Unhappy With the Church of Christ

There are many misconceptions about the church of Christ, its membership, and what they believe. I am speaking of the church of Christ that you see advertised in your local community and on church bulletin boards out in front of the buildings they meet in. It is often said that the membership of the church of Christ is the people who think they are the only ones who are going to be saved. One wonders if people who make statements like that have ever read their Bible.

The Bible clearly teaches one must be a member of the church of Christ (the church either belongs to Christ or it doesn't—you tell me which). The church is his body (Eph. 1:22-23, Col. 1:18). Christ is "head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body." (Eph. 5:23 NKJV) If Christ is the Savior of the body, and the body is the church, and the church is his church, then please tell me how you are going to be saved outside his body, the church of Christ? It cannot be done. Jesus said, “I will build My church.” (Matt. 16:18 NKJV) If he did, it is his church, “the church of Christ. (see Rom. 16:16)

But it is said, “We mean the denominational church of Christ that exists today, the one that meets down the road. It is not the church of Christ of the Bible.” How do you know the church of Christ you see advertised today is a denomination? Are you like the lady who told me years ago it was impossible today to have the original church of Christ? It was once possible, but it is no longer possible; is that the idea? Many seem to think so. If they are right, then no one can be saved today because that would mean Jesus is the Savior of something that does not exist today. He would be the Savior of a body that no longer exists -- reread the Eph. 5:23 quote in the paragraph above. If it does not exist, you cannot be part of it and cannot be saved.

The lady's idea was that no matter what a body of believers was to believe and practice today, it would end up being no more than another denomination, for it is simply impossible in our day and age to have the original New Testament church. In the eyes of the world, including the eyes of what is generally called Christendom, even if your belief, practice, and terms of admission are identical to that taught and practiced in the New Testament all you end up with is another denomination. Denominationalism is dependent on that line of thought and cannot survive without it.

If it were admitted that the New Testament church in individual congregations could exist today, outside of denominationalism, it would destroy denominationalism, which is the thing that cannot be allowed to happen. If your faith and practice in your congregation were identical to that of the New Testament church, say the church in Jerusalem or Antioch of the first century, do not kid yourself into thinking that the denominations would admit it or accept it, for if they did so, it would mean their ruin. You would be in their eyes just another denomination because that is the way it has to be for them to survive, to justify their existence. However, denominational opposition to the New Testament church does not mean it cannot and does not exist on earth today.

All of this has been a lead-in to what I want to talk about in this article. Many are unhappy with the church of Christ, thinking it is far from what it ought to be. They think we, who are members of the church, are blind and cannot see the problems in the church. Folks, the history of the church as recorded in the New Testament shows the church has rarely been what it ought to be. There is nothing new today along that line.

Even in the original church of the New Testament, the church at Jerusalem, we find the Hellenist widows being neglected in the daily distribution of food (Acts 6:1). The Hebrew widows were being cared for, but not the Hellenist widows. Should this have been? Of course not! To their credit, the problem was quickly resolved but there should not have been a problem in the first place. A little later, we find two bold-faced deceivers in the church (Ananias and Sapphira). Even the model church had problems.

Who would even know where to begin in talking about the problems of the church at Corinth? The Holy Spirit himself speaking through Paul calls them carnal (1 Cor. 3:3). He speaks of envy, strife, and divisions among them (1 Cor. 3:3). They had in full fellowship a man living with his stepmother in a sexual relationship that Paul says not even the Gentiles (non-Christians) would tolerate (1 Cor. 5:1). They were suing one another in court (1 Cor. 6) which would certainly make for a loving church atmosphere would it not? Paul says, "No, you yourselves do wrong and defraud, and you do these things to your brethren!" (1 Cor. 6:8 NKJV) Then there was the way they were conducting the Lord's Supper, which was atrocious (1 Cor. 11:20-22). Paul said about that, "I do not praise you." (1 Cor. 11:22 NKJV)

Later in 2 Cor. 12:20-21 when Paul was planning another trip to Corinth he writes to them saying, "For I fear lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I wish, and that I shall be found by you such as you do not wish; lest there be contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, backbitings, whisperings, conceits, tumults; lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and I shall mourn for many who have sinned before and have not repented of the uncleanness, fornication, and lewdness which they have practiced." (2 Cor. 12:20-21 NKJV) Yes, there is no need to tell me the church is not what it ought to be today, for when has it been? It has not been very often and not in very many places, based on the historical record we have in the New Testament.

