A DUAL CHURCH
IS IT ‘NEEDED TRUTH’ OR A SYSTEM OF ERROR?
The ‘Needed Truth’ movement originated, I understand, among certain Christians called “Open Brethren,’’ who with an earnest desire for something better than the teachings and practice of the brethren with whom they had long been associated, at last left that company. This led to their formation as a company distinct from Open Brethren.
It may be remarked, by way of introducing us at once to the subject before us, and without any fear, I think, of contradiction, that ever since the death of Christ, God has had a company on earth who derive their origin from that death. They are the “much fruit” of John 12: 24. The name given to that company in scripture is “the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood”, Acts 20: 28.
Each believer (whatever so called Christian association he may now be in) was originally born in sin, and was living without God in the world. Having believed the gospel, he became one of this new company called “those that were to be saved” (see Acts 2: 47 NT), and from that time he has to learn the mind of God with respect to his new relations, both in view of heaven and in view of earth. Indeed, he is indwelt of the Spirit, and is in relation to God as of His house, and in relation to Christ as of His body, in order that he may learn them.
PAUL’S TESTIMONY
We are taught in scripture that the church is to be regarded under these two aspects:—1. It is the “house of God”. “The house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth”, see 1 Tim 3: 15. 2. It is also the “body of Christ’. ‘ “The church, which is his body”, see Eph 1: 22, 23. In scripture also we learn that if smaller companies are formed within the company called “the church”, they are sects or heresies, by whatever name they may be called, and they are to be condemned, see 1 Cor 1: 12,13. There is therefore nothing stable as to truth and fellowship for any soul, but that which may be learnt from God and His word. His mind can only be found therein, and therein it can be found of all those who are in these new relationships with Him. Here is that on which the soul may rest—the word of God.
Although the church is regarded in scripture under two aspects which we have named, and as any one may see; yet, we are never taught therein that there are two churches. The expressions ‘a church of God’, ‘An assembly of God’; ‘a church’, ‘an assembly’, are not once found there, although continually found on the lips and in the writings of our dear brethren16. We read in the New Testament the expression “THE church’’ some forty times, as embracing the whole company on earth, but of “A church” not once. Whereas the expression “THE church”, as embracing all saints, has well-nigh disappeared from their writings and vocabulary. Is not this very significant? If Eph 5: 27 be quoted in opposition to what I say about “a church’’ (which is the only questionable passage I remember), translators say it should be in that passage also τήν νκκλησίαν (the church, as the others).
It may be argued in reply that if there are ‘churches’ spoken of, there must also have been, in any certain locality, ‘a church’, and hence the words are allowable; but my impression is, that the use of this expression, not found in scripture but strongly contended for, originates from a deeper source. It is not employed by our brethren to distinguish one local church from another, but because they teach and distinguish in this world as a whole TWO CHURCHES, which scripture does not. And they distinguish them also in the same locality, namely, (1) the church, which is His body, from (2) the church of God.
JOHN’S TESTIMONY
The apostle John speaks also of the church. With him it is a FELLOWSHIP. The charity of Gaius was spoken of “before the church”, that is, before the whole of that company on earth. Again he “wrote unto the church”, that is, to the local company where Gaius lived. Diotrephes was casting people out of that company. He “casteth them out of the church”, see 3 John 6, 9, 10. His frequent use of the word in Revelation (chaps 1, 2, 3, 22) is well known. The church, for John, was both the whole company on earth and a local company in a town. He speaks of the whole divine system of things which began with and appertains to Christianity in his first epistle. A FELLOWSHIP, wherein God is known, and moral light, truth, righteousness, love, and last ETERNAL LIFE; and what he has to say about them he introduces to us in his first epistle, as “that which was from the beginning”, 1 John 1: 1. Paul speaks more of the church as house and body than of this divine system which we find in John. But both apostles connect all that they have to say both for origin and continuance with Christ. Christianity, of course, could not be apart from Him, nor could the body exist apart from the link of life with Him the Head, and as each apostle bases all on Christ, so what each apostle says could only apply to His one Christian company.
