|
THE CHURCH: THE CHRIST CONFESSING COVENANT COMMUNITY
(originally written c. 1988. Latest rev. January, 2009)
Introduction
When one talks about the church what is at stake is the way
in which the Christian life is organized. I believe that the
Bible teaches us that believers should be united to the visible
community of the redeemed meeting for worship, instruction, and
fellowship in an organized, disciplined, way. If I am wrong,
then millions of dollars and millions of hours and lives are
being sadly misspent.
Certainly there are strong individual elements to the
Christian faith. No one else can believe for you. God does speak
to individual hearts in His Word. He gives new life to
individuals. The Bible, however, does not stop there: "it deals
with man, not only as a solitary unit in his relation to God,
but also as a member of a spiritual society, gathered together
in the name of Jesus...not an accidental or voluntary union
which has grown up of itself: it is a union designed beforehand,
appointed from the beginning by God, and plainly contemplated
and required in every page of the New Testament Scriptures."1
One of the strongest themes in Patristic and Medieval
theology was the importance of the Church as a visible
institution. The original evangelicals, i.e. the confessional Protestants of the sixteenth-century Reofrmation, were "a people of the book" and also a people of the church.
American evangelicalism, however, has a mixed record on the
doctrine of the Church. Though the church was still relatively
important for most segments of evangelicalism through most of
the 19th century, its importance was slipping. By the middle of this
century, evangelicalism had virtually lost any notion of the
church as a visible institution. It has not always been so. For
the better part of Christian history, the doctrine of the Church
has been considered a central part of the Christian confession.
The Apostles' Creed says:
I believe the holy catholic church, the communion of the
saints, the forgiveness of sins....
2
Remember that these clauses in the Creed come under the
heading of the Holy Spirit. In the conception of the Creed, the
"holy catholic" church is an assembly under the Holy Spirit.
A key to a balanced ecclesiology is to keep together the
"one," that is the "church universal" (holy catholic church) and
the "many," that is, church particular or communion of the
saints. A well-known 16th century Protestant catechism describes the holy
catholicity of the church thus:
That, out of the whole human race, from the beginning to the
end of the world, the Son of God, by His Spirit and Word,
gathers, defends and preserves for Himself to everlasting life a
chosen communion in the unity of the true faith; and that I am
and forever shall remain a living member of the same.3
It handles the particular under "communion:"
What do you understand by the ‘communion of saints’?
First, that believers, one and all, as members of the
Lord Jesus Christ, are partakers with Him in all His
treasures and gifts; secondly, that each one must feel
himself bound to use his gifts readily and cheerfully for
the advantage and welfare of other members.4
Biblical Ecclesiology
According to God's Word the gathering of God's people is a
different sort of association from most other groups. There are
very few associations we are compelled to join. Of course, from
a political or legal perspective membership or association with
the Church of Christ is voluntary. The government cannot force
you to subscribe to a confession or to join the Church. It is
God's Word, not the state, which forces us to unite with the
church.
First of all, we have to know we mean when we talk about the
Church. We must define our terms. The English word "Church" can
be traced back through the Scots "Kirk" to the Middle English
Chirche, perhaps to a late Greek expression Kyriakon,
that which belongs to the Lord, or the Lord's House.
Israel and the New Covenant Church
In order to properly understand the biblical doctrine of the
church, it is crucial to get to grips with the relations between
Israel and the New covenant people of God. The fundamental
questions is this: How are sinners saved and how were they saved
under the old covenant?
If we say, with the Protestant Reformation, "by grace alone,
through faith alone, in Christ alone," then we will have to
minimize the essential differences between the Old Covenant
people of God and the New. That is, the difference is not that
between works and grace since all sinners who have been saved,
have been saved by grace. Rather, it is a question of
administration or economy. How has God administered salvation in
the various epochs of redemption?
What is the Covenant?
