What Church?
Beyond Cheesy Grins and Fellowship Teas
Introduction
What shall we say about the religious state of Britain today?
There is one thing that is surely true, namely that the religious state
of the country is at a very low ebb indeed, as seen by the
fact that very few people claim to have a religion at all.
We look around and find that the vast majority of the so-called
“Christian” churches have strayed very far from Scripture. Vast tracts
of the church, such as the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches
openly use icons and images in their worship and break the second
commandment of God's holy law quite brazenly. So, we see that the
Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was a
good thing, in at least getting people back to the idea of having the
Bible as the sole authority of the church, revealing the true and right
religion to follow.
But look at the so-called Protestant churches today! What are they
doing? The vast majority have jettisoned the Bible and introduced
modern innovations that have no Scriptural warrant at all. No
wonder that so-called Protestant churches are emptying by the week!
People are not so stupid that they cannot see that the churches
themselves are not believing what they are supposed to believe any
more. The churches are quite understandably laughed at by unbelievers,
and not taken seriously. Who can blame anyone for coming to this
conclusion?
Now, most people who claim to be Bible-believing can in fact see this
major problem with the churches. A very popular solution that they come
up with is the
phenomenon of the Independent Evangelical Church. Most towns in Britain
today have at least one of these somewhere in them. These “churches”
are built up with the idea that the “denominations” as they call them
(not seeming to realise that all they are doing is forming other
“denominations” or associations with one another themselves, every time
they leave an old one!) are completely corrupt, so all true Bible
believers should heed the call to “come out from amongst them
and be
ye separate” (2 Corinthians 6:17). Hence they call upon all
true believers to come out of the
established churches because of their corruption, and form new
independent churches, or fellowships, on a local basis. Dr Martyn
Lloyd-Jones for example gave a well-known call to this effect in the
1970s.
The problem with this is that it all sounds so good! Most, if not all
of the well-established “Protestant” denominations have indeed been
taken over by liberals who do not believe the Bible. That is a fact.
They no longer teach that the Bible is true, and that the truths of the
Bible are fact not fiction, so there is indeed a need to do something
about these heretics and their teaching. Hence the attraction, to the
vast bulk of professing Bible-believers today, of the idea of “coming
out” and forming independent evangelical churches amongst themselves.
Indeed, this attractiveness is proven by the fact that evangelicals as
a whole are the only sector of the professing Christian community that
are on the increase numerically, particularly amongst the younger
generations, all other churches being in severe decline.
So anyone who is, by God's grace, born again of the Spirit of God into
the new birth obtained for His people by Christ, is going to be
attracted to one sort or another of these new independent evangelical
churches, rather than the old “denominations,” because they perceive
that the Bible is taught in the one and not the other. The problem is
that, however much on the surface this seems to be the right thing to
do, things are nowhere near as simple as this.
This article has been produced to try to show the true Bible-believer,
the genuine God-fearing Christian, the problems of the Independent
Evangelical Church scene, despite its apparent outward attractiveness;
and then to show him or her the right way of true religion, that he or
she may seek this, and not be side-tracked into blindly following
something other than what the Bible actually teaches.
Which Church Do I
Join?
So, we have been converted by the power of the Holy Ghost drawing us to
Christ as our only hope of salvation, to see the beauty of the Saviour
who came to save His people from their sins. Consequently, we would now
like to start going to church. Assuming that we
have found out that the vast bulk of professing Christendom has
abandoned the Bible as the only authority of the church and gone each
his own way (which should not take long to find out!), we now need to
find a church where the Bible is given its proper place as that final
authority, and where the teaching is Bible-centred, rather than centred
on the traditions of men.
This is easier said than done. So many different bodies, from the
Jehovah's Witnesses, to the Charismatic movement, to the Strict
Baptists, all
of these and many more claim to be the one true custodians of Bible
truth. They can't all be right! Just take any two of them at random,
and compare their doctrines with each other, you will not go too far
before you find doctrines that contradict one another! So where do we
start looking for the one professing Bible-believing church that does
have the truth?
The answer to this question in most cases, sadly, is that the new
convert blindly starts going to (or continues going to) the church
which he invariably has already had contact with before his conversion.
He may have grown up all his life in an Evangelical church, or maybe
some friends invited him to an outreach meeting of their church and,
having been converted there, he has started to go to the same
church. Whatever the means God has used to bring about a conversion, in
most cases the new convert already has Christian friends, and
consequently he blindly follows them into their church without really
thinking about it.
In other cases, the new convert was converted through reading the Bible
or a tract or other piece of literature, without any direct contact
with anyone else. Which church should he choose?
In seeking an answer to this problem, we must first of all come to
admit to ourselves that no one church (indeed no one individual) on
this earth is going to have their theology all perfectly right. All
churches are wrong to a greater or lesser degree at some point or
other, just as all people are wrong somewhere along the line. This is
an important starting point.
So, does this mean that theology doesn't matter? Of course not. There
is only one absolute truth. The Bible is the Word of God and is
Absolute Truth itself, but we, as sinners, fall short and make mistakes
in the interpretation of it. If we are true believers, as we grow in
the faith and learn more of the truth, we should be constantly changing
our views in order to coincide more and more with the scriptural
perfection. None of us ever arrive at that perfection whilst we are on
this earth, but true believers should, by the guidance of the Holy
Ghost, be at least all vaguely heading in the right direction. This is
part of our sanctification. So, theology matters to our sanctification,
and we should expect that in every believer we meet with, somewhere
along the line there will be some differences between us, even between
husbands and wives. This fact is not to be shunned, or swept under the
carpet. These things should be seen as normal and be brought out in the
open, wrestled with and understood, otherwise if we do not know what we
believe, we have a blind, implicit, faith, which is no faith at all.