THESIS
Our dear ‘Needed Truth’ brethren have, according to their teachers, the only right meaning and application of the word “CHURCH”. This lies at the basis of their constitution. If true, it is important, and satisfactorily accounts, as they say, for ‘why they are where they are’, and explains why they differ from all other Christians. The writer has desired to examine their claim without prejudice. He did not know and could not question their doctrines until they were brought before him by a dear brother, not merely himself interested in them, but interested also in some saints who at the time were under the influence of them. This is his excuse for this paper, which some have thought might help souls if printed.
The writer has read and pondered over the volumes of ‘Needed Truth’’, and over very many collateral lines which have emanated also from our dear brethren’s pen. It would be possible in a short paper to go into these. He therefore confines his remarks herein to the crucial question and main point at issue, namely, the claim to have the only right interpretation of the word “CHURCH”, submitting it to any one that if this claim is a fallacy, there is no need to go into collateral questions and side issues. Neither we nor they would attach any value to a superstructure whose base rests on the sand. We will only examine here this base.
We find then in their writings, and reiterated by them over and over again, that the word “church”, as found in Matthew 16, ‘‘Upon this rock I will build my church”, has the widest possible signification, but that the same word in Matthew 18, “Tell it unto the church”, has a much more limited circle in view. So far (though perhaps not exactly) we may be of one mind, but they go further, and explain that the word church in Matthew 16 means the body of Christ, of which every believer forms a part, but the word church in Matthew 18 is a local company, or ‘a church of God’, of which every local believer does not necessarily form a part neither in God’s sight nor in the sight of man17.
‘‘PROVE ALL THINGS”
But if this is the invariable testimony of the word of God as to the matter, we may apply it and shall find it will hold good in other parts of the New Testament. We will apply it to the saints gathered at Corinth.
In a place then, and there only, wherein the saints are gathered in the light of Matthew 18, exists the church of God. This our thesis.
First let me say that the point before us as to the “church” in Matthew 18 is very simple. The church is the final court of appeal between brother and brother, because this new company on the earth was to take the place of Israel. It was (as Israel had been) to be henceforth where God made known His mind, and where He also recorded His name, and hence its importance.
But the Corinthians had evidently given up this light as to the church when the apostle wrote his first letter to them. He had to say to them, “I speak to your shame”. “Brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers”, 1 Cor 6: 6. Had they ceased to be the “church of God” there, because they were not in the full light and practice of all that the church was? This could not be, since the apostle addresses them before correcting them and in the first chapter, as “‘the church of God which is at Corinth”. Hence it is not true that if saints in a place are not walking up to all the light which God has given as to the church they cease to be owned as the church of God there. At least this was not so in apostolic days! The seven churches of Asia, all more or less defective, may be called here also as witnesses.
I may now turn to the present application of this interpretation of scripture by our brethren, in the midst of the confusion of our own day. Their conclusion is evident. In every place where there is a company found gathered in the ‘Needed Truth’ fellowship, and there alone exists18 “a church of God’’, according to Matthew 18. And though there may be in that place hundreds of other Christians, and even all found in one place, yet they are not of or in the “church of God’’ in that place. These Christians belong to another church, that of Matthew 16. They are of the church “which is his body”. Here then we have in one place ‘A DUAL CHURCH’, an idea totally foreign to scripture. I propose to shew that it insists on one church and on the oneness of all saints, both as a house and as a body, and that they are co-extensive in God’s sight. The same company forms the one and also the other.