In reading the book of Galatians, it appears the churches there were ready to leave Christianity and go into Judaism. Paul starts the third chapter, "O foolish Galatians!" (Gal. 3:1 NKJV) He says, "I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain." (Gal. 4:11 NKJV) "You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (Gal. 5:4 NKJV) False doctrine was being perpetuated in the church of such a serious nature that if not countered would destroy it. Was there a problem in the church?

One can also see problems in the book of Hebrews. They were not progressing in the faith as they should have been. "For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food." (Heb. 5:12 NKJV) Some were forsaking the assembling of themselves together (Heb. 10:25). They had need of endurance (Heb. 10:36). A careful reading of the book leaves one with the impression they were wavering, or were on the brink of it, and thus were being exhorted and encouraged to stiffen up and hang in there. This book was not written to a particular church, but it does show problems among the people that make up the church. You cannot get a perfect church without perfect people.

Among the seven churches of Asia we see a church that had "left your first love" (Ephesus, Rev. 2:4 NKJV), a church that had some in it who "hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality." (Pergamos, Rev. 2:14 NKJV) That same church, Pergamos, also had people in it "who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate." (Rev. 2:15 NKJV) Would you say there was serious false doctrine in the church? Why was nothing being done about it? Would you say this church of Christ was what it ought to have been?

At the church at Thyatira, Jesus says they were allowing Jezebel, "who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and beguile My servants to commit sexual immorality and to eat things sacrificed to idols." (Rev. 2:20 NKJV) A lot of translations use the word "tolerate" rather than "allow," but the point is that the church was letting it go on. Can you imagine that?

Jesus described the church at Sardis as "dead" (Rev. 3:1), yet even so, there were a few in it that had "not defiled their garments" (Rev. 3:4) and would be saved. They all could be saved if they would repent, but that was a question yet to be resolved, whether or not they would do it. Finally, there was the church at Laodicea, which was the lukewarm church (Rev. 3:14-22). This was the church Jesus said he would spew out of his mouth (Rev. 3:16). They could not see (Rev. 3:18) and did not know their true state (Rev. 3:17), yet Jesus teaches they could even yet repent and be saved (Rev. 3:19).

One can see there have been very few congregations, even in New Testament times, that were what they ought to have been. The church at Philadelphia, Rev. 3:7-13, passed the test when the Lord (via means of John) wrote, and it seems nothing negative was said by Paul about the church at Philippi. But even in the church at Colosse, they were subjecting themselves to regulations (Col. 2:20-22) that were no part of the law of Christ but were in accord with "the commandments and doctrines of men." (Col. 2:22 NKJV) The church of the Thessalonians had those who were walking disorderly (2 Thess. 3:11). The church has always had problems and often very serious ones, and one can only wonder how long the church at Philadelphia and the church at Philippi remained free of problems.

Yes, people look at the church of Christ today that you see advertised, and because there are problems within it, the feeling is that it cannot be any better than any of the denominations or Catholicism. But here is the thing that makes the big, big difference. The one thing all the congregations I have discussed in this article had in common, along with the congregations of the church of Christ today, was that the membership understood what the true gospel was and believed and obeyed it, and thus were in a place where they could be saved individually if not collectively. That place was the church of Christ, his body, his church, that which he is the Savior of (Eph. 5:23). Not everyone in the church of Christ, first century or today, is saved. How one lives after gospel obedience does matter, and not all remain faithful or live the life.

The problem today is that the denominational world does not understand what gospel obedience is. As sincere as they may be, and I do not doubt them on that count, they do not and will not accept Peter's preaching on the day of Pentecost that baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). Until they are ready to accept and obey that clearly stated fact they remain outside the body of Christ which is what Christ is saving. One enters into the body of Christ by being baptized into it. "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body." (1 Cor. 12:13 NKJV) We are baptized into Christ ("For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ."—Gal. 3:27, NKJV), which is the same thing as being baptized into his body. Salvation is in Christ, not outside of him, and we are baptized into him. "Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus…" (Rom. 6:3 NKJV) Sins are only forgiven when one enters into Christ.

