What Is A Church (Part #1)

What Is a Church

With the emergence of new gospels to compete with the institutes of higher learning and the Gospel of the Kingdom, it was necessary to revisit the ideology of the church as the Kingdom of God.  If the church is the Kingdom of God, then the church would be entitled to all of the earthly blessings promised in the Holy Scriptures.   To validate these blessing, it would also require the reinterpretation of the meaning of the word 'blessing.'    The spiritual blessings promised by Jesus would require a type of explaining away and in their place the insertion of the blessings of Abraham.  This would fulfill the need of the Gospel of Prosperity that preys on the gullibility of the Saints.   The greatest blessing is no longer salvation; it is waking up in the morning and collecting blessings.  

None of the new age definitions fully defines what a church is.  Now this might seem like an easy question, the sort of question one might answer in a simple sentence or two.  Try it.  Ask yourself the question.  What is the answer formed in your mind?   “A building in which Christians meet for Bible study and worship,” is one distinct possibility.  “A group of Christians who gather for religious purposes” is another.  A critic might says, “A church is a club for insiders and hypocrites.”  A more modern day answer would be, a church is a place we go to get our praise on and collect blessings.  These quick answers do not take us very far if we are searching for a deeper understanding of what the church is, or what the church ought to be.  

In the above paragraph and throughout this book, I will move back and forth between the descriptive of what a church is to the prescriptive of what a church ought to be.  There are times I will speak from the perspective of the visible (organized) church and time I will reference the invisible (within the Heart) church.  My seemly rambling is not accidental, nor is it the product of a nomadic disposition; it is because trying to reconcile the church of the Bible with the church of today is a daunting task.   In my study of the church, I am not so much interested in what churches are, or in what people think churches are.  I am more concern about what the churches should be or once was.  When I ask, “What is a church?” I am wondering about the ideal church sanctioned by Christ, rather than those spoken of in the book of Revelation. 

Try to imagine; Christ is coming back for his church.  Try to combine into one cohesive unit all of the concepts and ideologies then visualize them as the Bride of Christ.  It boggles the mind when we think of the confusion that exists within the households of faith.  The visible church seems to have discarded the biblical concept of Heaven, Hell, The Kingdom of God and everlasting life, and even the prophecies are cast aside.  The church has become a business, and it is all about raising money, earthly gains, and continued blessing. 

To understand what a church should be, sometimes we need to take a closer look at the things the church should not be.  The evolving aspect of Christianity has placed the organize church in a tedious position as it struggles to redefine and maintain its relevance in a changing society.   Is the church just a place of entertainment? 

We must keep the proper perspective as related to the problems facing the modern day church.  To do so, it is necessary that we began with Jesus' statement to Peter concerning the establishment of the church and ending with his letters to the churches in Revelation.   Somewhere between Acts and Revelation, we ought to be able to reconcile the diverse views and opinions.

In the book of Revelation, Jesus sent seven letters to the representative churches.   Each church is said to represent a particular time in the church age from inception to the raptured (caught up).   We will discuss these letters in detail later on in this book.  In each of the letters, Jesus offered a stern condemnation and recommendation to the church.   The mention of these letters now is to show that I am not alone in offering my condemnation of the church.  The church had failed to live up to Jesus' expectation the same as the Children of Israel failed to live up to what was expected of them.   

Jesus mentioned the church to Peter, but regardless of what spin we put on it, the church did not begin until the day of Pentecost.   In a conversation with his disciples, Jesus posed the question, "who do men say I am?"  Some of the disciples compared him to John the Baptist, some to Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.  There is a profound message in the answers given; Peter responded with the appropriate response, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."  Jesus said to Peter "And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(Matthew 16:18).   The operative word prevails and from today's perspective understanding what the church is is imperative to understanding this scripture.  

Let us take a closer look at some of the numerous interpretations of this scripture, and then we will try to decide what a church is and how we will refer to it throughout this book.  Remember, the road to misinterpretation began with the failure to understand the symbology used in Jesus' speech.  

Peter is a Greek word, meaning rock. Peter held a very prominent and conspicuous place among the apostles, during our Savior's life; and he was afterward foremost in counsel and action, in the early efforts made for the promulgation of the gospel. Peter continued until the apostle Paul entered the field; and from that time, Peter disappears from the sacred history.  Peter's prominence while it remained was due to the boldness and energy, of his personal character--qualities in which he excelled all others until Paul, who united the boldness, surpassed him and strength of Peter with the calmness and steadiness of John.

There can only be one true meaning to this scripture, yet there are diverse interpretations.  The question of 'why' is rarely addressed.  Regardless of the ideology presented, "I am right, and you are wrong", is often the only citation needed to prove one's point.   In those instances when this type of citation is not sufficient, the proclamation of it being a message from God or, "God said", eliminates much of the doubt.  There are numerous ways to interpret the scripture, yet, we err when we interpret the scripture in a manner necessary to justify our self-serving rhetoric.  Failure to follow the proper guidelines will result in a fluid interpretation that is not scripturally sound and will not withstand the test of time.

The Roman Catholic Church rely mainly on (Matthew 16:18), so far as they rely at all on the direct authority of the Scriptures, for supporting the claims of the bishop of Rome to be the head of the church, they also consider him the successor of the apostle Peter. That the apostles, however, did not understand these words as investing Peter with any official supremacy, is evident from the conversation in respect to precedence, which afterward arose among them.

"At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" (Matthew 18:1).  To demonstrate his point, "And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, and said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 18:2-3).

These verses place emphasis on becoming as a little child, in a hierarchy built on power and control this is not an acceptable position.   The person vying for a position of power will use condescending clichés such as, "In the church there is no big (I's) and little (U's)", the assembly response with fervor as a web deceit and control is spun.  

"And he came to Capernaum: and being in the house; he asked them, "What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?" But they held their peace: for by the way they had disputed among themselves, who should be the greatest" (Mark 9:33-34).

They disputed (augured) among themselves on who should be in charge.  Whenever a group assembles there seems to be the question of who is in charge.  Common within the church and it is human nature to want to be in charge.   It was easy for the Nicolaitans, a thing Jesus hated, to come in and set up positions of rulership within the church.