Here are four main points that will be
covered in this article
1. "Worship" is a service,
not a ritual. Those who "attend church" and imitate Old
Testament worship patterns generally neglect the New Testament commands to
exhort one another daily (Hebrews
2. The Old Testament looks forward
to the Age in which all men would worship God everywhere, and not just
in that "place which the LORD your God shall choose" (Deuteronomy
12:11). The New Covenant priesthood is decentralized and universalized, not
restricted to the "ordained" and the church traditions of men.
3. Exhortation is conversational,
not sermonic. Preaching means dialogue, not a monologue.
Rather than being equipped by New Testament-style exhortation and service,
church-goers can become impotent and dependent upon a credentialed
"professional" who engages in statism.
4. Fellowship is best accomplished
in homes, not in pews. In "church" the
"dignity" of priestly pomp and "worship" is substituted for
the personal, house-to-house communion pictured in the Scriptures (Acts
These
four points are very plainly at odds with most every church in the country. But
the point is not simply to be different, nor to insult all other churches. The
purpose is to analyze apparently "obvious" traditions in the light of
the Scriptures (Acts
What is "Worship"?
The
basic meaning of the word "worship" is service. To
"worship" God is to put every area of one's life under the His Law.
Worship in the generic sense is the devotion we owe to God in the whole of
life. God is sovereign, He is Lord, having sovereignty over us and propriety in
us, and therefore in all that we do we owe subjection to him, devotion to His
revealed will, obedience to His commandments. There is
no area of life where the injunction does not apply (1 Corinthians
In
the Old Testament there was also a more specific usage for "worship,"
namely, the observance of the ceremonial rituals. These ritual observances
typified worship in every area of life. Animal sacrifice, the burning of
incense, attendance at temple, and other rigors were imposed on the people of
Jesus
spoke of the New Covenant form of worship in John 4. The woman at the well,
having been confronted with the ethical demands of the Lord Jesus (regarding
her adulterous life), attempts a "doctrinal" diversion: she asks Jesus
about "worship." Putting words in Jesus' mouth, she claims that
worship occurs in a certain place (John
In
the common, specific sense, "worship" means attending to the
ceremonial requirements of the Old Covenant, going to a certain place.
But these acts only symbolized true "worship," and were
necessary to prod a Spiritless people to that worship which means obedience to
God in every area of life, in Spirit and in Truth.
Can
you find one occurrence in the New Testament books of "worship" in
the ceremonial/specific sense (going to a specific place to worship)
being required of bondservants of Christ? The answer is no. Or are the
occurrences of "worship" speaking of obedience in every
area of life? The answer is yes. Do any of the Greek words used for
"worship" occur in any sense requiring bondservants of Christ to go
to
The Enduring Old Testament Law
The
Mosaic law commanded God's people to gather for
worship and to hear God's Word (Deuteronomy 12:5-12; 31:11-12). The Old
Testament required travel to a centralized location to hear a special
priesthood. The reason is that the Spirit was not yet given to the people under
the Old Covenant, and since they had no Spirit to communicate with God, they
had to go to a physical building and hear a physical priest to understand what
God's Word was. Do we still have to hear God's Word from a special priesthood?
Or does the Spirit of God dwell within us today? Compare these commands with
Jesus' conversation with the woman at the well (John
Obviously,
we do not "bring an offering" or "come before Him" in the
same way we did in the Old Covenant. Nor do we
"hear God's Word" by going to the typological temple and hearing a
priest. Scripture says we are all priests now (1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6;
Old
Covenant believers would be astonished at the scope of publication of God's
Word in our day. This is guided by the powerful work of the Holy Spirit
Himself. Thus, publishers should labor as priests under God, and see their work
as having great and special Spiritual significance.
This
massive outpouring of Truth works to enable every believer-priest to know and
study God's Word and to proclaim it to his neighbors. And it all takes place
outside the walls of institutional churches. In fact, the "church"
has historically opposed the free dissemination of Scripture and its
exposition. The Roman Catholic Church burned Christians at the stake for doing
this.
All
of this should be understood as the true Spiritual meaning of the Old Testament
prophecies. Joel
Thus,
no building can be said to be the place to worship simply because of the
presence of the special "ordained" priests. Every Believer is a
Priest. We need not "go to
Does the Bible say Believers must go to a Physical church?
Churches
commonly quote Acts 20:7 as a precedent for Church worship, but the whole
impression of Acts 20:7 is rather that of a family
meeting together in a home than of a modern congregation met in a church. "Family" meaning a group of believers and friends.
Is it possible that we may have lost the sense of the congregation as a real
family in God?
Psalm
Does
Scripture require this "special" place of worship in addition to
"everywhere"? One of the burdens of the first century was the corrupt
worship among the Jews, and scripture says in God's advent, that will be
replaced with pure worship among the Gentiles in every place (Malachi
How
do we worship God in the New Covenant? Do we need an institutional priesthood?
Must we journey to a certain centralized location? Must we "attend
church"? It is virtually implied that those who do not "worship"
in a certain place (subordinate to a priest) do not believe in
"assembling" together, or with any appreciation of the Community we
have in Christ. This is false. The question is not, "Are we to
'gather together'"?, but rather "How
are we to 'gather together'"?