As to the building, it is built only of living stones, see Peter’s confession, Matt 16: 16, and also his epistle, 1 Pet 2: 4-5. As to the body, every member has a vital link with the head. What Christ builds is eternal, and His body or what is united to Him is likewise eternal. The one is the dwelling place of God on earth (according to scripture already quoted from Timothy), as it will also be in heaven (see Rev 21: 22-23), the other is for the setting forth of CHRIST down here, as also there. Down here it is in the body of Christ that Christ is displayed. “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith”, and hereafter it is the vessel for the display of the glory of God. “Glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end”, Eph 3.
We must remember that whatever is not found in the word or supported by it, is only human and worse, for it is a denial of the mind of God. Scripture declares plainly the object that God had before Him in the death of Christ. It was that Jew and Gentile believers—ALL—should be ONE. “One flock, one shepherd”, John 10: 16 NT. This oneness was not a mystical oneness only. It was one which the world did and could take note of. The Lord refers to the world’s seeing and believing it, in His prayer to the Father. “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me ... and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me”, John 17: 21-23. The death of Christ was the gathering ground, the necessary basis of this oneness. He “must be lifted up’”. Hence Caiaphas is made to utter similar language, for otherwise the Gentiles could not come in. One must die for the people, “And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad”, John 11: 52. A visible oneness existed also when the Lord, addressing Saul, said: “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”, Acts 9: 4. Saul persecuted a visible and wellknown company, wherever he found them, namely, the saints of God. They were so well-known that, in that day, people could go to them, and could join them. “They went to their own company”, shews this, and also, “Of the rest durst no man join himself unto them”, shews it also, Acts 5: 13. The purpose of God in the death of Christ, and the gathering together of a company, the church, was twofold. It was that they should know Him, and that they should display that they did. God shewed both of these out when the death of Christ was an accomplished fact, and He manifested both in this new company, and He has not altered since.
ls God’s purpose to be after all defeated by the failure of man? And if not displayed, does it nevertheless EXIST? ‘No’ and ‘Yes’ are faith’s two answers to these two consecutive questions. He has not been defeated. The thought is simply absurd, He sees but one company on earth. God’s house is still one—Christ’s body one. There is one house, the dwelling-place of God, “the church of the living God” (1 Tim 3), in which ALL Christians (because they are of it) have to “behave” themselves. Were not all Christians of the house, or assembly of God, they might behave as it pleased them, but it is not so. And there is “one body”, by means of which Christ is set forth. “Ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular”, 1 Cor 12: 27. All that we have seen in scripture as to saints in the light of God, goes to prove their oneness. Two aspects of one sphere of things are not two spheres.
But two church spheres are insisted on by the ‘Needed Truth’ teachers. And in order that there may be no mistake that this is so, we are told that the “without” of 1 Corinthians 5 refers not only to the world but to those Christians who are not in the ‘Needed Truth’ fellowship! ‘Outside of such companies of God-constituted churches is the ‘without’ of 1 Corinthians 5’, see ‘Needed Truth’, vol iii p 25. I had always thought that to be in the “without”, where the man was placed by the judgment of the apostle, and to be “put away from among yourselves” where he was placed by the judgment of the Corinthian assembly, was for the time to be treated as not a believer at all, and as one with no link whatever with God—a wicked person—a sinner in his sins—and not as a failing saint. But no, we are told, though put “without” the church of God at Corinth, he was still in “the church, which is his body”, Eph 1: 22, 23. Hence, if they admit that there is any present existence of the church on earth at all, then the “body of Christ” must be partly within, and also partly without, the house of God! As another has said, ‘Surely this is bad enough’! The only proof that the man was a believer at all was in his repentance and restoration in the second epistle! Till then he was to be treated by the saints as morally lower than one of the world, see 1 Cor 5: 10, 11. With such an one they were not even to eat (an ordinary meal), although the apostle in the same epistle sanctions their eating (if they were invited) with an unbeliever, see 1 Cor 10: 27.