Many denominational people will eventually be immersed, but it is often for the wrong reason. We are not to be baptized to gain admission into some manmade denomination. If we do, what does that avail? Again, if I say I am saved before and without baptism, why bother with it at all, for your immersion will not be that which Peter preached or Paul preached? The baptism Peter preached (Acts 2:38) gave you remission of sins. The baptism Paul preached (see the prior paragraph, Rom. 6:3) put you in Christ where salvation is (see 2 Tim. 2:10), which is in reality the same thing Peter taught, but in different words.

I freely grant that everyone who has believed the gospel, repented of their sins, confessed Jesus, and was thereafter immersed "for the remission of sins" and did those things from the heart is in the church of Christ, even if his/her membership thereafter is in some denomination. That person is a Christian and was saved at the point of such obedience. However, as the Bible clearly teaches, we must, as Christians, follow God's commandments and walk in truth. Can that be done in a denomination?

I know of no denomination that does not use instrumental music in worship, but even secular history itself tells you it was no part of first-century Christian worship. There is no command for it, no example of it, and no authority for it in the New Testament. It is another manmade doctrine that prevents worshipping in truth (John 4:24). Is worshipping in error just as good as worshipping in truth with God? "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24 NKJV) Does the word "must" mean anything? Does it mean a man is free to worship as he pleases? Does the word "truth" have any importance, or does it mean freedom of choice?

I know we have problems in the church and I have known it for a long, long time. Our teaching and preaching often leave a lot to be desired. In many ways, we are tradition-bound in matters of indifference, preferring to live in the mid-twentieth century rather than the twenty-first century. Check the copyright dates on the songs we sing if you think otherwise, and I have nothing against old hymns, but I am just saying.

However, if one is unhappy with the church of Christ, they must ask themselves, what is the alternative? There is no other place to go. It is as Peter said, “Lord, to whom shall we go?” (John 6:68 NKJV)

(1) If you step out of the church of Christ into denominationalism, then you step out of the Lord’s church into a manmade church where Jesus never promised salvation. All of the denominations came into existence generations after Christ established his church.

(2) You then give your support, participation, and funds to encourage the false doctrine they teach that you don't need to be baptized for the remission of sins, denying what Peter preached on the Day of Pentecost.

(3) You become a supporter of the idea that truth doesn't matter--you can be saved anywhere in any denomination, they generally all teach that, even if they are all in disagreement on doctrine. You become a proponent of the idea that error is as good as truth since they all differ on doctrine. If one can be saved in error, then truth simply no longer matters.

(4) You accept the idea that how one worships is a matter of personal choice. You become one who is willing to cross the words "must" and "truth" out of the John 4:24 passage, “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and truth." (John 4:24 NKJV)

There was a time in Jesus' ministry when many of his disciples left him because of his teaching. Jesus then said to the twelve, "Do you also want to go away?" (John 6:67 NKJV) Peter answered, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." (John 6:68 NKJV) I feel much that way about the Lord's church. Sure, there are problems, but where does one go if not there, for it is the body of Christ of which he is the Savior? Why would I step out of that body into a body created by man, of which Christ is not the Savior? Why would I do that? Why would you do that? Would it be to keep peace, to keep men happy? Does it make sense to try and please men over God? I think not.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Non-Offensive Christianity

If someone was to ask you or me what constitutes Christian character what would we say?  Off the top of our head, we would most likely say love for God and our fellowman and faith in the Lord Jesus.  As we thought about it more intently we would add things like the fruit of the spirit, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control." (Gal. 5:22-23 NKJV)  We might recall Peter's admonition to add to our faith virtue and godliness in 2 Peter 1.  No doubt we would add humility (1 Peter 5:5), mercy and meekness (Col. 3:12), thankfulness (Col. 3:15), and truthfulness (Eph. 4:25) to our list and our list would still not be all-inclusive of the good things to be found in Christian character at its best.

It is hard to look back over this list and see anything that should offend anyone.  It is certainly not the Christian's desire to offend.  The word of God teaches the Christian to "pursue peace with all men" (Heb. 12:14 NKJV), "to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men" (Titus 3:2 NKJV), and "as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men" (Rom. 12:18 NKJV).  How is it then when it is the Christian's desire to be non-offensive to others and he/she has good character that the Christian ends up offending so many? 