The
Judaizers told believers in Christ that unless they observed the ceremonial
requirements of the Old Covenant they weren't being faithful. Their purpose was
not to make obedient patriarchs out of the new converts, but to gain power
over them (Galatians 2:4).
We
should not localize God:
Acts
1 Kings
What does "Preach" mean?
Believers
are to Preach God's Word (2 Timothy 4:2; Acts 20:7-9; 1
Timothy 4:6-16). Also mentioned is "exhort"
and "teach" in these verses. Far more significant, however, is
the entire notion of "preaching". There were no one-man
lectures (monologues) in the early Church until Greek philosophy was
imported into the Church. The traveling philosophers (peripatetics)
were popular in the Greco-Roman world, and were too easily imitated among
Believers. What passes for "preaching" in our day has absolutely
no Biblical warrant. Nowhere in the New Testament is there an example of a "sermon" in the Christ's assemblies.
We
need to emphasize this point. If the Apostle Paul were invited into one of our
meetings and saw only one man give an oration patterned after the Greek
philosophers of his day, with absolutely no interaction with the
"laymen," Paul would demand to know "What's going on here?"
This modern pattern bears no resemblance to the New Testament pattern, although
it is unwittingly patterned after ancient Greek itinerant moralists. The
"sermon" is an unscriptural tradition, imported from Greco-Roman
paganism. Some preachers, of course, fail to meet even the standards of the
Greek philosophers. Their "preaching" is pure entertainment.
Acts 20 is used to establish many modern practices of the
church, and yet it supports none of them. Consider "preaching."
Comments RKM: The text were added so
the reader can see how different translations wrote the verse.
(ALT) Now on the first [day] of the week [i.e.
Sunday], the disciples having been gathered together to break bread,
Paul began holding a discussion with them, being about to be departing
the next day, and he kept prolonging the word [fig.,
discussion] until
(ASV) And upon the first day of the
week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them,
intending to depart on the morrow; and prolonged his speech until
(BBE) And on the first day of the
week, when we had come together for the holy meal, Paul gave them a talk,
for it was his purpose to go away on the day after; and he went on talking till
after the middle of the night.
(CEV) On the first day of the week we
met to break bread together. Paul spoke to the people until
(ISV) On the first day of the week,
when we had met to break bread, Paul began to address the people. Since
he intended to leave the next day, he went on speaking until
(KJV+) And1161
upon1722 the3588 first3391
day of the3588
week,4521 when the3588 disciples3101
came together4863 to break2806 bread,740
Paul3972 preached1256 unto them,846 ready3195
to depart1826 on the3588 morrow;1887
and5037 continued3905 his speech3056
until3360 midnight.3317
(YLT) And on the first of the week,
the disciples having been gathered together to break bread, Paul was
discoursing to them, about to depart on the morrow, he was also continuing
the discourse till
The Greek word for
"preach" in Acts 20:7,9 is word dialegomai: it's a "dialogue"
not a "monologue." Dialegomai
means: “to say thoroughly, that is, discuss (in argument
or exhortation): - dispute, reason (with), speak.”. It
comes from the word "di" which means
"a combining form meaning 'two', 'double'." We do not have
"dialogue and discussion" in most "churches," and therefore
do not obey Acts 20:7. Does the church really believe that Paul gave an
uninterrupted lecture -- for twelve hours?!? Dialegomai
is also translated as "reasoned" in Acts 17:2, where Paul "reasoned"
in the synagogue out of the scriptures. Paul "reasoned in the
synagogue every sabbath" (Acts 18:4,19). In church, the preacher doesn't "reason"
with anybody, but simply talks with no chance of interaction with those in the
audience. Dialegomai is also translated as
"disputed" in Acts 17:17, where Paul "disputed he in the
synagogue", and in Acts
For
now, note the inescapable fact that there simply was no "preaching" or
"sermon" as we popularly conceive it today. When we proclaim the
Gospel to our neighbor, we engage in "official and professional
instruction" as priest-kings of Christ! The gates of hell are assaulted
and overcome by our "informal discussion". Modern churches have
replaced the discussion and animated conversation of the New Testament with
"sermons," an invention of the Greeks, and a man-made tradition.
As
a result, I cannot obey the Scriptural commands as cited in 1 Corinthians
Who is a Minister or a Priest?
While
the Apostle could claim to be a "steward of the mysteries of God" (1
Corinthians 4:1), we wonder what Churches mean when they claim the same thing
for themselves, after the age of the Apostles, and denying the duty to all
other ("non-ordained") believers. Perhaps they dispense mysteries
only when speaking ex cathedra. No, surely whenever any believer shares the
Word of God with another, he dispenses mysteries in the same sense as the
churchmen might legitimately claim for themselves.