“God alone is lord of the conscience, and hath left it free
from the
doctrines and commandments of men which are in any thing contrary to
his word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship. So that to
believe such doctrines, or to obey such commandments out of conscience,
is to betray true liberty of conscience: and the requiring of an
implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy
liberty of conscience, and reason also.” (Westminster
Confession of
Faith 20:2)
Theology is therefore very important with regards to knowing and
believing and trusting in absolute truth. It is common today for
churches to say “theology doesn't matter,” it is “love” that counts.
However, if you have that attitude then all sorts of problems occur,
not least of which is that anyone in the church will be free to hold in
their own imagination what they believe (or more to the point what they
want to believe) Christ to be like, rather than bowing the knee to the
Christ of reality as described in the Bible. This is no different from
a five year old who invents an “invisible friend” to play with, who,
amazingly enough, thinks, acts, speaks and behaves just like them! How
convenient! But in the realm of reality, how very wrong! Yes, correct
theology is vital. Make no mistake about that.
Which brings us back to the vast difference in the theologies of these
independent churches. In fact this is a major problem. Because of their
independent nature, all of them are free to adopt whatever Creed or
Confession of Faith they choose, even in a lot of cases making up their
own, or at least severely amending an existing one, to suit their
tastes. Most churches have some kind of Confession of Faith, even if it
is only enshrined in the Trust Deeds of the property. Nowadays, this
means very little, other than providing a way of preventing a Jehovah's
Witness, for example, from getting into the pulpit of a Trinitarian
church. Teaching and believing the Confession of Faith of the church
amongst the members is not on the agenda of a vast majority of
churches. The reason for this is obvious. The more we teach and learn
about theology, the more one will be able to see clearly the
differences that truly exist between believers, both as churches and as
individuals. One of the great tenets of these churches is to keep
outward unity at all costs (despite the gross fragmentation there is
between independent churches!). Theology therefore has a detrimental
effect on this outward unity. Unity in ignorance is the easiest, safest
guide to keeping the peace, so they think. But, as we have mentioned,
we must understand that all individuals, let alone all churches, are
going to have some differences somewhere along the line. This is simply
the nature of spiritual growth. We all start from different positions,
we all travel different spiritual paths, but we are all heading the
same way, if we are true believers. Of course, as this life is a
pilgrimage, we will all have different ideas. The important thing is
that we are all heading the right way. So we shouldn't be afraid of
finding differences amongst us, it is quite normal. Oh yes, it could
split your tinpot little evangelical church from the back of beyond in
two, but wherever true believers are, there will be true unity, even if
it is not present in any external church organisation.
Indeed, Christ prayed that we “all may be one”
(John 17:21). This does
not mean that we should have to work at getting on with one another,
because that would mean that we didn't get on now, and Christ's prayer
would be unanswered, depending on us to fulfil it! This is obviously
nonsense. But Christ has prayed that all true believers may be one, and
this is surely the case, despite any differences that exist between
people. When we meet a true believer, we know it, and we love that
person without trying or needing to try to do so. That person is truly
repentant for his or her sins, they are truly broken, they have a truly
humble spirit. To meet someone like this is joy to the true believer,
no matter how obnoxious they may be otherwise.
So, back to the question. Which church should we join? We should not
necessarily join a church because our friends go there, neither should
we necessarily join the church that is nearest to us and most
convenient to hand. Neither should we join a church just because it is
popular, or full of outward display or vigour.
Now, it would be excellent if we could join a church where not only the
Bible is taught, but also where there is a true spirit of
repentance, brokenness and humility with a true mourning over sins
before a holy almighty God. Where God is exalted and man is abased.
Where God is worshipped in fear and trembling, with all seriousness.
This is true religion. But the problem is, where can one find a church
like this these days? Hardly any exist. We can blame liberalism,
modernism, worldliness and so on entering into the church as much as we
like, and we indeed know that these things have destroyed vast tracts
of the so-called Protestant churches already, but the Independent
Evangelical Church scene must take its fair share of the blame too. It
thinks it is immune from such criticism because it regards itself as
outwardly to have the Bible; but these other elements of repentance,
humility etc. are noticeably absent even in these churches.
Antinomianism and worldly practices abound therein. That is a fact. We
all need to be aware of this as a major problem, and rather than try to
find our “perfect church” (which does not exist, just as a “perfect
person” does not exist on this earth), or looking for the latest
“thing” to get all excited about in this vain empty world; we should
ourselves be nurturing, within ourselves, reverence with godly fear.
“Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let
us have
grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly
fear: For our God is a consuming fire.”(Hebrews 12:28,29).
This does not mean that we should not join a church of course. But the
point is that we should not assume that the answer to all our problems
is to “come out” of a church just because it is “boring” or dull, or
does not titilate the carnal senses. Yes, there are times in which we
should come out of churches, but firstly, never as individuals, and
secondly, only when either the doctrinal basis has been changed, or the
marks of the visible church have been removed. The Westminster
Confession of Faith is again helpful here:
“This catholick church hath been sometimes more, sometimes
less
visible. And particular churches, which are members thereof, are more
or less pure, according as the doctrine of the gospel is taught and
embraced, ordinances administered, and publick worship performed more
or less purely in them.
The purest churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error;
and some have so degenerated as to become no churches of Christ, but
synagogues of Satan. Nevertheless, there shall be always a church on
earth to worship God according to his will
.”
