Christ and the Church

CURRENT among various concepts circulating in and around the church today is the theory that one is not accountable to the church, but to Jesus Christ. It is said by the adherents of this theory that human beings are too finite and fallible, too prejudiced, or too far from Christ to make sanctified decisions regarding the spiritual condition of other individuals. These pro­ponents of this theory admonish others to "judge no one," to limit their criticism to themselves, and to realize that one's spirit­ual condition is a matter between the in­dividual and his Lord.

A concept such as this immediately does away with the concept of the unity and fel­lowship of the believers, the solidarity of the faithful. While stressing the work of the Holy Spirit on the individual, it ignores the fact that in almost every case where the concept is carried out, the "Holy Spirit" seems to tell different people dif­ferent things. This granted, there is no al­lowance that can be made for church standards or church membership require­ments; everyone is on his own and is solely responsible for his or her conduct and be­liefs.

The Church in the Old Testament

The meaning of the Hebrew word for church, carried over into the Greek trans­lation known as the Septuagint, indicates the unity of the believers. Sunagoge is a combination word, made from sun—mean­ing "together," and ago—meaning here "to gather." The resultant word meant the in­dividuals who have been gathered together. The word was used of buildings only when the building represented a group of peo­ple; the primary meaning was the people rather than the building.

From the time of the Exodus out of Egypt, the terms "synagogue," "congrega­tion," "assembly," et cetera, visualized not an individual or splintered groups of in­dividuals, but the organized body of be­lievers under the guidance of God through a chosen spokesman. There was no distinction made between the Jew and the congregation. It was the congregation that was led out of Egypt by a pillar of fire and smoke; it was the congregation of Is­rael that heard the voice of God at Mount Sinai; it was the congregation that built the sanctuary in the desert; it was the con­gregation that entered the Promised Land forty years later. Chapter after chapter in the books of Exodus, Numbers, and Leviti­cus are addressed to the congregation of Israel, or begin with the congregation be­ing discussed.' The New Testament refers to the entire group as the "church in the wilderness" (Acts 7:38). The Revised Standard Version translates this word, "congregation." It is another word used here, which will be discussed later, but which is never used to refer to an individ­ual but always to a united group.

In matters of morality the congregation was considered as a unit. It could commit sin collectively,' and in order to be for­given it must repent collectively. This in no way had an effect upon the individual, who was responsible for himself as well as for the congregation. The priests bore the sins of the people as individuals and as a congregation.

In the matter of morality in distinguish­ing between the congregation and the in­dividual it is important to note that if an individual sinned on an individual basis, apart from the congregation, that sinner was cut off from the congregation; in other words, his sin effected his separation from the congregation. This would indicate that the congregation was composed of individuals who were in harmony with God, who were sanctified, that is, set apart for a holy use by God, and that an act of sin severed the person from this united group.

It was the congregation of Israel that was exiled into Babylon, and it was to the congregation of Israel that the following promise was addressed by Jeremiah: "Their congregation shall be established before me." ³And indeed it was the congre­gation that was re-established in the land of Palestine after the seventy years of exile. It is a historical fact that the majority of the Hebrews did not return from exile to Pales­tine, but remained in Babylon, Egypt, or Asia Minor. When the call went forth in Babylon for the Hebrews to return to Pales­tine, it was those who were in harmony with God who returned. It was this pitiful number that is referred to as the congrega­tion by Jeremiah, and it was to this congre­gation that the Messiah was born.

The Church in the New Testament—the Historical Setting

With the advent of the Messiah we find a change in the composition of the congre­gation, or church, which is not organic but historical.

In the ideal, the Jewish nation would have accepted the promised Messiah, a rev­olution would have swept through the Mid­dle East, and on throughout the world, Christ would have laid down His life for the sins of the world and taken it up again. The Jewish nation, however, rejected the Messiah, crucified Him, and persecuted His few followers. When Pilate asked the crowd, "Shall I crucify your King?" the priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar." ⁴When Pilate washed his hands before the crowd and declared himself in­nocent of Christ's blood, putting the blame on the Jewish nation, the crowd answered, "His blood be on us, and on our chil­dren."' Thus the Jewish nation divorced itself from God, and as a nation severed it­self from the congregation of those who are in harmony with God and set apart for His service.

Did the congregation thus die or cease to exist? No! The congregation is composed yet of those who are in harmony with God, who accept His way of doing things. The historical situation was that the majority splintered off and left a minority to carry on. A vast reduction but not a cessation.

That the Jewish nation did not constitute the congregation in toto is clearly seen in God's will as revealed in the Old Testament as well as in the New Testament. Isaiah 56 is a classic example of the avail­ability of the gospel to all, regardless of national origin. Paul goes to great length in the ninth chapter of Romans to prove that the plan of salvation encompassed not just the Jewish nation but all peoples, conditioned only upon their acceptance of God and His way of doing things.

"As indeed he says in Hosea, 'Those who were not my people I will call "my peo­ple," and her who was not beloved I will call "my beloved." And in the very place where it was said to them, "You are not my people," they will be called "sons of the living God." And Isaiah cries out concern­ing Israel: "Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved." ' "

The congregation would therefore carry on the tradition, greatly depleted, but not destroyed.

Thus it is that out of the sunagoge was born the ekklesia. Like the first term, the second is also a combination word, made from ek—"out of," and kaleo—"to call," resulting in the combined meaning: "those who have been called out." This is not a word that originated with the Christian church, having already appeared in the Septuagint and having been used by Christ. The term is a natural one, though a bit misleading technically. It was natural for the followers of Christ to consider them­selves as having been called out of the syna­gogue (now apostate, and rejected), and to have been called out of the world into fel­lowship with God through Jesus Christ, and as this ekklesia, or called-out group, they referred to themselves.

Paul is very clear in his teaching that the fall of the Jewish nation did not constitute the fall of Israel. He outlined in the book of Romans this teaching that Israel did not refer to a flesh-and-blood relationship, but rather to a spiritual relationship to God through faith. He argued that Abraham was called and accounted righteous through faith before the act of circumci­sion was introduced into the picture. Thus Israel continues, although the Jewish na­tion is severed from the congregation. Israel carries the connotation of one who is an overcomer through faith, rather than through obedience to law or physical line­age.

It is in this foregoing historical setting that we must view the ekklesia, or the church from the time of Christ onward in contrast to the synagogue of the Old Testa­ment. It is of the utmost importance, how­ever, to recognize the continuity of the con­gregation of those who are in harmony with God from the time of its inception, at the time of the Exodus to the present time.