The Work of Christ

• About this site

Marta Shutt

• About this site

  I speak in tongues more than you all - A biblical exploration about the gift of tongues. Two pitfalls are pointed out: The dangerous error of counterfeiting the truth and the chilling error of a dead orthodoxy.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

 The Encourager

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

Is it scriptural to call the whole assembly together to discuss business matters in the assembly?

I do not know of any Scripture which would favour such a custom, and judged merely by ordinary standards of common sense and business principles, I should think it very unlikely to result in good to the business or to the assembly as a whole. What profit could come from listening perhaps to differences among elder brethren?

An assembly of God is not a debating society nor yet a democracy, in which rule is from beneath, it is a theocracy in which rule is entrusted by the Holy Spirit to those whom He has fitted for the work. “Take heed. . . to all the flock (not your flock), over the which the Holy Spirit hath made you overseers” (Acts 20:28)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:28).

“Remember them which have the rule over you” (the guides), “Obey them that have the rule” (Hebrews 13: 7, 17)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 13: 7, 17). “Know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and esteem them very highly in love for their works’ sake” (1 Thessalonians 5: 12, 13)." TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 5: 12, 13).

Acts 15" TARGET="_blank">Acts 15 seems to throw light on the matter before us. Paul, Barnabas and certain others had come to Jerusalem about a troublesome matter, and they were received of the church, clearly the whole assembly, not excepting the apostles and elders. It was a meeting to hear “all things that God had done with them,” but apparently at this general meeting certain Judaizing brethren, of the sect of the Pharisees, which believed, rose up and introduced the very matter that had troubled the saints at Antioch. It would clearly not have been for edification to discuss the differences before the church, so the next verse tells us that “the apostles and elders came together to consider of this matter” (v. 6). The results must have been communicated to the whole assembly (ver. 22), for otherwise they could not have had fellowship in sending Judas and Silas to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, with letters in their name. “The apostles and elders and the brethren send greeting to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria.” These arrived in Antioch, and when they had gathered the multitude, that is, I take it, the whole company of believers, they delivered the epistle. We gather, therefore, that matters of business and discipline are not discussed before the whole church, but that the results should be communicated to them, when it is a matter which calls for general knowledge.

W.H.

• About this site

THE HOUSE OF GOD

Do you think that the House of God is regarded in Scripture as “the place of profession,” as is sometimes taught?  That is, the "profession" of one who is not saved, but is a part of church culture.

A good deal is taught on this subject, which we do well to test by the Word of God. It is sometime erroneously taught that the House of God is the place of Christian profession, and that God recognises this as a “third something” between the true Church and the world. What is known as Household-Baptism, for instance, thus seeks to justify the baptism of children and unconverted household servants. These are brought, they assert, into the House of God—they are “in the ambit of the Church of God,” as the strange expression goes. They are there on the ground of profession; but what profession can infants make? And if unconverted persons make any, it can only be false. That man has made a mixed thing of it by carelessness in reception, or by neglect of Scriptural discipline, is sadly true; but to make out that God is responsible for, or connives at such a state of things is indeed serious.

Now, the expression “House of God” refers in the Old Testament, if we except Genesus 28:17, 22, where Jacob uses the expression in a figurative sense, to the Tabernacle or to the Temple, and though uncleanness and even idols (2 Chronicles 33: 7)" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 33: 7) might invade that House, they never formed part of it, and at every revival were drastically removed and cleansed away (e.g., 2 Chronicles 24:13;" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 24:13; 2 Chronicles 29:16;" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 29:16; 2 Chronicles 33:15)." TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 33:15).