Does this indicate that the apostle still regarded him who was put away as of the body of Christ? May we partake of a meal with an open unbeliever and yet not sit down to eat at any time with one who is of Christ’s body? It appears to me impossible to find in this teaching the “rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim 2: 15), to which we are exhorted by the same apostle. And the reason for departure from it is, I think, sufficiently manifest. It lies in this: that a company IN the church of God, claims TO BE the church of God, and then, since it cannot un-Christianise the thousands of believers who may not be of its company, is driven by necessity to this idea of a second church, in order to provide for them!
Before closing these remarks, I should like to draw the attention of the reader to a few passages of scripture which bring, as I judge, the mind of God before us, because unless there is in each of us a vital and personal link with God, all talk as to the “church” is, after all, but empty. How is this vital link formed?
THE LINK FOR ETERNITY
First, it must be individual; and secondly, it is God’s work. It is formed now, exactly as it was formed in the case of Peter in Matt 16. The Father draws to and reveals the Son. Thus, also it was formed in Paul. “When it pleased God .... to “reveal his Son in me”, Gal 1. The Lord on earth said, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him’’, John 6. The Corinthians too, defective as they were outwardly, were called of God to “the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord”, 1 Cor 1: 9. We are similarly called. God would have in souls a vital and a moral work, and that work is His own work from beginning to end, and of such souls Christ builds the assembly or the church, and against this (the work of the Father and the work of the Son, the dwelling-place, too, of the Holy Ghost) the gates of hell were to be, as they have proved themselves to be, absolutely powerless, for it all exists today! It is evident that “I will build” refers in the minds of some brethren to what can only be seen in heaven. But this is not so, since the building of the church amidst opposition and the gates of hell is not in heaven, the gates of hell are where the assembly or church is being built by Christ, and where hell attempts its destruction, that is on earth. This structure of God is here today, and is composed of living stones, being in its existence the greatest possible proof of the futile character of all Satan’s opposition, though active in his hatred of it, from the first day until now. For no one, I think, would say that Christ has ceased to build His church, nor that God does not now do His own work in individual souls apart from any ecclesiastical machinery, forming there a vital and moral link for eternity with Himself. This is the material of which the assembly (or church) is built. Founded on the confession by Peter of Himself as “Son of the living God” (which confession was the proof in Him of the Father’s work), the Lord says, “I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my assembly”, Matt 16: 18 NT. He builds on what is true of HIMSELF as made known in the soul. And this is AN EVERLASTING BASIS. The saint from beginning to end is God’s workmanship (Eph 2: 10), and so is the church. What folly to say, if saints have not come together locally they are not of it!
My point is that a DUAL CHURCH is nowhere found in scripture, and that the ‘Needed Truth’ thought is a denial of the mind of God. There were not two churches in Rome, for if they met in various places, as probably they did (compare Rom 16: 2, 14, 15, &c), yet still all were but one company. He says, “To ALL that be in Rome”. There were not two in Corinth. He addresses his epistle “unto the church of God which is at Corinth”.
WITHIN AND WITHOUT
The “within” of chap 5 was the ASSEMBLY there, wherein God dwelt in the company of His saints. It was “God’s building” according to 1 Cor 3: 9, and it was also His dwelling-place, He says so in 1 Cor 3: 16, 17. The “without” was the world outside, where Satan dwelt, and the apostle had “already judged” that by his apostolic authority the offender should be “delivered to Satan”. They could not do this, but they could “put away from themselves” and if they were “within”, where then was the one whom they put away, since he was not within? The “without” God judges. “Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person”, 1 Cor 5: 13.
It seems to me to invalidate or reduce their action at Corinth to an absurdity, to limit the “within” to anything smaller than the whole church of God, and the whole body of Christ for whom they acted. The man was not put from the “yourselves” or the “within”, if he was after all still recognised as of the “church of God” or of the “body of Christ”. Put away from the “church of God” our brethren I suppose would admit he was. But the apostle says of those who thus acted, “Now ye are the body of Christ”, 1 Cor 12: 27. Therefore from themselves—the “within”—both as the “church of God’’ and as “the body of Christ”, the man was for the time put away. And if the teaching of our brethren today leaves such a man still owned as of “the body of Christ, though put out of the church of God, it clearly is not of God nor the teaching of Paul to the Corinthians., Every external link was gone with saints until God wrought repentance in him!