(Westminster Confession of Faith 25:4,5)
So we should not leave a church just because we do not like something
or someone in the church. So long as the three marks of doctrine,
ordinances and purity of worship are more or less purely practised, we
should stay in. To “come out” and form a local independent body, for
whatever reason, is wrong. If we have to come out, it should be a
church-wide move, and then only because the marks of the visible church
have been removed. Thousands of tinpot bodies “doing their own thing,”
which is what we have in the Independent Evangelical Church scene, is
an affront to the church of Jesus Christ, and is to be shunned and
despised with all our heart.
Cheesy Grins
Another of the major problems with independent evangelicals is what can
only be described as the “cheesy grin” syndrome. I can't think of a
better way of putting it. This basically is the idea that in everything
we should be joyful and our witness to the world is to exude that joy
in all our expressions and speech. Scripture is indeed quoted to try to
back this idea up. “Rejoice evermore” (1
Thessalonians 5:16) and “The joy of
the Lord is your strength” (Nehemiah 8:10) are favourite
Bible
verses used.
However, neither of these verses refers to an outward exuding of joy at
all. The first refers to the fact that as all things work together for
good to them that are the called (Romans 8:28), then we can really
rejoice that all God's decrees will be performed and that no-one can
ever frustrate any of them. Despite what man can do, God will be
vindicated and will perform ALL His counsel. So we needn't fear
anything “going wrong” as it were. The second is all about the fact
that we should be inwardly joyful after discerning the goodness of the
Lord in saving His people from their sins. It should give us an inner
peace, which the world knows nothing of, and this is to be our witness
before the world, not some kind of “hyper” state all the time trying to
convince people that we are interesting and are worth listening to,
because we are not, none of us. It does no good to exude joy to someone
who, for example, has had a bereavement. We should “weep with
them that
weep” (Romans 12:15), not exude “joy” no matter what our own
outward
circumstances are.
This may on the face of it seem a rather minor complaint, but really it
delves to the heart of what true religion is all about. You do not have
to watch television for very long before you can see exactly the same
philosophy in all sorts of completely worldly, unbelieving people.
Television announcers ALL put on a “happy” appearance, indeed they are
taught to do just that and never appear miserable or sad in any way.
This presumably is because any slight sign of sadness in a presenter
reveals the truth that the “happy” show on their faces seen normally,
is just a veneer. They have to put on a happy, fun-loving attitude,
otherwise the humanistic philosophy they are peddling might, if they
let their smile drop for a second, be seen to be the empty, vain thing
it really is.
Yes, television presenters, the government and the education system are
all together trying to get us all to believe their religion - i.e.
Secular Humanism. Anyone who works for these institutions who shows
anything other than happiness, would let the side down and gets
immediately dropped from public life. They have to make their religion
sound good and right. My point is that modern evangelicals are no
different from these people “trying” to propagate their religion. Oh
yes, their religion is different, but their manner is exactly the same.
It is always an effort to appear joyful. Dear believer, this should not
be. We should not be trying in our own strength to propagate our
religion, like a soap powder; we should be seen to be different,
honest, truthful, and therefore this means we should be deadly serious.
We have a serious message - a message of life and death - eternal life
and death in fact. We should not therefore be gaily following along
with the world and its ways. Our days of doing that are over. We should
certainly not try to “be like the world to win the world,” as is
popularly taught these days in evangelical circles, because every
single time the world can do it better, and the so-called Christians
simply end up appearing stupid in the eyes of the world. Our days of
worldly behaviour are over. We MUST be serious in all we do, because we
have been given a serious revelation of reality. People of the world
will call us miserable. But we know that within ourselves there is a
deep joy, which is one of knowing our salvation. THIS is the joy of the
Lord that is our strength.
A couple of very serious errors follow on from this, and this is really
the point. So many times in evangelical circles, as soon as the worship
is over the people are telling jokes and indulging in other such
frivolous activities and worldly behaviour. And this is in the more
serious churches of the evangelical spectrum too! The jokes are already
in the sermons of the middle-of-the-road and charismatic evangelicals.
Seriousness is banned from their services! We should exude joy and be
frivolous, flippant and worldly all the time - that is their religion,
and it deserves all the contempt it receives! No, but even in the more
conservative, sober churches the seriousness lasts only until the end
of the service and then it is gone. I once saw three muslims walking
past the grounds of a church I used to belong to, just after the end of
a service, and I will never forget the look on their faces when they
saw the children of the church playing football and rolling around in
the mud on the Christian's supposed holy day. Did this commend the
Saviour to them? Not at all. It made me deeply ashamed of being in that
church. This should not be. If what we have is of eternal consequence,
matters of life and death, heaven and hell, and are all true, what
manner of persons ought we to be? There is NO room for cracking jokes,
playing games and being flippant at all. We should be deadly serious
people. This does not mean that we should not smile and be humorous on
occasions, but there is a vast difference between being humorous on
occasions and being flippant. Flippancy is a sin, because it shows an
underlying attitude that “religion” is not to be taken seriously and
should only exist in a small part of life, rather than taking over the
whole of our philosophy, and therefore the whole of the life of a
believer. Oh yes, the believer will be criticised for being “po-faced,”
and serious by the world, but he will be criticised anyway, whatever he
does. Even if he tries to be flippant like the world, the world will
still just turn around and laugh at him anyway, a lot more so than
someone who is at least consistent in his seriousness. So laughing and
joking and being flippant is not worth trying, it only makes our
witness to the world a lot worse.
The other serious error with regards this problem is the seeming lack
of knowledge of the depth of one's own personal sin. Some people really
believe that upon being “saved” all our sins can actually be removed
(as
opposed to the truth that they are removed in a forensic sense, i.e.
as
in a court of law. They are not actually removed physically at all).