The answer lies in what the Christian believes.  The very fact the Christian believes what he or she believes is offensive to many.  To whom you might ask?  To those who believe otherwise— to the atheist, to the progressive, to the secularist, to the communist, to the Islamist, to those who will not believe and obey the gospel and live faithfully.  The very fact one is a Christian condemns them.  They know they are living lives that are contrary to the gospel, that the gospel condemns their life choices.  They feel Christianity is judging them. 

For example, if the Christian believes it is sinful to live a life of a fornicator who is likely to be offended by that belief?  To ask is to answer—the fornicator, to those who see sex as a sort of human right married or not.  If the Christian was to speak against living together outside of marriage how many friends do you think he or she would make in the world we live in today here in America?  Not many.  If he speaks up it is said he is making himself a judge and causing trouble.  He is considered harsh and intolerant (as though God would tolerate the sin).  He is unloving.

If the Christian considers drunkenness to be sinful who is likely to be offended by that belief if not the one who drinks to drunkenness?  You can go right down the list of what the Bible calls sins, name them one by one, ask the same kind of question, and get the same kind of answer.  Christian beliefs themselves are offensive to many--to a great, great many--no matter what subject you end up talking about.  It is not so much what the Christian does that is so offensive but what he believes.  Jesus said we would be judged by the word of God (John 12:48) and God's word does offend many by limiting their freedom to sin without rebuke.  The word rebukes them.  If you believe the word then that is a rebuke to them and that is offensive.  You offend them because of what you believe about the word, namely, that it is the truth. 

Jesus said on one occasion, "The world…hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil." (John 7:7 NKJV)  Do you think the sinner wants to hear or be told that his works (his sins) are evil?  The minute the Christian speaks up against a sin he puts himself in company with Jesus and the world will hate him too just like it hated Jesus.  The men and women of the world want not only the silence of the Christian but even more than that, they want the Christian's approval.  They basically desire the Christian give up his faith, deny the word of God, and join them, at least in heart.

Jesus said on one occasion to those who sought to kill him, "You seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you." (John 8:37 NKJV)  When God's word has no place in a man then given the right circumstances and provocations, as the man sees them, there is no limits to the depths of sin that it can lead a man to.  The word of God places boundaries upon men, boundaries that do not satisfy those of a worldly bent, but boundaries that keep men from the evil which men are capable of doing when at their worst.  The Christian respects God's fences (boundaries) but the man of the world whose desires are for the world rips the fences to pieces.

The world thus often puts the Christian in a spot that if he had his choice he would rather not be in.  No one who has had any upbringing about him wants to be offensive to others.  We all desire the friendship of others and their affection, we want friends, not enemies, and let us be honest even if a person is worldly it does not mean they are unlikeable.  Many have very winning personalities.  They are often not bad people measured by the standards of the everyday world but the problem is the Christian can have only one standard and that standard is not the standard of everyday worldly life.

Paul gave us all words of wisdom when he said, "For we dare not class ourselves or compare ourselves with those who commend themselves. But they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise." (2 Cor. 10:12 NKJV)  Christ is the only acceptable standard a Christian can have.  The goal and the desire is not to be the best of the average everyday person but to be Christ-like.  Our desire is to be saved and in order to be saved we must live like Christ and not like the average of men.  We must seek to please God, not man.  "If I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ." (Gal. 1:10 NKJV)  The command of God is, "Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord." (2 Cor. 6:17 NKJV) 

The condemnation of one group of believers in Christ lay at this very point.  "Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." (John 12:42-42 NKJV)  Thus we come to the fork in the road where we must make a decision.  What will it be?  Will we go with God and his word or will we go with the majority of men?  Will we offend God or will we offend man for that is what it comes down to?

No matter how much you and I desire the salvation of all men we do not desire it any more than God does.  God is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV)  He "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim. 2:4 NKJV)  He loved the world (mankind) so much he gave his only begotten son that man might be saved (John 3:16).  Nevertheless, the Bible teaches "narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." (Matt. 7:14 NKJV)

Now let me ask a question.  If God is so desirous of men being saved why is the gate to life so narrow and the way to life so difficult? (Matt. 7:14)  The gate is narrow and the way is difficult because man finds it hard to accept God's will, believe it, and obey it.  Put another way man finds it difficult to bring his will into subjection to God's will.  Anyone and everyone could be saved, God does not show partiality, but God is God and man is often and generally unwilling to accept salvation on God's terms.  It is offensive to man.