The term covenant is a very frequent word in the Bible.5
Covenant describes the way God relates to His people. It is
generally said to involve the notion of a binding oath between
Yahweh and his people in which he promises his people to be
their God and his people, in response to God's grace, swear
complete fidelity to Yahweh. The covenant is signed and sealed
in blood.
We can better understand the biblical notion of covenant if
we substitute the word promise. God made a promise of salvation
to Adam, after the fall, in the garden.6 He made a
promise to save Noah through the flood and to preserve him and
us after it.7 He promised to be Abraham's God and a God to
Abraham's children.8 God's covenant with believers is
so important that it is nearly impossible to correctly
understand the Bible while ignoring the covenant.9 In
Genesis 17 Yahweh speaks to Abraham about his covenant:
I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant
between me and you and your descendants after you for the
generations to come, to be your God and the God of your
descendants after you. This is my covenant with you and your
descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every
male among you shall be circumcised. You are to undergo
circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant
between me and you. For the generations to come every male
among you who is eight days old must be circumcised,
including those born in your household or bought with money
from a foreigner--those who are not your offspring....My
covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. Any
uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the
flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my
covenant (Gen 17:10-14).
Is There Still A Covenant?
Just as God made a covenant with Abraham, he promised a New
Covenant to come later.10 He made this New Covenant
in the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.11 The Lord
Jesus consciously and specifically established "The New
covenant."12 The Apostle Paul said he was "a servant
of the New covenant."13 How can this be if there is
but one covenant of Grace? The New Covenant is new as contrasted
with Moses, but not as contrasted with Abraham.14
This is the point of Galatians 3:1-29; 4:21-31, and 2
Corinthians 3:7-18 where Paul says that the glory of the Old
Covenant was fading but the glory of the New Covenant is
permanent. The message of Hebrews chapters 3-10 is that the Old
Covenant (under Moses) was preparatory to the New Covenant. The
fundamental theme of Hebrews 11 is that Abraham had a New
Covenant faith, that is, he anticipated a heavenly city and to
the redemption which we have in Christ.15
The Promise Remains, The Circumstances Change
Now that the promise of the covenant has been fulfilled the
circumstances of the covenant have changed. We who live on this
side of the Cross view things differently because we live in the
days of fulfillment. In biblical terms, we live in the "last
days." 16 We have the completed Bible and the gift of
the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit. 17
The Old Covenant was designed to direct attention forward to
the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross.18 The old signs
like Passover and circumcision along with the other bloody
sacrifices and ceremonies have been replaced. Yet we still live
in covenantal arrangement with God, and the bloody pictures of
Christ have been replaced with un-bloody signs (reminders) and
seals.
Why is the Covenant Important?
The covenant of Grace unifies all of Scripture.19
God made a salvation promise to Adam and Eve.20 God
repeated that promise to Abraham. Paul calls Abraham "the
father" of all believers.21 All believers are saved
because of God's faithfulness to his Covenant promise.22
How Were Covenants Made?
Circumcision was the sign of the Old Covenant given to
Abraham in Genesis 17:10-14. The covenant and the sign are so
closely identified that the Lord calls the sign of circumcision,
"My covenant." Anyone who did not take the sign would be "cut
off" from the covenant people.23 In the Old Covenant
Scriptures the phrase "to make a covenant" is expressed with the
words: "to cut a covenant," that is, to perform the cutting away
of the foreskin of the penis of the uncircumcised adult male or
the eight-day old Hebrew infant. 24 To be circumcised
is to be identified with God and to be "cut off" from the world
and to be included with God's people.
In the Old covenant, implied in the act of circumcision is
the taking of an oath: "If I do not keep the covenant, may the
destruction which is illustrated by the cutting of the foreskin,
actually happen to me." 25 This is why the Lord
speaks of covenant breakers being "cut off" in Genesis 17:14. In
Exodus 4:25, 12:15,30:33,38; Leviticus 7:20-25; Psalm 37;
Ezekiel 14:8-17, 25:7-16. Scripture uses the same verb for
"cutting off" of covenant breakers as it does for the "cutting"
of a covenant in Genesis 15:18.