The end of Romans chapter 7 is set forth by
these people as referring to the apostle Paul before
his conversion,
whereas it is clear that it refers to Paul after
his conversion,
because before his conversion he didn't have a battle going on in his
members at all, and wasn't bothered with sin because the Holy Spirit
had not yet planted the seeds of regeneration in his heart. The battle
with sin did not exist before his conversion; it only came afterwards.
We should, therefore, be continually mourning over our sins. The more
we grow in grace, the more we see the depth of our own iniquity. This
should show in our outward demeanour - we should be broken, humble
people. Oh yes, we know that God has justified us despite our sin and
laid it all on Christ, so in our innermost being we do not despair, and
indeed are full of the joy of the Lord, but we need to keep the
knowledge of the depth of our sin ever before us, because we should
love the things of God and long to be free from sin completely. This
will not happen until we die and go to glory, but we should be longing
for such in this life, and saddened when we find more and more how far
we fall short of this standard. Again, we will be called “po-faced” by
the world, but who cares? We are here to love God not to please men.
Evangelicals have a serious problem - it is their prayers that give
them away. Not even a mention of the word “sin” is commonplace, and is
a sure sign of shallowness in their religion. We should always be wary
of this attitude when we find it in others, and even more so when we
find it in ourselves.
The crunch comes of course when we ask the question, “Was Christ like
this?” Did he go about with a cheesy grin on his face, exuding “joy”
all the time, and thinking of sin as a light matter? The very idea is
blasphemous. He was known as “a man of sorrows and acquainted
with
grief” (Isaiah 53:3). The only mention we have of Him ever
“rejoicing”
was in the fact that spiritual things were hid from some and revealed
to others by God (Luke 10:21) - the doctrine of Election! This is
something most evangelicals tend to feel awkward talking about or many
openly shun, because most want to believe in a God who at least wants
to save everybody, if not actually loves everybody. The truth is far
from this. Christ is our measure. Growing in grace is all about being
more Christ-like, until we shall “be like him” (1
John 3:2). How dare
we then believe that exuding “joy” to others is a right way to live.
Being Christ-like should make us humble, sober and, most of all,
serious.
Fellowship Teas
There is nothing wrong with true Christian fellowship. Talking about
the one thing that unites us, i.e. Christ, and
everything to do with
Christ and the things of God, should be the believers joy, and sharing
these things with others should be sweet. There is also nothing wrong
with individuals inviting each other for tea. The problem comes when
the church
officially organises "soirees," i.e. social
occasions such as fellowship teas, church
barbecues, coffee mornings etc. The problem with these events is that
they very soon take over the real work of the church, and the churches
then rapidly turn into nothing more than social clubs - just like the
“denominations” they have come out of in fact. The talk of the things
of the Lord no longer takes place, let alone has priority. The meetings
might be made “religious” with a ten minute “evangelistic” message or
something similar to give it credibility as a church-organised event,
which everyone listens to politely, but once this “official” bit is
over, the talk is about anything and everything but the things of God.
This is the sure sign of a dead church. Gossip and the things of each
other - of this vain empty world - of time and sense - take over the
discussion. Maybe this is done with the good motive of trying not to
alienate outsiders by “theological” talk. However, it soon becomes
clear that even when no outsiders are present, the talk is still
grossly unspiritual and worldly.
Now, we cannot force people to talk about God. A forced conversation is
no conversation at all. It must come, if it comes at all, from the
heart. Too many evangelical churches have these sorts of meetings,
usually under the guise of “outreach,” and they take no time to
actually teach their members doctrine before going out evangelising.
Most evangelical churches have so much emphasis on outreach,
outreach and more outreach, and very little or no emphasis at all on
teaching and doctrine. The result is that people will learn how to
engage in conversation with strangers perhaps, but they will not have a
clue how to respond when that person being spoken to surprises them by
coming out with a sensible question on spiritual matters! Consequently,
unbelievers can see no difference between people of the world and
people of the church, and see no cause for concern to change their
ways. A lot of churches would actually preach to them that God
loves them (as they are). This even more confirms them in their ways.
“If God loves me as I am,” they conclude, “Why change? Why repent? Why
come to Christ?” More discerning churches would not go this far though,
but still if the members are not taught anything (because “doctrine
divides” they say!), the result is that they will not be able to be
effective witnesses to anyone, and the purpose of evangelism will be
completely lost.
The whole ethos of the Christian's walk in this world is that it should
be other-worldly, not this-worldly. People will of course accuse us and
say we are “too heavenly-minded to be of any earthly good.” But this
can never be the case, indeed to be any earthly good at all we
need just that - to be heavenly-minded. We need to always keep
in
the forefront
of our minds the fact that here is not our home, we look for a city
which is to come, wherein dwelleth righteousness (Hebrews 11:10-16; 2
Peter 3:13).
So all the earthly pleasures that the people of the world seek after,
and indeed we sought after before our conversion, should not only hold
no power over us any more, but should hold no attraction at all to us
any more. Too frequently people who are supposedly converted to Christ
want to hang on, not only to their lusts and passions - we should know
it is obviously wrong to hang on to these - but to their hobbies and
recreations as well. Sailing, golf, cricket, watching films on
television etc. They say that all these things are lawful activities so
long as we do not get too obsessed with them or spend too much time at
them; but is this really so? Christians should plan their lives out in
accordance with what God has them as individuals to do. This involves
some “spare time” from their usual work activities. However, to then
say that we can carry on with our old hobbies in this “spare time” is
not right. Doing anything for our own pleasure (and for no other,
higher reason) is a sin, it is against the First Commandment for a
start. If we therefore have any “spare time” we should fill it with
useful things (there is always something to do),
the refreshment for
the body and soul coming from the break from the usual routine, not in
either inactivity or taking up some hobby purely for one's own
pleasure. We are not our own any more (1 Corinthians 6:19). The
chief
end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever
(Westminster Shorter
Catechism, Question 1), not to glorify self and enjoy self in any way,
shape or form. We are finished with self. Does that mean that I must
give up watching films, sailing, golf etc.? Yes, most certainly it
does! All these activities are pointless and serve no useful purpose
whatsoever. “Christians in Sport” is just as much an oxymoron
(contradiction in terms) as “Catholic Truth Society.” Christians should
get out of sport and such like activities as soon as they are
converted, as well as the other frivolous, pointless activities they
partook of before they were saved by God's grace. The Christian life is
far more satisfying than anything these worldly trinkets have to offer.