What does please man is the way that seems right to man.  But, what is the end of that way?  "There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death." (Prov. 14:12 NKJV)

Even among those the world calls Christians (whether they are or not God will judge based on his word) very, very few are willing to accept that a child of faith must repent and be baptized for the remission of sins despite Peter's exact words to that effect.  "Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38 NKJV)  He had to be mistaken, he could not have meant it, it is offensive, the very thought is offensive.  We want non-offensive Christianity.  Non-offensive Christianity demands disregard for the word of God.

With non-offensive Christianity we can have, I recently read, 34,000 Christian denominations (A Short History of Christianity, Stephen Tomkins, page 245).  With denominationalism everyone gets what they want, the church of their choice; all will be saved no matter what group they are with as long as they in the broadest sense of the term "believe" in Jesus, and thus no one is offended—non-offensive Christianity.  No one is offended because in the end denominationalism means doctrine does not matter.  You read it the way you want, I read it the way I want, we are both saved, it doesn't matter which one of us had the truth.

Denominationalism is a wide gate and a broad way.  If I am wrong and that is the narrow gate and difficult way (34,000 denominations) then tell me how many denominations we would have to have to have a broad way?  Would a hundred thousand do it or would it take more like a million?  When one can find the church of his choice, rather than God's choice, you have non-offensive Christianity.

There is no doubt that the tender heart that does not want to offend people is good in its attitude toward the feelings of others but the truth of life, all of life, is that man must make choices and in making choices he will inevitably offend.  There are gentle-hearted people who sincerely want to please everyone, not be offensive to any, and who want to stay out of all fights and disagreements and they are thus unwilling to take sides or take a stand.  They just want to be left alone and left out of any disagreements or unpleasantness but isn't that the desire of most of us?  We want peace, not strife.  We want less stress in our lives, not more.  But there is a problem.

Life just does not work that way.  We cannot stay on the sidelines forever.  In failing to choose sides we choose the side by default that is most likely to be wrong, the side of the majority.  If the broad way has most of the people in it (according to the Lord it does—Matt. 7:13-14) and that is the way of destruction then my choice by default is not going to work out well for me.  It is true enough in this life a majority position is the most popular and the least likely to cause you strife in the here and now but it is also the damning position on the Day of Judgment.  On that day you want to be a part of the minority, not the majority.

Paul, speaking by inspiration, says, "All who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution." (2 Tim. 3:12 NKJV)  Who is this person who is suffering persecution?  Is it the non-offensive Christian?  No!  The truth is you cannot be a faithful Christian without offending many.  You will offend because you will take a side, the side offensive to the world and to much of Christendom.

God calls us to take sides and he gives us no middle ground.  It does not matter if we would prefer to not take a side for that is not given to us as an option.  We will either believe or we will disbelieve.  We will either repent of sin or we will not.  We will either be baptized for the remission of sins or we will not be baptized for the remission of sins.  We will either be obedient in life or we will be disobedient.  We will either battle Satan or we will not battle Satan.  God's choices are only twofold.  They are either/or.  Eve only had two choices, not a half dozen.  Yes, this may sound hard and harsh to some.  God is a demanding God but what are you going to do about it?  Are you strong enough to take on God and win?

"He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad." (Matt. 12:30 NKJV)   It is either/or, there is no other option given.  We must "contend earnestly for the faith." (Jude 3 NKJV)  We must "fight the good fight of faith." (1 Tim. 6:12 NKJV)  Why?  Because it is either/or.  God commanded it and we either will obey or we will disobey.  There is no third option given.  That is the life we live.  We can please the majority of men now by not taking sides, sitting on the sidelines, giving the world no opposition, but in doing so we have taken the default position which is the devil's majority position--the broad way. 

We might say we did not ask to get put in this position.  No, we did not ask to be put in this position but God saw fit to place us here.  We are his creation.  Are we going to fight against God or put on the armor he has given us and go to battle (see Eph. 6:11-17)?