Yahweh placed Himself under this curse in Genesis 15:17-21.
Yahweh sealed his promise to Abraham by passing between the
pieces as a sign that he would keep His promise to Abraham.
Yahweh received the curse upon Himself in the Lord Jesus Christ
who was "stricken by God, smitten by Him and afflicted...cut off
from the land of the living" Galatians 3:13, 14. 2 Corinthians
5:21 clearly teach that Jesus became sin and endured the curses
of covenant breaking for those who believe.26
What are the Relations Between the Covenants?
The Lord Jesus has fulfilled the bloody signs and types of
circumcision and has replaced them with un-bloody signs.27
2 Timothy 2:11; Romans 6:2, 5, 6, 8 teach that, by faith, all
believers died with Christ. If Christ died an accursed death and
we died with Christ, then by faith in Christ we have undergone
the curse implied by circumcision. Colossians 2:20; Philippians
3:3 explicitly say that by faith, in Christ's death, all
believers have undergone circumcision. Romans 6:2-10 says that
we are baptized into Christ's death. That is, when the sign of
the covenant is applied, the recipient is identified with Jesus'
death and the cursedness of Christ.
The main difference is that what the Old Covenant promised
through ceremonies and sacrifices, the New Covenant reveals as
fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus. Part of our problem
as late 20th century believers is that we are largely ignorant
of the Old Covenant Scriptures. This was not the case among
first century believers. The New Covenant Scriptures refer
constantly to the Old Covenant. Romans 3:21, 9:27, 11:13-32;
Luke 24:27; Hebrews 9:15, and the whole of ch.11 all teach that
the Covenant of Grace instituted by God through Abraham
continues into the New Covenant. God's Word clearly teaches that
New Covenant believers are the New Covenant Israel.28
Everyone who believes is the true son of Abraham.29
Romans 9:6-9 teaches that a Jew is one who loves the Messiah
Jesus and trusts him only for salvation.30 Thus we
cannot say that there are two completely different 'churches' or
peoples of God. Paul teaches clearly in Romans 2:29; 4 [all];
9:6-9 and Jesus teaches explicitly in John 8:31-58 no one is
saved by being Jewish.31
The Church in the Old Covenant
In the Old Covenant Scriptures the primary Hebrew word for
Church Qahal refers to the regular, visible,
institutional, assembly of God's people. There is another Hebrew
phrase 'Edah but this phrase is usually synonymous with Qahal
. The difference between the two words is that the Qahal
usually refers to the assembly of God's people and the 'Edah
describes the people of God whether or not they are assembled.
The Covenant Community Assembled Before Sinai
In the Old Covenant the Qahal usually gathered for
religious purposes, though sometimes for other purposes like
national defense, which is a religious activity in the Old
Covenant. One of the clearest texts for understanding Qahal
is Deuteronomy 9:10. Moses says,
Yahweh gave to me the two tablets of stone written by the
finger of God. On them were all the commandments Yaweh
proclaimed to you on the mountain out of the fire, on the day of
Ha Qahal (i.e., the assembly, See Deut 10:4;
18:16).
The Old Covenant body of believers are those who were
assembled and constituted the people of God by the voice of God
Himself. Just as when at Creation God spoke and all things came
into being, at Sinai, God speaks and creates His Covenant people
out of refugees from Egypt. God creates them by fiat. God
declares that He will be their God and they will be His people.
They become a Covenant Qahal.
