by Kyle Pope
Synopsis: In the fifth article, as the discussion shifts to include questions of cooperation, Kyle offers his last study considering the bearing that cooperative efforts have on scriptural organization.
In our final round we include the topic of congregational cooperation. To begin, let's start with some principles regarding the NT church and its work. Among the different terms the Holy Sprit used to describe God's people, Jesus used the potent word ekklēsia, generally translated "church." Ekklēsia was a Greek political term used in Hellenistic culture for the representative assembly of citizens and in the Greek OT for the formal assembly of Israel. Roy Ward explains, "It was familiar both to Gentiles by political usage and to Greek-speaking Jews through the LXX . . . . Its Greek history associated with it a certain dignity with possible ideals of freedom and equal-membership playing a part" (169).1 In Scripture it is used in three distinct senses:
1. A Universal Sense, of all souls belonging to Christ living and dead (Matt. 16:18; Heb. 12:23). Of this assembly, Christ is the sole Head (Col. 1:18) and God alone adds souls to it upon obedience to the gospel (Acts 2:47).
2. A Local Sense, of Christians in a given location (Acts 13:1; Rom. 16:1; 1 Cor. 1:2). These assemblies are led by qualified elders and deacons appointed over and from among these congregations (Acts 14:23; 20:28; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1-13). Elders do not oversee multiple congregations—there is no organization higher than eldership, but lower than the headship of Christ.2 Since only God knows those who are truly His (2 Tim. 2:19), and the Lord's church includes the faithful dead, we cannot conceive of the universal church as comprised of the sum total of local congregations. Local churches are comprised of those who identify with one another, but it is God who "searches the hearts" (Rom. 8:27).
3. The Local Church Assembled. One is added to the Lord's church upon obedience to the gospel. He or she then identifies with a sound local church (Acts 9:26), but that does not mean that one is "in the church" (i.e. in the assembly of the church) from the moment of conversion or the point of identification with a local body.
Scripture prohibits or proscribes works and actions for the church assembly that it does not prohibit or proscribe at all times. For example, a woman is not to be silent from the time of her baptism, or identification with a local church, but in the assembly of a local church, "it is shameful for women to speak in church" (1 Cor. 14:35). Eating together for hunger is good outside of the assembly (1 Cor. 11:22a, 34), but to do it "as a church" (NKJV) or literally "in the church" (1 Cor. 11:18, KJV, ASV), beyond eating the "Lord's Supper" (1 Cor. 11:20), is to "despise the church of God" (1 Cor. 11:22b).
In brother Burleson's discussion of institutions he posed the scenario of a representative from a college speaking to a congregation about the college. In Scripture, collective worship involved teaching (Acts 20:7), prayer (1 Cor. 14:14-19), singing (1 Cor. 14:26), and on the first day of the week the Lord's Supper (Acts 20:7), and the "collection for the saints" (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Where is authority for a presentation "in the church" (i.e. in the assembly of the church) for promoting any human institution? Doug asked if a group of Christians wanted to pool resources to support an institution, "How many individual Christians would constitute congregational support?" Here is where much of the confusion and division rests. Does any act that members of a church do constitute acting as a church, or "in the church"? No. We are Christians at all times, but if a group of Christians goes shopping, camping, starts a business, or goes to the movies are they doing these things "as a church"? No. What's the difference? The stated purpose of the assembly.
In following the restoration plea, we call people to be united in contentment with the primitive practices and teachings of the NT church. We ask our Catholic friends to reject the burning of incense in worship because it wasn't done in the first century. We tell our Baptist friends the Southern Baptist Convention is unscriptural because its not taught in Scripture. Brother Doug mentioned how the American Missionary Society became a divisive issue within the Restoration Movement, but I would ask, was their move to exercise control over congregations the only problem with this arrangement? No. It was wrong because it is not taught as a work of the church in Scripture. Sadly, now there are congregations who still consider themselves "churches of Christ" (Rom. 16:16), and were actually first started in the days of these divisions, but have actually established, operate, and support their own evangelistic institutions. Why was it wrong at the turn of the 20th century, but it's acceptable in the 21st century?