My parents did not ask for the poverty of the Great Depression and then WW II but that is where they found themselves.  The wise man takes a look around to see where he is at and the best course to pursue rather than moan, groan, and complain about where he finds himself.  God will give us rest and peace in due time in a place where there is no strife or battle but that is then and this is now.  Those who are overly meek and quiet need to put on the Lord's battle armor and go to war for the time being so they can have peace in a later time, the hereafter.  It is an either/or choice, you either do it or you don't.  Your future depends on your decision.  Do not delude yourself into thinking there is such a thing as not taking sides and setting on the sidelines for that is Satan's default position.  That is Satan's side.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can One Be Just A Christian Without Being In A Denomination

Many years ago I asked a lady this very question--can one be just a Christian in Christ’s church without being in a denomination?  Her answer was that while that was once possible it is not possible today.  I have never understood that kind of thinking.  To her the church that is Christ’s could not exist today, in the modern era, alone by itself, outside of denominationalism.  That is a position that raises all kinds of difficulties.

In the early years of Christianity, the gospel message when believed and obeyed made Christians and Christians only that were added by God to the church, Christ’s church.  “And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.” (Acts 2:47 NKJV)  If the pure gospel message of the New Testament will not do that today then when, where, and how did it lose its power to do so?   Why must I today be in a denomination when all I want to be in is the Lord’s church?

But it is said that the gospel still saves just like it did in the first century, still puts you in the Lord’s church, but then after obeying it you must join a denomination.  Why?  They didn’t in the first century.  Oh, it is said you join one for edification, fellowship, and joint evangelistic and benevolent efforts.   So, is it being said that the first-century church lacked these things?  Is it being said you cannot be in that church today for it does not exist as a stand-alone institution today?  If it doesn’t when did it die out as a stand-alone institution? 

Does the gospel message now when believed and obeyed add you both to the church Jesus built and to a denomination simultaneously?  If so, when did that begin?  If so where can I read about it in the Bible?  If so which denomination does it add me to in addition to the Lord’s church?  If so why is that needed now but was not needed for hundreds of years after the first century had come and gone?  If so when did the gospel lose its power to make me just a Christian, no more, no less? 

When did Jesus and the gospel begin to need help in the saving business?  When did his church alone cease to be the body of the saved?  “He is the Savior of the body.” (Eph. 5:23 NKJV)  The body is his spiritual body, his church, “He is the head of the body, the church.” (Col. 1:18 NKJV)  The Lord adds us to the church when we believe and obey the gospel (Acts 2:47).  Paul says of Christians, “You are the body of Christ, and members individually.” (1 Cor. 12:27 NKJV)

But it is now said that that is not enough--if the lady was correct.  Now to be saved you must also be a member of a denomination (the assumption being that all Christians are).  So, you must be both in the Lord’s church and a denomination to be saved, is that right?  It is if the church Christ built is not sufficient by itself.  But, most denominationalists would say it is not essential to be a member of their particular denomination to be saved, others will do.  Then please tell me of what earthly or heavenly good that denomination serves other than to be a divider of men, one group of believers divided against another group of believers?  If it is not essential to the salvation of men get rid of the thing that causes all the strife and division.

The truth is the church Jesus built does still exist on this earth today without the help of any denomination.  The gospel has not lost its power.  The church of Christ can exist anywhere in the world today when men and women are willing to forget just about everything they have been taught in denominationalism and just take the Bible alone as their guide.  If the church Jesus built does not exist as an operating entity upon earth today in your locality, wherever that be, as it did in the first century in the Middle East, there is only one reason for it in lands where the Bible is readily available--men love their denominations and would rather have them and their creeds and councils and governing bodies than just the simple New Testament church and its worship regulated by the word of God alone.

Let us be honest.  If we take the New Testament, the word of God alone, as our guide a lot of things will have to be given up.  One does not read in his New Testament of, as examples, sprinkling of infants, christenings, sprinkling of anyone at any age and calling it baptism (baptism is immersion), baptism for any purpose other than the remission of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16), instruments of music being used in New Testament worship, dramas being performed, group musical performances, and a host of other things that have today become commonplace in denominational practices and worship services.  Are those things right?  You cannot read about them in your New Testament which raises the question of does one need a New Testament as a guide.

Nor will one read in his New Testament anything about one man rule of a congregation by a single individual designated as a pastor (each New Testament congregation had multiple pastors), oversight of a congregation by a national church organization, church-sponsored ball teams, raising funds by business ventures, seminars for everything from weight loss to how to do your taxes, and the list could go on.  One must go outside the New Testament for those things. 