“Love not the world, neither the things that are in the
world. If any
man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him” (I
John 2:15).
“If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are
above,
where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on
things above, not on things on the earth.” (Colossians 3:1,2)
“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God,
that ye
present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God,
which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world:
but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove
what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”
(Romans
12:1,2).
This world is passing away. It is vain and empty. It seems to me
however that most “Christians” are really quite happy here. They may
get a few ups and downs but when these happen so long as they think
about Jesus and get a gooey feeling in their heart as a result, then
that is all true religion means to them. This is pathetic. We are
“strangers and pilgrims on the earth” (Hebrews
11:13). This is not our
home.
“For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come”
(Hebrews
13:14).
“All is vanity and vexation of spirit” under the
sun (Eccl. 1:14).
We may not like to believe this but it is true. Why are there so many
exhortations in the Bible telling us not to put our trust here? Because
it is all passing away.
“For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth
for a
little time, and then vanisheth away” (James 4:14).
“Set your affection on things above, not on things on the
earth” (Colossians
3:2).
We must leave this place one day and so it is best that we prepare for
this as soon as possible. If you had a dying relative and were told
that they only had six months to live, you could choose to disbelieve
it. However, when that person does die after six months then the trauma
will be a lot worse for you because you had spent all that time trying
to convince yourself that they were not going to die. However, if you
had spent that six months facing reality and the truth of the matter,
then when that person died you would be far more able to cope with it
as you would have had six months to prepare for the event and to come
to terms with it. It is the same in this world. It is merely a
preparation place for the next. Hence the sooner we face facts and see
the truth of the matter, which is that this world is in bondage to
decay and that there is nothing here, then the sooner our faculties
(body, mind, will etc.) can come to terms with these facts and indeed
see our need of Christ.
All too many people who call themselves Christians, indeed
evangelicals, are thoroughly convinced that the church exists for their
own well-being. They would not question this, and assume this to be the
case. However, the ultimate aim of the church is not to pander to self,
but it exists solely for the glory of God. Church is not in existence
to give us a sense of well-being, or for any other physical/ emotional/
spiritual problem that we have, but solely in order to make known God's
glory in everything; that God may be exalted and His truth known.
Consequently, church is not for social events, counselling groups,
self-help groups and the like. This is purely the philosophy of the
world without God, and has no place in the church. The unbelievers out
there in the world, having no hope and without God in the world
(Ephesians 2:12), only have each other; they do not have God - He is
far from them. Let them try to find help in such like groups if they
can. The Christian is far from such activity as the Lord is his light
and salvation (Psalm 27:1).
“The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do
unto me.”
(Hebrews 13:6.)
“Though the LORD be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly:
but the
proud he knoweth afar off.” (Psalm 138:6.)
The world fills itself with self-help groups and group therapy sessions
and the like. Without God there is only despair out there, so they have
to keep on trying to convince each other that they are worth something
and that there is something in this life to live for. Therefore they
fill their empty lives with positive thinking and try to have a
positive attitude about themselves (“It's not dark, and we're not down
here!”). To this end indeed, they only have each other to lean on for
support. So they fill their lives with social events and things
encouraging fellowship with each other, not realising that what they
are doing is worshipping each other rather than God, living for their
own feelings and sense of well-being rather than for God's glory.
Everywhere we look, this philosophy is churned out before us in the
media, government and education (propaganda) system. Management
training schemes are full of this kind of thing. This is what the
religion of Secular Humanism is all about. The church should therefore
have nothing whatsoever to do with this. The way of Christ is the way
of self-abasement and humility, not self-assertiveness and self-esteem.
Christians need to know this and stop worshipping self and one another.
God is everything and man nothing. We should never forget that.
To summarise, people think that God is altogether such an one as
themselves (Psalm 50:21). There is an attitude, in prayer and worship
for example, of a “pal-i-ness” with God, as though God is our best pal
and we can tell him all our troubles and whisper sweet nothings in His
ear all the time. A Santa Claus figure in the sky that we can punch in
the stomach as hard as we like, and he will still just sit there and
smile at us. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is not God.
This is not the Christ of the Bible.
“God is a spirit, infinite, eternal and unchangeable in his
being,
wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth”
(Westminster
Shorter Catechism, Question 3)
God is not such an one as we are, he is altogether majestic in the
heavens. How much therefore should we worship Him, and work out our own
salvation in fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12)? He is not just a
big fat daddy in the sky like Santa Claus. This kind of God is a total
figment of people's imagination. God is altogether God and we should
fear Him. Modern evangelicals say it is the unbeliever who should fear
God because they are on the road to hell, and the believer who should
not fear God because he isn't. But the reality is that it is the
unbeliever who has no fear of God before his eyes at all (Psalm 36:1).
The unbeliever denies God's existence. It is the believer that is
characterised in the Bible as the God-fearer, and this is the
Christian's lot. If we do not fear God, we must conclude that we are
not His at all, and do not know Him who is a consuming fire (Hebrews
12:29).
“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God,
and keep his
commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:13.)