Not only was the assembly of Israel gathered before Him: the
holy ones of heaven attended the Lord of Hosts (Ps 68:7,17;
Heb 2:2). Sinai became the throne of the God of heaven and
earth; assembled around Him were all the holy ones of heaven;
gathered at His feet were his saints, the holy ones of earth
(Deut 33:3).32
The Qahal is a solemn assembly because it stands
before God (Deut. 31:31; 23:3; Judges 20:2; 2
Chronicles 20:13). The gathering of the Qahal is sacred
because it is the duly constituted gathering of the Covenant
people of God to hear the voice of God and even to meet with God
Himself at the door of the tent of meeting (Josh 8:34,35;
Deut 31:11,12; Exodus 34:29-35). It is when Israel is
convened as the Qahal that God Himself dwells in
their midst (Ex 29:42-46).
The Covenant Community is a Worshipping Assembly
In the era of David and Solomon the "great assembly" of the
Qahal is convened by David to secure Solomon succession
to the throne (1 Chron 28:1,2,8; 29:10,20). In 1 Chronicles
29:10 David blesses the Lord before the Qahal and in turn
the whole Qahal blesses the Lord. The Psalms, according
the headings, were written for use in the Qahal. In Psalm
68 we read of a parallel between worship in heaven and worship
on Sinai. The impression is that just as God is in the midst of
His Hosts in heaven, He was in the midst of His people at Sinai.
Later, part of the Joel's promise of restoration of the
people of God includes the sounding of the trumpet, a call to
worship, the convening of the Qahal for solemn service
(Joel 2.15-17). These are but a few examples of the visible,
duly constituted, stated, formal, assembly of God's people as
the Qahal to worship and to praise the God of the
Covenant and to hear His Word. The center of the life of the Old
Covenant community of the redeemed was the tabernacle. In Exodus
29:42-46 we see how God arranged to meet with His people at the
Tabernacle to speak to them, where His Shekinah Glory-Spirit
would be present. It was there Aaron and his sons were to serve
as priests. As a result,
[t]hey will know that I am the Lord their God, who
brought them out of Egypt so that I might dwell among them.
I am the Lord their God.
On the whole, the use of Qahal in the Old Covenant
Scriptures points to a concrete conception of the Covenantal
Community of God's people, who, when gathered together,
constitute the Covenant Assembly. Everyone who was eligible
needed to gain admittance into this assembly by the taking of
the Covenant sign of circumcision (Gen 17:9-14).
Circumcision is a self conscious identification with the people
of God. Everyone who received the sign of the Covenant was
responsible for all the law of the Lord. Everyone who did not
take the sign of the Covenant was liable to the judgment-wrath
of God. (See Exodus 4:18-26).
The sum of God's Covenant with His people is this: to be
their God and a God to their children (Gen 17:7,8; Acts
2:39; Revelation 21:3). An important part of God's Covenantal
relations with His people include meeting with them in a locale
as the Assembly of God's people. Keeping in mind the promises of
Jeremiah 31:31-34, that God would come even closer to His people
in the New Covenant, then we would expect the Qahal or
Ekklesia to play an even more important role in the life of
God's people in the period after the Old Covenant.
The Ekklesia in the New Covenant
Where Hebrew says Qahal referring to the visible
assembly of God's people, the Greek Scriptures have Ekklesia.
A good example is Deutronomy 23:2,4 which uses the phrase
Qahal Yaweh which the Greek translation of the Old Covenant
translates Ekklesia Kyriou or "Church of the Lord."
33
The New Covenant Assembly of the Lord
In the New Covenant Scriptures the word Qahal is
translated by the Greek word Ekklesia (assembly) and
sometimes with the verb Ekklektoi ("elect," Revelation
17:14). Ekklesia occurs over 100 times in the New
Covenant Scriptures. Usually it refers to a local identifiable
circle of believers. In example: ."..great fear seized the whole
Ekklesia..." Acts 5:11. Paul speaks about the "Churches
in the province of Asia," "the Churches" in Ciclicia, Galatia,
Asia, Macedonia, and Judea (cf. Acts 15:41; 1 Corinthians
16:1,19; Galatians 1:2; 1 Corinthians 16:19; 2 Corinthians 8:1;
Galatians 1:21). These passages refer to local assemblies. When
the New Covenant Scriptures speak about the Church ."..it
becomes apparent that the notion of assembly or congregation is
in the forefront."34
The largest number of occurrences of the word Ekklesia
are classified by Murray as "instances of particularization"
where Ekklesia is used to describe the Church in
Jerusalem, (Acts 8:1; 11:22) Antioch, (Acts 11:26; 14, 27; 15:3)
Ephesus, (Acts 20:17, 28), at Cenchrea, (Romans 16:1), in
Laodicia, (Colossians 4:16), and in Thessalonica (1
Thess 1:1). These Churches could also be called "city
Churches," the word Ekklesia is used in the singular to
describe the Christians living in that city.
