the Christian faith, that the only prescription that allows the Church to grow is by use of house churches? In these countries you could not obtain a government permit to build a "church" building such as we have known and experienced in Europe and America.
If you want just one piece of evidence that shows how much the modern "church" is not obeying the teachings of Scripture, look to their practice of baptism. In the Bible, as soon as a person made a profession of faith in Jesus, they were immediately baptized. There was not a single excuse for waiting. If you want a second piece of evidence that shows how much the modern "church" is not obeying the teachings of Scripture, look to their practice of the Lord's Supper. This was never a wafer, a cracker, or a piece of bread and tiny cup of grape juice or wine. For the early Christians, this was a complete meal. Hence Paul's address of the Corinthians' abuse in 1 Corinthians 11. A third example would be membership. In the beginning, the only
qualification for membership was a life changed by the Holy Spirit. Now look at all the unbiblical nonsense attached to it.
In the New Testament, believers met in someone's home in order to talk and fellowship together, to encourage each other, and enjoy one another, and they did so over a full meal. The New Testament knows nothing of "church services" as you and I have experienced! They talked together, prayed together, sang songs of praise and worship together, built each other up spiritually through teaching, and encouraged one another from Scripture. They were a family unit, and they acted like it. When you change something beyond what it was originally designed to be, you make it completely other than what God had intended. This results in it being dysfunctional. Churches that are not based on the teaching, traditions, and practices of the Lord Jesus and His apostles are unbiblical, dysfunctional churches.
In using the word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia), early Christians were employing a term in which, while it designated the assembly of a Greek city-state, only citizens could participate. The Church is not "a hospital for sinners." The Church is for believers only! Go ahead. Read through the entire New Testament (especially the book of Acts) and find a single instance of sinners in the Church. Oh, and in case you were not aware of it, once a person has been born again, even though they might continue to stumble into sin, the Bible refers to them as saints—never as sinners. They are a new creation! So, how do you reach the lost if the Church is only for saints? By going out and evangelizing them as you were commanded to. Once people had repented and believed, then they were added to the Church. Not before!
Away with tradition, and back to the Bible! The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible must be our absolute and final authority on all matters pertaining to doctrine, church practice, family life, and personal holiness. Regardless of how we were raised, what we were taught, what we might presently believe, regardless of our opinions, our feelings, or our proclivities, we are to subject ourselves and our beliefs entirely to the Word of God. If it contradicts us, then we are to submit ourselves to it—no matter the cost to ourselves. Go by Scripture, even when the consequences of such are unthinkable to you. This is called death to self; taking up our cross daily. It is fundamental to being a Christian. The Word of God never submits to us, our culture, our ethnicity, or anything else.
I do not expect my brothers and sisters in the faith to take my word concerning biblical truth at face value. In fact, it would be foolish of them to do so. The Bereans did not take the apostle Paul's words at face value (Acts 17:11), nor did Peter expect his readers to take his word at face value (2 Pet. 1:19-21). There are numerous "experts" or "scholars" they can refer to outside of the Bible that back up everything I have just written. For many people, the Bible simply is not sufficient enough. It is not their absolute and final authority. For those people, they can refer to the "experts" and "scholars" on the issue. Nevertheless, your experience of "church" does not meet the biblical prescription of what the Church ought to look like and how it ought to function.
When we come together, the Church should be under the Headship of the Lord Jesus, allowing Him to move in and through each member of the Body at His discretion. The Church should rely on the Holy Spirit's direct guidance in our meetings. This is how the early Christians functioned. In the second century A.D., this pattern began to change by those who thought they had the same inspiration as the original apostles, and during the time of Emperor Constantine it become fixed within the Church. The Church has never recovered from this. Instead, it was taken for granted that what "leaders" decided was what the Spirit was saying, and so pew-sitters never bothered to question what they were told from the pulpit, and were taught to value lesser things. The Headship of Jesus has been effectively strangled and the life of the Holy Spirit has been gradually squeezed out of the Body of Christ by the traditions of men in the mechanical organization they call "church."
How did we end up having authoritarian church hierarchy? It originated with the fight against unacceptable beliefs when Gnostics were claiming to have received special knowledge given them by the Spirit. Despite not having a complete Bible at their fingertips, rather than recognize the authority of Scripture and the teachings, traditions, and practices of the Lord Jesus and His apostles, the Church reasoned that authority rested with the apostles and so anyone succeeding them would have the same authority (and inspiration). Thus began the false teaching of "apostolic succession." In the second century, you can see the authoritarian hierarchy develop, especially in post-apostolic writings. In the fourth century, all hell broke loose as the Church no longer resembled what she had been in the past. The structure and practices we see across every denomination today were put in place under Emperor Constantine, and find their roots in Roman culture and pagan religious rituals. If you were to dissect each denomination's "church service" today, you would find that it differs very little from the Catholic system.
No Bible student worth their salt would ever attempt to deny the fact that the New Testament knows nothing of a "clergy" class in contrast to a "laity" class. There was no division of class between believers in the early Church. This has already been proven with the Scripture references above, of which there are many others. The early Christians had no sacred temples to meet in; there was no division in the body of "clergy" and "laity"; there was no "pastor" leading the proceedings (least of all from the front); and the "pastor" and/or staff did not receive salaries. All of this is unbiblical, tracing their roots to Roman culture and pagan religious practices.