Independent
Now we come on to church government. Most people who call themselves
Christian will immediately think that this is such a dry subject, and a
totally unimportant one. However, the truth is far otherwise. Church
government is very important.
We frame our lives from what we see in the Bible. Worship, dress, our
walk in the world etc. are all to be framed in this way. This is the
Regulative Principle. Church government is no different. We believe in
Presbyterian church government because the Bible teaches it, especially
in the Acts of the Apostles, and especially in chapter fifteen. But we
also see it from our own common sense to some degree. It is obvious
that it is the best form of government, where elders rule the church
and where they regulate one other, rather than any one of them exalting
himself above the rest. The two extremes either side of this ideal are
so obviously open to corruption. Episcopacy, i.e.
rule by bishops, is
an hierarchy where some elders are given more power than others,
culminating in a system where one man rules over all. This is seen in
the example of the Roman Catholic church, where the pope so exalts
himself that he is deemed by the church, when speaking on behalf of the
church, to actually be infallible. No mere man should ever be given
such power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. However, many people
can see this blatant abuse of power, but they go to the opposite
extreme and believe in Independency in their church government. This is
where each congregation is completely separate from each other
congregation. This certainly avoids the possibility of a “pope” arising
from the midst of the church at large, but this system is just as wrong
in itself as well. Little “popes” over their own geographical patch
always emerge instead. Christ's church is surely one church, not many
tinpot little churches scattered all over the world not having anything
to do with each other. In this Independent form of government, there is
no restraint in any way. Any congregation can do what it likes and
no-one can stop it. It can stray in doctrine, worship and practice far
from what is right, but if no-one within the church complains (and
those who do will have been hounded out by the time the changes come
into effect), no-one else can stop this from happening. This is a major
problem, which Independents do not seem able to see. On the one hand,
if anyone in a congregation has a complaint about an elder, for
example, and the elders of the church do not deal with the complaint to
his satisfaction, he can go nowhere else for justice. He could take it
to the congregation in general, but the problem with this is that most
congregations are so under the control of the elders that they would
never vote against any of them because they become convinced that they
are such “nice” people outwardly, so there is nothing he
can do. Similarly, the other way around. If a congregation's elders
have a problem with some troublemaker in the church, so much so that
they eventually, after due procedure, have to excommunicate him; all he
needs do is go to the next tinpot little independent church down the
street, and he can join that without any problem, because that church
does not have dealings with the church where the trouble was! Neither
problem can be solved properly in Independency.
So often, when an independent church has decided on a course of action
that a minority do not like, that minority, being out-voted, can simply
“split” from the church and form their own tinpot little evangelical
church down the road. This happens so often, especially if there is a
leader type amongst the minority, such as someone who has been to
management school, who can gather a following of some sort.
Independents are the first to complain that Presbyterian churches are
always splitting, but this is not so. Presbyterian churches do split,
but the problem is that when they split, it is very visible, because
every congregation in them splits along the lines of the dispute in
question. However, the actual number of splits in Presbyterian
churches, is miniscule compared to the thousands upon thousands of
splits in tinpot little evangelical churches all over the country. The
difference is that we never see these, as they all by definition happen
on a local basis, so unless it happens near you, you never know the
real reason why any independent evangelical church was started in any
one place. If you do delve back in the history of the church in
question, the likelihood is that it was started by a split! So how dare
Independents criticise Presbyterians for always splitting! Presbyterian
church government has helped to minimise the many splits in the church
that would have otherwise occurred if the church had been under
Independency in its government!
The major problem with Independency is that it breeds little “popes,”
all of whom have their own “patch” and whom no-one in the congregation
ever dare criticise. If someone does dare to criticise, that person is
hounded out of the church. But no fear, they can just take a few people
with them and start up their own little empire down the road! This is
exactly the same error as popery. Popery breeds big Hitlers, exalting
men to have power over wide areas. Independency breeds little
Hitlers,
exalting men to have absolute power in their own patch.
Most of the elders in Independent churches are management types who
have learned all the techniques there are to keep people under their
thumb without them realising they are being manipulated. They teach
their flocks that the worst sin that can ever happen to a church is a
“split” and that they are to never rock the boat in any way to make
sure a “split” never happens. So that is what the people end up
believing. But splits do happen, and occasionally they are good things,
purging the church of dross and purifying it. So one can never say that
a “split” in and of itself is the worst thing that can ever happen to a
church. It depends on the individual situation. However, we still end
up with vast bulks of most independent congregations blindly following
the elders, perfectly under their thumb, not believing they can do any
wrong, blindly following their great god “church,” and thus being no
different from Roman Catholics, in that their “church” takes precedence
over truth and righteousness.
Presbyterianism can indeed be abused, and has been, we are
all aware of that. But at least in
theory, checks should be in place all along the line to keep the elders
in their rightful places as equals, so they neither exalt themselves
over their flocks nor each other.
Evangelical
All Bible words can be corrupted and used in a wrong way, and none more
so than the word “evangelical.” It has come to mean quite a few
different things in the modern church scene. The word means “of the
Evangel,” or “good news.” It is therefore a good word to use, when used
properly. However, Independent Evangelical churches tend to distort it
in two main ways:
Firstly, we see that whilst the word “evangelical” means “of good
news,” it is assumed that because it implies a declaration of good news
to all men, that God therefore must want all men to be saved. This is
where these churches go wrong. It is the main reason why a vast
majority of these churches end up promoting the heresy of Arminianism.