Doug did not appeal to a Scriptural example of collective support of an institution, but wrote, "In short the passages that speak to the usage of church funds by local congregations do not disqualify support being given to sound organizations that the church leaders believe to be doing God-honoring work (Acts 11:28-30; 1 Cor. 16:1-3; 9:11, 14; 2 Cor. 8:4, 8; 11:7-8; Phil. 4:15, 18; 1 Tim. 5:17-18)." Let's test that. Acts 11:28-30 describes "disciples" (11:29a) in Antioch (11:27) sending "relief to the brethren dwelling in Judea" (11:29b) to "the elders" (11:30a), "by the hands of Barnabas and Saul" (11:30b). In the same way, 1 Corinthians 16:1-3 and 2 Corinthians 8:4, 8 speak of congregations by means of their collection sending direct relief to saints in Judea. 1 Corinthians 9:11, 14, and 2 Corinthians 11:7-8 speak of churches directly supporting preachers—something which Philippians 4:15, 18 exemplifies, describing Philippi sending support directly to Paul by one of its members. 1 Timothy 5:17-18 describes churches supporting elders who labor in the word. Where do any of these passages speak of human institutions?
Brother Doug asked, "Does a congregation have to support an educational or benevolent institution out of the treasury?" Then answered, "Of course not, but this is not forbidden in Scripture and should not be forbidden by the Lord's people either." I would ask, if this is not a proscribed activity, is it worth dividing the Lord's church to engage in it? Further, how can we say it "is not forbidden in Scripture" if its practice is not demonstrated in Scripture? Again, this is the same argument advocates of instrumental music say—"It's not forbidden in Scripture!" For a practice to be an expedient it must be generically authorized in Scripture. Vicarious work through human organizations has no such authorization, and is therefore an addition. How can unity ever be attained if we follow some unscriptural practices, while condemning others?
Finally, how do the Scriptures teach that local churches may cooperate in the Lord's work? Doug affirmed his respect for congregational autonomy. I agree that the Bible describes churches operating independently, but concurrently in the cause of Christ. Sadly, many efforts that have brought division have sought to either activate the universal church, or compromise congregational autonomy. If we maintain consistency in following NT patterns this will not happen. The Bible reveals different patterns for benevolence and for evangelism. In Scripture, churches sent relief to other churches directly (Acts 11:28-30)—not through a separate organization or another church. For evangelism, however, the pattern in the NT is churches sending support directly to sound preachers (Phil. 4:15-18), not to a separate organization, or even to another church to distribute that support. When congregations follow these patterns they act with Scriptural authority and are cooperating in the cause of Christ. To alter these patterns is not to use expedients, but to bring in unscriptural additions.3
Let me end by thanking Mark Mayberry (editor of Truth Magazine) for first asking Doug and I to engage in this discussion. I thank both Mark and Greg Tidwell (editor of Gospel Advocate) for agreeing to publish this exchange concurrently. My warmest thanks goes to brother Burleson for agreeing to participate in this study, especially with all of the responsibilities he has on his plate. Doug, my prayer is that you receive my words in the spirit of love and brotherly kindness in which they are intended and that our God may be glorified by the efforts we have put forth.
1 Ward, Roy Bowen. "Ekklesia: A Word Study." Restoration Quarterly 2.4 (1958): 164-179.
2 The authority of the apostles was an exception to this (Eph. 2:20), but there are no modern day apostles (Acts 1:21-22). Their authority is only demonstrated through the doctrine they taught as revealed in Scripture (Acts 2:42; Luke 22:30).
3 For more on this, see my lecture, "Church Government and Cooperation," Pursuing the Pattern: A Careful Examination of New Testament Practices, Ed. Jim Deason. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2017, 89-104, or the audio: http://www.eciconference.com/resources/2017---Pursing-the-Pattern/03ChurchGovernmentAndCooperation(KPope).mp3.
Author Bio: Kyle preaches for the Olsen Park Church of Christ in Amarillo, TX. He has written several books published by Truth Publications including How We Got the Bible. The church website is olsenpark.com. He can be reached at kmpope@att.net.