Paul in writing to Timothy speaks of his knowing “how to behave himself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” This is the local aspect—the Church of God, viewed as the place of responsibility. Undesirable elements did incorporate themselves, alas too easily, in the local “house” (see Jude), but though the condition was detected, it was not approved of. Ecciesiastics justify the sad lack of discipline in their organisations by the parable of the tares and the wheat—”Let both grow together until the harvest”—but they seem to forget that “the field is the world,” not the church. Undesirable visitors, thieves, and such-like, may find entrance into a house, but it is contrary to the desire of the head of the house, and they form no part of the household and must be removed as soon as detected. In Hebrews we read, “But Christ as a Son over His own house: whose house are we, if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end” (Hebrews 3:6)," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 3:6), that is, those who continue in the way prove themselves to be the House of God, the rest have no part in it.

It is indeed a blessed privilege of the people of God no longer to be “strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God” (Ephesians 2:19)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 2:19). And this is His purpose in gathering saints to Christ —“To whom coming as unto a Living Stone. . . chosen of God and precious; Ye also as living stones are built up a spiritual house” (1 Peter 2:4," TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 2:4, ). “Ye are God’s building.. . ye are the temple of God” (1 Corinthians 3:9, 16)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 3:9, 16). When the apostle speaks of the “House of God,” does he then view it as possibly or even probably including “false brethren crept in unawares,” or ideally? I believe the latter, for whatever is not God’s building is an extraneous element to be purged out. For instance, in Hebrews 10:21," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 10:21, Christ is presented as “High Priest over the house of God”—surely He is not the High Priest of false worshippers—trespassers in that house. Again, Peter reminds us that “judgment must first begin at the house of God.” Has he in view the heterogeneous company, that some seem to see almost exclusively, in the place of profession—a mixture of believers and unbelievers, because they all profess and call themselves Christians? I think the context shows rather that the true House of God is in view—contrasted with those that “obey not the gospel of God,” and paralleled in the following verse with the righteous—”If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?” (1 Peter 4:17, 18)." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 4:17, 18). Where is there room in this verse for a third something, neither righteous nor ungodly, but “professors.” The original from which this quotation is taken bears this out: “Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth; much more the wicked and the sinner” (Proverbs 2:31)." TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 2:31).

These latter, including false professors, will be recompensed not now, but in the future. But someone will say, “Does not Paul speak of ‘the great house of Christendom’ in his Second Epistle to Timothy?” Certainly not in so many words, though such a form of words has been dogmatically attributed to his writings. What he does say, I believe parenthetically, is, “But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour and some to dishonour” (chap. 2. 20). This passage and the ‘parable of the tares seem to be the sheet anchors of ecclesiastics to justify their mixed systems. To them “the great house” is “the Church” in their broad sense of a great ecclesiastical, christened organisation, reciting the apostles’ creed and practising “the sacraments.”

Others, as we have seen, understand Paul to mean “the great house of Christendom,” though I believe such an idea springs from a misreading of the passage. I submit again that verse zo is in the nature of a parenthesis, explaining the use the apostle is about to make of the term, “vessel unto honour” in verse 21. “In a great house” (that is in any great house in Rome, where he was in prison, or in Ephesus, where Timothy is supposed to have been), there are vessels of various materials and of varied uses. At this point the apostle resumes his exhortation, “If a man purge himself from these”—the evil things and men above referred to—he shall be something corresponding to the literal material vessels of gold and silver of any great house, namely a spiritual vessel unto honour in the House of God, “sanctified and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.”

One does not wish to dogmatise, but I would ask my readers, who desire to be still subject to the Word of God, apart from the glamour of great names, carefully to weigh above with the Scriptures.

W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

Go to the main Sunday school page for puzzles, lesson plans and other activities for Sunday school teachers.

• About this site

UNIVERSALISM

Do not scriptures such as Colossians 1:20," TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1:20, Ephesians 1:10;" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:10; 1 Timothy 2:4-6;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:4-6; 1 Timothy 4:10;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 4:10; Romans 5:19;" TARGET="_blank">Romans 5:19;  1 Corinthians 15:22-28;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15:22-28; Philippians 2:9-11;" TARGET="_blank">Philippians 2:9-11;  teach the universal salvation of the race? Will not all men be saved?

This questioner is a “Universalist,” believing that all fallen creatures will one day be restored to Divine favour, and brought to heaven.