This is the idea that God wants or desires all men to be saved, but He
cannot effect that, so it is up to the individual person to make his
“decision for Christ,” God giving us the free will to accept or reject
Him. Nothing
could be further from the truth. This is a total heresy and should not
be embraced for a moment. It is a heresy simply because of the fall of
Adam, thus rendering ALL his posterity descending from him by ordinary
generation fallen too - indeed totally depraved. None of us have the
free will to choose good and reject evil. Only when we see our
depravity in all its hatefulness can we realise how wretched we really
are, and that God has not left us to choose Him, because if left to
ourselves, none of us would do so. Until we see our depravity for what
it is, we will not believe the truth or have any interest in the things
of God. It is God's will that is sovereign, not man's. It has to be God
who chooses us, not the other way around.
“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you”
(John 15:16).
Evangelicals may purport to be “Calvinistic” in their doctrine and say
they believe this in theory, but when it comes down to it, they don't
believe it at all in practice. They present a God wanting all men to be
saved but not being able to do anything about it, i.e.
a frustrated
God, which, let's be honest, the unbeliever will just laugh at! These
evangelicals are playing into the unbeliever's hand! They are preaching
a God that the unbeliever can reject, and he does so in no uncertain
terms, thus feeding his pride and nurturing the idea
within himself that he has defeated God! Far from God not being able to
do anything about anything, God performs all His pleasure. Otherwise he
would not be God. He would not be all-powerful. Because of our total
depravity, it is God who chooses who will be saved. All men are called
to repent and believe, but those who are saved are those who respond to
this call because God gives them the gifts of repentance and faith to
do so. We cannot work up these things from within ourselves, they are
the gift of God.
The second point follows on from this, and that is that evangelical
churches
tend to have outreach as their primary function. I have
mentioned this before, but it needs repeating. Outreach is NOT the
primary function of the church. Not that outreach in and of itself is
wrong, far from it, but evangelical churches are different from most
other churches outwardly in that they are very visible in their
outreach work, and they do this to the exclusion of virtually
everything else. Doctrine and the ongoing teaching of the Bible should
be the primary purpose of every church, in order to build up the people
in the faith. Outreach is important, but secondary.
But the evangelical leaders use emotional blackmail, saying such things
as “if the church doesn't evangelise it will die," conveniently
forgetting that Christ Himself said, “I will build my church;
and the
gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).
God will
build His church. He doesn't need us. We could just sit up by the fire
in a nice comfy chair and do nothing, and not one of God's elect will
be lost, God will still do all His pleasure. However, of course, if we
do sit by the fire and do nothing, we will be being very disobedient.
That is why we involve ourselves with the life of the church, not
because God needs us in any way, shape or form. We must never forget
that we are expendable.
“Outreach” is like happiness. The more you pursue it, the more you will
not get the results you want. If, however, you pursue something else,
something far more useful and worthwhile, then happiness, or
satisfaction, is sure to come as a result. Similarly the “outreach”
meeting will never bring results because the church ends up being seen
by outsiders as just existing to “get them in” and for no other reason.
Once they are in, the only thing they are taught then is how to bring
others in. The whole empty thing is self-perpetuating! This is as bad
as the Jehovah's Witnesses, and the church is clearly seen by the
outside world as nothing more than a strange religious sect, and
rightly so.
The best form of “outreach” is to forget about the outreach meetings
completely and concentrate on building individual believers up in the
faith through teaching, Catechism classes and, above all, Bible study.
Most people in these churches would appear horrified at this, but
despite their reaction, the right way forward is for believers to be
first of all built up in the faith properly. As individuals in the
church are being built up, so the church itself is being built up and
the people in it will then quite naturally evangelise without thinking.
Surely this is the best way of witnessing to the world, namely when our
walk with God is so heavenly, and our evangelism is so natural.
We cannot just assume that everyone in the church will come to know
what the Bible teaches by leaving it up to them as individuals to do
their own Bible study at home. In fact this whole attitude stems from
the idea mentioned earlier about these churches teaching that “doctrine
divides,” so the less doctrine taught by the church the better! But the
fact remains that there is one ultimate truth. There is a Bible to
study. We all have every right to disagree with the pastor, or whoever
is teaching us, but we do not do this lightly, because he is put over
us for the primary purpose of teaching, and should theoretically be
more educated in Biblical things than we are.
An uneducated ministry is very common in these independent evangelical
churches, and this is totally wrong. Most of the people in charge are
in their position of authority just because they fancy themselves as a
preacher - or as they say “feel called” to the ministry. None of them
are properly trained, only a few having been to a Bible College at all
(most of which are grossly Arminian in content, and are just an excuse
for a good time at the taxpayers expense), and that would usually have
been only for a year or two at most. Hence it is not uncommon for a
person no more than a few years in the faith suddenly to become the
minister of his own church. I am not necessarily saying that the pastor
should have had any formal ministerial training, but the pastor ought
at least to be a very mature Christian of at least twenty years in the
faith if possible, together with the requirements of an elder in 1
Timothy 3.
An uneducated or immature pastor causes problems as many members of the
congregation would very likely be more spiritually aware than they are,
and
as a result friction is inevitable. It is an embarrassment for an elder
or minister to have a lay person under their wing who is more
spiritually discerning than they are. The one thing these leaders like
doing
best is to keep people under their thumb all the time, being taught and
kept in line by themselves. This is the lust for power that drives
them. So someone who is more keenly spiritually aware is quite
naturally going to have to look elsewhere than their own church leaders
for their spiritual food. Indeed this is quite often the true
Christian's lot in life, having to suffer “without the camp” (Hebrews
13:13), foraging for food (John 10:9). This will annoy the church's
leaders as they know that they have no control over such persons. They
want control over everything in the church (including the “revival”
when it comes!), and get very upset when they see themselves losing
control, as people do not look up to them any more. A more spiritually
aware member “rocks the boat” quite naturally without even trying to do
so, and is branded a “troublemaker” because the leaders do not like
them.