It
seems that church preachers are sometimes not as interested in exalting the
Apostles or the Gospel as much as their own ecclesiastical power. This
seems to be a fairly significant issue, one that underlies the issue of
preaching and this entire article: The ecclesiocrat
works to "mystify" his "office." He wants a
"mystique" to surround his position. He seeks not to exalt the Word
of God so much as to intimidate and impress the "laity." Many are
unable to think of the work of the elder as attainable, practical, or
understandable, because it is invested with an aura of mystery. The every-day
function of nurturing younger believers and watching over them, concerned for
their Spiritual growth, is converted into a high and lofty ecclesiastical
"office" resembling an inscrutable, occultic
link between god and man. Rather than rooted in Biblical Law and practical
competence therein, this ecclesiocentric authority is
esoteric, shrouded in mystery.
In
the Priesthood of All Believers, all believers can strive to be mature, wise,
and Godly. In denominational churches, the "uninitiated" can never be
"mysterious." They are qualitatively (not just quantitatively)
inferior. "Religion" is thus removed, and the rest of us must read
Ann Landers for "practical" guidance the rest of the week.
In
sharp contrast to this mentality, the Bible wants us to think of every believer
as one who must dispense divine mysteries (Isaiah 61:6; 66:20-23; 1 Peter 2:9).
In fact, the "mystery" which was hidden in the Old Covenant is the
fact that all men shall be a part of God's Kingdom of priests, and they shall
function fully, obediently, and spontaneously (Ephesians 2; Revelation 1:6; 1
Peter 2:5,9; Hebrews 8:8-12) without the rigors of the Old Covenant ceremonial
priesthood (Colossians 1:26-27; Ephesians 1:9-10; 3:5-6; Galatians 3:19 - 4:11)
and without fear of the principalities and powers which held sway over the
nations during the Old Covenant (Revelation 20:1-3). Everyone engages in an
extremely significant and special act when they bring the Word of God to bear
on a neighbor's problems. The New Testament tells us that this conversation has
cosmic significance; the very gates of hell itself are pulled down and Christ's
Kingship extended (2 Corinthians 10:4-5; 1 Corinthians
The Godly father does not dangle fatherhood over his son's head as an unattainable "mystery." He seeks to display and explain fatherhood, helping his son to become a Godly father. The Godly "Minister or Elder" does not mystify himself or an ecclesiastical position of power. He models a life of service and obedience to Biblical Law in a practical way, demystifying competence and Godliness so that it might be imitated by all (1 Peter 5:1-3).
Conclusion
To
say that we are violating Scripture unless we also "attend church" in
the building of an ecclesiastical corporation with a credentialed seminary
graduate in the spotlight, is simply preposterous, a remnant of Roman Catholic
teaching. There is not a shred of evidence to support such an ecclesiastical
requirement, and the whole of Scripture seems to go against it. The movement in
the Bible is away from ceremony and limited special priesthood, and toward
decentralization, an every-believer priesthood, and a
return to direct communication with God through His Spirit.
Our
failure as believers to implement this truth comes from our friendship with
the world, and conformity thereto (Romans 12:1-2; James 4:4). It seems
strange to us to think of a household communion. In our culture, Grandparents
live in their own house, Aunts and Uncles are likewise separated from their
Nieces and Nephews, and it is "trendy" for children to move out of
their parents' house as soon as they possibly can. In our day "the Family"
has been described as one or two working parents and (maybe) 2.2 children
(recently down to 1.8).
If
we were to take a first-century believer (or even a modern-day member of a
number of non-western cultures) up into an airplane over Southern California,
and showed them city after city of single-family dwellings, all packed in like
sardines, row after row, with parents in one house, children in another,
grandparents in another, aunts and uncles in still another, and the poor and
homeless wasting away in the abandoned section of industrial parks and urban
ghettoes (where the suburban dwellers have coercively zoned them) our passenger
would cry. Then he might become enraged: "This is sick! This is an
abomination! I could never have imagined such atomism and selfish isolationism!"
Little does he know that even among those houses where parents and children
dwell together, it is little more than a motel, with students and commuters
simply dropping in to sleep at night. In this land
there is no property -- genuine property -- over which fruitful, honest
dominion can be exercised unhindered by banks or landlords. It is a nation of
slaves. Where in our land is an Abraham, with hundreds of adopted children,
hundreds of domestic apprentices, hundreds of the poor and needy receiving shelter,
hundreds of illiterate orphans being educated and brought up in the nurture and
admonition of the Lord, and several generations of Family in blessed contact
and harmonious community? Well, if we believe the churchmen, that ideal is
clearly unattainable: we live in the New Covenant, and we do not have the
Spiritual resources which Abraham had under the Old Covenant. Right?
Does
Ephesians
We
should always be conscious of Christ's Presence "where two or three are
gathered in My Name." Whenever we obey the command to assemble together
for praising God, Scripture reading and study, exhortation and comfort, prayer
and singing, and remembering the Lord's death in the communal meal, we are
clearly engaging in a very special activity.
Remember,
the "Church" does not save anybody, only our Lord and
Savior Jesus Christ can save us (John 3:17; 10:9, Acts 2:21; 4:12;
15:11; 16:31, Romans 10:9,13).
Name: Janice
Date: Friday, December 01, 2006
Time: 02:22:32 AM