No, if you want the New Testament church that Christ built a lot of things will have to go by the wayside and you will end up with nothing much that is attractive to worldly men.  The worship service will not be like attending a rock concert or an entertainment event.  It will be very simple--singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, prayers, partaking of the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week, the word of God will be preached, and a collection will be taken on the first day of the week to carry on the work of preaching the gospel and carrying for the needy.   

It is a hard transition from a denomination into the simple New Testament church that is led not by a single man or a national oversight organization but by a few select men who meet the biblical qualifications to be elders as found in 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1.  These men have no authority to legislate for God.  Their role is simply that of overseers to ensure that the work is done that God has given the church to do.  These men will be chosen by the members of the congregation from among themselves.  No one person designated a pastor by the denominational world will run the affairs of the congregation nor will a national organization.

The name on the sign out front will not matter as long as it is a scriptural designation.  It could simply be called the church (for that is what it is), or the church of God, or the church of Christ, or any other scriptural designation.  The name is more descriptive than it is an actual name.

You will not be voted into the membership.  You cannot join this group of believers.  Why not?  Because God adds you when you obey the gospel.  As I heard one man say recently, he had it right but I had never thought about it that way, you cannot join the church because you are adopted into it and God is the one who does the adopting.

Critics say that in the very act of organizing such a group you immediately become just another denomination.  That goes along with the way they think for they do not want to leave denominationalism behind and thus insist one has to be a member of a denomination and cannot be just a Christian.  They thus proclaim the Lord’s church a denomination.  If they admit we can have just the New Testament church on earth today and worship in it they condemn themselves and they are not about to do that so all they can do is shout and shout over and over again “denomination.”  They will label you and truth be thrust to the wind.

But what they are really saying, if they would think it through, is that God’s word has lost its power to make just a Christian and lost its power to keep his church on earth today out in the open where it can be seen.  They are saying that the seed, “the seed is the word of God” (Luke 8:11 NKJV), produces a different crop today than what it did back in the first century.  Back then it produced just Christians, now you plant it and you get both a Christian and a denominationalist.  Strange seed this is that has undergone a transformation like no other seed in human history.

They are caught in a bind.  On the one hand, they do not want to say you must be in a denomination to be saved but then on the other hand they want to insist you must because to them it is impossible to reestablish the New Testament church today and just have it alone.  They want it both ways; they want to eat the cake and save it all at the same time.  Life doesn’t work that way.  They cannot have it both ways.  But, that is their problem, not mine.

I think most people who are serious about their religion see the great contradictions in denominationalism.  However, they either do not know what to do about it or else their love for it is such that they will not give it up.  I readily admit it is hard to start over but that is what must be done if we are going back to the church Jesus built.

Denominationalism will always have a greater appeal to man than the Lord’s church for it allows more freedom of expression and gives man more say so in what is done and how it is done.  Man has a desire for that.  It has always been that way long before the church ever came into existence.  Mankind wants to do things they want to do unhindered by God.

The concept of restoration of New Testament Christianity is a valid one and there are many churches of Christ in the land today still operating on the principle that it is possible to be just a Christian alone outside of denominationalism, just be a member of the church Jesus built, take the Bible and do what they did in the first century, that and that alone, and be just a Christian.  Unless God’s word has lost its power it is still possible to do that.

The church can be established in its New Testament purity in any area where men and women are willing to leave denominationalism and just take the Bible alone.  It is not necessary to call it the church of Christ although no man should be hesitant to call the local congregation by that Christ-honoring name.  Just give it a scriptural designation, organize it by what you read in your New Testament, accept members based on the way men were made members in the original church Christ built, worship as they worshipped, do the work they did, and leave all manmade inventions out of it.

To answer the question that was the title of this article, “Can One Be Just A Christian Without Being In A Denomination” the answer is yes if the desire is great enough to do so.  But, be assured, those who love their denomination will have none of it.  The Catholics are not the only ones who love their traditions.  As the Apostle Paul said, “For do I now persuade men, or God?  Or do I seek to please men?  For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ.” Gal 1:10 NKJV)  We can please men (humankind) or we can please the God of men.  Pleasing men means denominationalism.  We ought to choose to please God.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]