It therefore remains that the primary aim of a church is to teach
doctrine. Modern evangelicals find this too much like hard work and so
don't bother - after all, church is a “spare time” activity,
i.e. they
come to church in their “spare time,” when they could have gone fishing
or something instead. But if we really love God, we should want to make
church our most important activity, far more important than our paid
employment in fact.
These churches also have a false idea of conversion. Most people in
them are not continually hungering and thirsting after the things of
God in any way, as they should be if they were truly converted. They
rather cling on to a gooey feeling they had once, a long time ago,
which they can call their “conversion.” This is a bit of a misnomer as
true conversion is an ongoing thing - we are continually being
converted. If they mean regeneration (being “born again”) then that is
an invisible event and is not felt straight away (c.f.
natural birth).
The gooey feeling in the heart “conversion” experience is something
that these people cling to so vehemently. 300 years of “Evangelicalism”
is partly responsible for this as signs of
“conversion” were encouraged to be looked for. Originally this was from
the right
motive of examining yourselves “whether ye be in the faith”
(2
Corinthians 13:5), which is always a profitable exercise. However,
people turned this into looking to their emotions instead. The gooey
feeling that they experience may or may not be their first awareness of
their being in a regenerate state. If they are true believers, then it
could well be the time that they first became aware of their regenerate
state, and these people should be striving forward in their faith,
working it out in “fear and trembling”
(Philippians 2:12), giving
diligence to make their “calling and election sure”
(2 Peter 1:10).
Otherwise it is probably nothing of the kind and no different to the
kind of ecstatic feelings that can be whipped up by Indian gurus or
whirling dervishes. All these people have is this gooey feeling to look
back to all the time to assure them of their “salvation,” and they then
are simply told to “believe the promises” and they will be all right.
This is dangerous stuff, as people could by these easy means be deluded
into thinking they are believers when they are not. Most churches
accept this readily however as it keeps the numbers up. Arminian
“easy-believism” is very much to blame for this, as “becoming a
Christian” is just a matter of going forward at a mission, being told,
“Now you're a Christian, Congratulations!”
Consider the following (true) testimony:
“Sometime after having received this glorious manifestation,
being
young, he was again entangled in the vanities of the world, of which he
afterwards sincerely and truly repented. And it pleased God on the
evening of 21st September 1823 to again hear his prayer. It seemed as
though the house was filled with consuming fire. This sudden appearance
of a light so bright than would naturally be expected occasioned a
shock of sensation visible to other extremities of the body. It was
however followed by a calmness and serenity of mind and an overwhelming
rapture of joy that surpassed understanding, and in a moment a
personage stood before him. The stature of this personage was a little
above the common size of men of this age. His garment was perfectly
white and had the appearance of being without seam. This glorious being
declared himself to be an angel of God sent forth by commandment to
communicate to him that his sins were forgiven and that his prayers
were heard, and also to bring the joyful tidings that the covenant
which God made with ancient Israel concerning their posterity was at
hand to be fulfilled. That the great preparatory work for the second
coming of the Messiah would speedily commence. That the time was at
hand for the gospel to be preached in its fullness and power to all
nations that a people might be prepared with faith and righteousness
for the millennial reign of universal peace and joy”.
Impressed? Would you allow him into membership of your
church? These are the words of Joseph Smith, founder of the
Mormon church - a heresy with its masonic undertones and denial of
Christ's deity.
Consider also the following testimony:
“….while he was describing the change which God works in the
heart
through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did
trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given
me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law
of sin and death.”
This would indeed be good enough for membership in most, if not all,
evangelical churches today. But it is the so-called testimony of the
Arminian John Wesley, who all of these churches really
think was a true
believer. Yet, consistently, throughout his life, he hated the truth,
indeed he seemed to hate the truth more and more as his knowledge of
theology grew. No evidence of a saving change here, we fear.
This is the kind of thing that we are up against all the time. People
who have had this sort of experience will be utterly convinced that it
is a genuine “experience” of God. They will be the hardest to be
convinced, humanly speaking, of anything different. And the Independent
Evangelical Churches will pander to them, and allow them into
membership on such testimony. In all seriousness, we cannot rely simply
on people's “experience of God” in order to determine whether they are
truly in the faith or not.
I have seen several people profess conversion in these churches, on the
basis of having had a gooey feeling inside themselves at a certain
time, and indeed getting the whole church very excited about it
(especially if they had lived a particularly profligate life
beforehand), only to fall away completely some time afterwards, even
having, in one case I can think of, an admission from the pastor
eventually that maybe he hadn't been converted after all (a few months
earlier that same pastor was jumping with joy over the same person's
so-called “conversion”). As a result of this, and seeing many people
keen to hear emotional testimonies but totally uninterested in
spiritual things, I cannot help coming to the conclusion that very few
of them have been truly regenerated at all.
Conclusion
The outsider simply takes one look at the Independent Evangelical
Church scene and laughs. The outsider is not in the slightest bit
interested in seeing so-called Christians aping the world. They expect
the Christian to be serious, sober and different from them, and when
they see so-called “Christians” aping them, they are turned away from
true religion as a result. It has nothing different for them. Indeed
this is the opposite reaction to the one the
Evangelical Church is trying to get from them! It is
amazing that
“Christian Unions” in universities and colleges take in all this
rubbish hook, line and sinker. You would have thought that the people
who should be the more intelligent members of the whole population
would not be taken in by it all, but it only goes to show that it is
God that reveals truth to whom He will, and those who are quite happy
with a feelings-orientated church, will get one, and go to hell.
We are serious about this. The Independent Evangelical Church scene is
anathema to God. It turns people away from true religion,
and:
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
compass sea
and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him
twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” (Matthew
23:15).