Satan’s Assault via the Church (Part 3)

By Bob Myhan

As previously pointed out, the English word, "church," is used by most, if not all, modern versions of the Bible to translate the Greek word, "ecclesia," in certain contexts. The word, "ecclesia," has in itself no religious significance. Nor does it imply any organizational structure. In Acts 19:24-41 the word is used both of a "lawful assembly" and of a "disorderly gathering." While “ecclesia” is not the word that is translated "gathering," in verse 40, it is the word translated, "assembly," in verse 41, and both words refer to a collectivity of persons with no organizational framework.

The English word, "church," translates the Greek word, "ecclesia," only when the translators viewed the ecclesia under consideration to be an ecclesia "of or pertaining to the Lord" (kuriakos–from which the English word “church” is derived, according to International Standard Bible Encyclopedia), whether "all saints everywhere" or "saints in a given locality." Again, no organizational framework is given through which "all saints everywhere" may function collectively. Saints in a given locality, though, are authorized to organize as a collectively functioning unit. They are also expected to develop such qualities in a plurality of men that will qualify them to serve as elders (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-11).

The universal church, again, is a collective unit but not a "collectively functioning" unit. There is specific authority for the collective functioning of the “local body” but no authority for the collective functioning of the “universal body.” And yet supposedly non-institutional brethren are organizing themselves into “foundations” to do the work God assigned the local church, while claiming to be acting as individuals.

The difference between individual action and collective action is not whether individuals are acting but whether or not there is common oversight. By “common oversight” is simply meant that each person is under the oversight of the same person or persons, whether a president, a plurality of elders or a board of directors.

The Lord has unquestionably authorized "saints in a given locality" to function collectively under common oversight (a plurality of elders) in the areas of edification and evangelism, but has He given "all saints everywhere" that authority? If so, where is it? Where is the direct statement, approved apostolic example or implication that "all saints everywhere" may function collectively, that is, under common oversight? Organizing the universal body by putting "all saints everywhere" under common oversight is just as lacking in scriptural authority as organizing the universal body by putting "all congregations everywhere" under common oversight. If one claims generic authority for the former, this writer would like to know from what passage such generic authority is obtained. The same passage would generically authorize the latter. If this is not so, why is it not?

The only scripturally authorized framework for Christians to function collectively in the areas of edification and evangelism is the local church with its elders, deacons and saints (Phil. 1:1). For this arrangement there is specific authority. Specific authority excludes everything else in the same category. Just as specific authority for vocal music excludes instrumental music, specific authority for the local church excludes the evangelistic foundation.

It has been observed many times over the years by many writers and preachers that the autonomy of local churches is a safeguard against the rapid spread of error from congregation to congregation. Why would the Lord put local churches under the oversight of a plurality of men and give a long list of qualifications for those men to meet, and limit their oversight to the flock of God among them, if He were also going to authorize brethren to organize to do the same work under a board of men who may or may not meet those qualifications? This writer maintains that, if the local church is generically authorized, it is optional. If it is specifically authorized, it is both necessary and exclusive. If, therefore, a given collectivity of Christians is engaged in edification and evangelism under common oversight, that collectivity of Christians is either a local church of Christ or it is unscriptural. If it is not, why is it not? If it is, those who are involved in such are aiding Satan in his assault on the church front. &

The Conscience (Part Two)

By Bob Myhan

Because the conscience is the human heart in its ethical nature, it can be flawed. It accuses or excuses us on the basis of what it believes to be right or wrong. But belief is an intellectual function. And, because the heart is intellectual in nature, it must be educated.
We must know the truth, rather than just believe something to be the truth, in order to be saved by the truth (John 8:31-32). It is unfortunate that some do not want to learn more truth, lest they should have to answer to the conscience when it accuses them more often.
When one knows the truth but refuses to accept it, his conscience becomes seared (1 Tim. 4:1-2). This is the most dangerous state in which one can find himself; an individual whose conscience is seared cannot be pricked in his heart (Eph. 4:17-19).
Think about the contrast between Acts 2:37-41 & Acts 7:54-58. In each case, we have a gathering of physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But the two audiences reacted differently to the gospel message. What made the difference? The difference was that one group had hearts that could be pricked. That is, they were capable of “godly sorrow [which] produces repentance leading to salvation.” (2 Cor. 7:8-10).
Consider also Saul of Tarsus. He had lived his life "in all good conscience" (Acts 23:1). He obeyed his conscience, even as a persecutor of the Lord’s people (Acts 26:1-11). His service to God was with a pure conscience (2 Tim. 1:3). And he tried to encourage others to maintain a good conscience (1 Tim. 1:18-19).
Dear reader, do you have a good conscience, today, or is your conscience convicting you of sin? If the latter is the case you have two alternatives: obey the truth by meeting the conditions of forgiveness or sear your conscience by continually refusing to obey. &

You and I Will Never Cease to Exist

By Bob Myhan

Does man have an immortal spirit that survives death? Or does he cease to exist at death? This was one of the key doctrinal differences between the Sadducees and Pharisees of the first century.

But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, "Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!" And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection--and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both (Acts 23:6-8).

But what does the Bible teach? Either it teaches that man has an immortal spirit or it teaches that he does not have an immortal spirit or it teaches nothing, at all, on the subject.

When the Sadducees asked Him about the resurrection, Jesus replied,

"...have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." (Matt. 22:31-32; Ex. 3:6)

Moses was born hundreds of years after Abraham, Isaac and Jacob died. Yet they must have been alive in some sense during Moses’ time or God would have been "the God of the dead" which Jesus said He is not. Thus, these men did not cease to exist when they died. Moses himself survived death; he appeared with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration about 2500 years after he died on Mount Nebo (Deut. 34:1-6; Matt. 17:1-3). Samuel appeared on earth after his death, also (1 Sam. 28:7-19). Elijah did not die, at all (2 Kings 2:9-11), but he did not cease to exist at his ascension for he also appeared with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration.

But all these men were righteous. What about the wicked? Is there any evidence they do not cease to exist at death? According to Jesus, all the dead will one day be resurrected.

"Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation" (John 5:28-29).

Either the wicked do not cease to exist at death or the word, resurrection, means something different for the wicked than it means for the righteous. If there is no spirit that survives death, there will be no spirit to resurrect. We will each determine where we will be in eternity. (Matt. 25:31-46) &