If I turn to other scriptures which speak of the church, I find still but the one company. There are not two churches in either of the seven cities of Asia! “The assembly” I find addressed there, but always as one and as one well known, Rev 2 and 3.
“The church of God”, we are told, is an expression tantamount to the “house of God”. Be it so, 1 Tim 3: 15 gives it. But a house is for one to dwell in. I ask then this question. Does God dwell by His Spirit in all believers? YES. (It is thus already answered for us in Eph 1: 13; l Cor 6: 19, &c. He dwells in the body of each believer, for each such body is His temple. Then mark where this teaching lands our dear brethren. Though God dwells thus by His Spirit in every individual believer in a place (see Eph 1: 13) yet He does not dwell in the number of these believers, in any place. God has no house—no dwelling there. In that place there is no house or ‘‘church of God”, because the saints are not in and of the ‘Needed Truth’ fellowship!
It is important to note here that (as I think) no poor simple-minded Christian, reading Matthew 16 and comparing it with Matthew 18 would ever have come to the conclusion that the word “church’’ referred in these chapters (and onward in scripture) to two different companies. Is not all the difficulty (or much of it) in this. that in the early days ALL the saints came together “in assembly” in a place, see 1 Cor 11: 18 NT. “When ye come together in assembly”. This assembly could be “told”, could be received into and could be put away from, but all this has failed, and will never therefore be set up again in its entirety on earth. But let us never forget that the principles on which the assembly thus acted remain the same for every company today which desires to walk in the truth. God had in view the need of His people to all time, and we are not bidden to put out of the “church of God”. God has, in perfect wisdom, provided for our day, the days in which His church’s lot is cast now, and we are still called upon to put away from amongst yourselves the wicked person. In doing so we are not told (and we do not assume) to be putting out of the house of God, nor out of the “church of God”, because it is not so said in 1 Corinthians 5. For we dare not claim to be in an exclusive sense “house of God”, and “body of Christ’’. But we obey scripture, we ‘put away from amongst ourselves’, and thus the discipline of God’s house is secured. God knows, and if He please He can shew on earth, if the man is His. In the meantime let others decide, if they wish, where he is put!
May God preserve saints from errors and assumption. He will not support us in either. Wherever there is a member of the body of Christ, THERE is found also a living stone in that building which Christ builds, and there is a portion of that “house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth”, 1 Tim 3: 15. But mark where this owned as God’s truth for this day places you, and places all who are in the light of it.
Man’s thoughts and ecclesiastical systems exist today, but they in no way affect the truth of God. I know that there are other members of the body of Christ. I establish nothing new by putting myself right with the Lord and then with them. My privilege is to identify myself with such, my guide being what they have done, and what they are doing. They have ‘departed from iniquity’, in a day when iniquity abounds, and abounds not only in the world, but also in the professing church. Then if I also have thus departed God’s thought for me or any such saint is not isolation. My privilege now is, as of the house of God, and as of the body of Christ to “follow (pursue) righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart”, knowing that the Lord has identified Himself with this line of things and with no other, whether many or few (see 2 Tim 2: 19-22), and that is what some are seeing. I must find them, and I may have to begin with one, or two, or three, but in conclusion, I would press upon every saint that as he takes up his privilege, his responsibilities here will all be discharged, and that our enjoyment of privilege is far greater than the discharge of our responsibilities. The greater will be found to involve the less, as God’s light for a dark day always does. My comfort, is that God will help every saint who desires and is seeking His light, but the awful darkness of an eternal night is fast settling down on this poor ecclesiastical but Christless world. May we be alive to the one and thus in truth delivered from the other!