Let us examine each verse in turn:

there is nothing in Phil. 2:9-11" TARGET="_blank">Phil. 2:9-11 about willing submission. All will bow the knee and confess Christ as Lord, if not willingly, then unwillingly. When the Lord utters the terrible words to certain ones, “Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels,” is there a hint that this will mean their conversion and restoration?

Certainly 1 Corinthians 15" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15: 22-28 is a strange passage to prove the salvation of all. It refers to the terrible scenes in Revelation 20" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 20 when Satan and the impenitent will be judged and cast into the lake of fire. It is said that Christ at the end will “put down all rule and all authority and power” (v. 24). If this meant their reconciliation, then death would be reconciled too, for “destroyed,” in verse 26, is the same in the Greek (Katargeo) as “put down” in verse 24. The real meaning is explained in v. 25: “all His enemies will be put under His feet,” or “made His footstool,” as in Psa. cx. This would be a peculiar way of expressing reconciliation. It was not thus that the father in Luke 15" TARGET="_blank">Luke 15 welcomed the prodigal. Joshua did treat the Amorite kings just in this way, and it sealed their doom, and they were executed before nightfall.

Romans 5:19" TARGET="_blank">Romans 5:19 does not say a word about all being saved, but merely that “as many were made sinners by the disobedience of Adam, so many will be made righteous by the obedience of Christ”. The condition of repentance and faith is enforced throughout the epistle. How divorce it from this verse? Romans 2:5" TARGET="_blank">Romans 2:5 tells us of those who refuse to repent.

1 Timothy 4:10" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 4:10 simply says that God is the Saviour of all men, “specially of them that believe.” Why “specially,” if all are equally saved? Many believe, and I think they are right, that Saviour here means “Preserver.” (The French—version has usually ‘Conservateur,” i.e, Preserver.)  The Lord cares for all, and in a special way for His people.

1 Timothy2:4-6" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy2:4-6 does not say that all will be saved, but that God is willing that all should be saved. We glory in this truth, and we are sure that wherever He can righteously apply the saving efficacy of the blood of Christ, He will do so. The ransom is paid for all. It is sufficient for all, efficient for them that believe. But those who refuse to believe will perish in spite of the work of Christ. To some the Lord had to say, “Ye will not come to Me that ye might have life”. Neither Ephesians 1:10" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:10 nor Colossians 1:20" TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1:20 says a word about “things under the earth,” or infernal things, as Phil. 2:10" TARGET="_blank">Phil. 2:10 does, when the sujection of all is in view. It is, moreover, “all things” that are to be reconciled. How could heavenly persons need it? But sin has entered the heavenly sphere; discord has marred the harmony there as here, and things, so far, need adjustment or harmonising. Certainly, all things in heaven and earth will be “headed up” in Christ (Ephesians 1:10)," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:10), but the impenitent are not included. They will be vessels of wrath to display God’s power and wrath. The questioner allows there are some verses which seem to teach otherwise, and quotes one—John 3:36" TARGET="_blank">John 3:36—which he really explains away by leaving out the first part, and dwelling on the fact that “the wrath of God abideth in the unbeliever” is in the present. But it is clear that the future is referred to from the first words, “He that believeth not, shall not see life.” This cannot refer to the present, for as long as breath is in the body, a man may turn, believe, and see life; but once the unbeliever passes from this scene he will never see life, but will exist under the wrath of God for ever. Space will only allow me to point out, that our Lord gave no hint of a future probation and restoration of all. Do His words (to quote only one Gospel) in Matthew 10:28;" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 10:28; Matthew 13:42;" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 13:42; Matthew 18:9;" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:9; Matthew 25:46," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 25:46, teach universal salvation? The Lord spoke of many passing down the broad road to perdition; of a “closed door,” and of many asking in vain for admission; of “a great gulf fixed,” which none might pass! The hope of Universalists is a false hope, as all who trust in it will one day find. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, He that believeth not shall be damned."

William Hoste

• About this site