Sometimes Ekklesia is used in the New Covenant
Scriptures to describe a gathering of believers meeting in
someone's house. This is true in 1 Corinthians 16.19 ."..
Ekklesia that meets at their house." In Romans 16.23 Paul
seems to indicate he had been worshipping at a house Ekklesia
(cf. Philemon 2). There is no evidence from the New Covenant
Scriptures that these were not actual, formal assemblies of
God's people.
Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself establishes the visible, New
Covenant assembly in Matthew 16.15-19. Jesus asks His disciples
for their confession about Him.
'Who do you say that I am?' Simon Peter answered, 'You
are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' Jesus replied,
'Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not
revealed to you by man, but by my Father in Heaven. And I
tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build
my church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. I
will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever
you bind on earth will be hound in heaven and whatever you
loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
Notice that Jesus solicits this confession. This divinely
revealed confession given to Peter comes as a sharp contrast to
the other confessions about Jesus' identity. Now that Peter has
confessed who Jesus is, Jesus is now confessing who Peter is!
Peter is addressed as "the rock," but only as a Christ
confessing Disciple/Apostle. It is true that in the original
Jesus says, "You are Petros?..." then "on this Petra
I will build...." Petros is masculine and Petra
feminine. The reason for the difference is that Petros is
a proper name belonging to Peter. It must be masculine. Petra,
on the other hand, does not need to be masculine to describe
Peter. Matthew 7:24 uses the word Petra in a to describe
a foundational stone. The word Petros is Jesus' way of
describing Peter the Christ confessor.
Peter's confession is crucial to understanding the passage.
Just a few verses later Peter blurts out that Jesus should not
be put to death. For that confession Peter is called Satan
and Skandalon i.e., the Devil and the rock of offense
(cf. Isaiah 8:14. Both passages are a play on words. In the
first passage the play is on Petros and Petra and
in this passage the play is on the relationship between
Skandalon and Peter's Aramaic name, Cephas which was
the word used to describe the rock of offense. So, Peter the
question is not whether Peter will be a rock, the question is,
what sort of rock will he be? When he confesses that Jesus is
the Christ, Peter is a Christ confessing foundation stone. When
he fails to confess, he is a stumbling stone (temptation) and
Satan.
According Acts 4:11 Jesus is the cornerstone. According to 1
Peter 2.4-8 Jesus is the rock of offense.
2 Corinthians 10:4 says that "The rock was Christ." Consistently
in the Old Covenant God is said to be the "rock of my
salvation."35 Only those who confess that Jesus is
the Christ are united to Him. So, it is only because he is
united to Christ by faith that a Christ confessing apostle is
said to be a rock.
The authority of the keys is not given to Peter alone. In
Matthew 18:18 and in John 20:21-23 Jesus gives the same
authority to the whole company of Christ confessing apostles. So
in his confession of Jesus as Messiah, Peter represents the
other Apostles, whom Paul calls the "foundation of the Church"
(Ephesians 2:20). This passage echoes 1 Timothy 3:15 where Paul
says that the Ekklesia is the pillar and ground of the
truth and the "fullness of him who fills all in all."36
A Mixed but Disciplined Visible Assembly of Saints
The visible church is always going to be a "mixed" assembly.
Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven
is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while
everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among
the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed
heads, then the weeds also appeared. "The owner's servants
came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your
field? Where then did the weeds come from?' "'An enemy did
this,' he replied. "The servants asked him, 'Do you want us
to go and pull them up?' "'No,' he answered, 'because while
you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with
them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time
I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie
them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and
bring it into my barn.'" (Matt 13:25-30).
It is not, however, to be an undisciplined assembly. In
Matthew 18:15-20 the visible assembly of the saints is
presupposed. The problem is what to do when a brother sins. The
solution involves confrontation by fellow believers. Our Lord's
instructions to the Church.
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the Church,
and if he refuses even to listen to the Church, treat him as
you would a pagan or a tax collector.
The Lord says, "tell it to the Ekklesia." It is
impossible to conceive of how this could be accomplished outside
the realm of the visible local, or associated regional assembly.
It should be remembered that, at this point in the history of
redemption, God's people had only the Old Covenant Scriptures
and there was no developed conception yet of a universal
Ekklesia beyond the Qahal of the Old Covenant. To
read "Church universal" here for Ekklesia would involve
stretching the text beyond its limits.
Also implied by this verse is a stable membership. Were this
Ekklesia envisioned as a floating conglomeration of free
agents, then the declaration regarding the offender would have
little or no effect. If there is no visible Church body assumed,
who would make the determination regarding guilt? To whom would
the announcement be made? One might as well shout the results of
the congregation's discipline process to the wind.
Jesus Himself here lays the foundation for the visible
Church. Jesus self-consciously established the organization of
the visible Church.37 This view is reinforced by John
20:21-23 where Jesus breathes the Holy Spirit upon them and
gives the disciples/Apostles the authority to bind and loose
sins. Murray says,
When Jesus speaks of 'my Church', he is thinking of those
gathered and knit together after the pattern provided by the
Old Testament as the people for his possession, as the
community which he is to constitute, and which stands in
relation to him comparable to the congregation of the Lord
in the Old Testament."38
The Holy Catholic Church
Paul wrote these lines in a circular letter to local Churches
in Asia Minor beginning with the Ephesian Christians. This
letter and other Apostolic letters along with the Old Covenant
were read in the weekly gathering of Christians. No New Covenant
writer ever addressed letters to the Church "invisible" as such.
New Covenant epistles are always addressed or sent to at least
one or more persons or congregations.
The whole idea of a universal or "catholic" Church consisting
of all believers of all times is dependent upon the existence of
local bodies of believers. To speak of universals without
particular constituents means that the universal does not exist.
It is a figment of the imagination. Murray writes,
...whether the church is viewed as the broader communion
of the saints or as the unit or assembly of believers in a
home or town or city, it is always a visible observable
entity.39
I can speak to you about the whole of a given automobile. But
if, when you ask me if mirrors or doors belong to this car, I
say no and then it turns out that there are no tires, no
chassis, no engine etc. then you have a right to say to me: It
sounds to me as if your car does not exist! Of course you would
be right.
The same thing is true then of Paul's teaching in 1
Corinthians 12. We cannot exercise our gifts in the Body of
Christ outside of the local Church. There must be some group
somewhere exercising these gifts. This is the only way that we
can understand Paul's instructions to the Corinthian Ekklesia
regarding cliques in the Church (1 Cor 3:1-9) and to
expel the immoral person among them who was unrepentant
(1 Cor 5:1-12). Church discipline presupposes the
existence of the visible organized (even official) Church. This
line of argument is especially relevant in view of chapter 11.
We have been arguing throughout that the by definition the
Qahal or the Ekklesia is those who are constituted as
the visible, institutional, Covenant community. Yet we know from
the history of the Old Covenant that there were those in the
Qahal who were not partakers in Christ by faith. Thus it is
not impossible for there to be hypocrisy in the visible,
assembled, institutional Church (2 Tim 2:20; 1 John 2:19;
Hebr 6:4-12).
The Body is the Qahal
In Ephesians 2:12 Paul implies that those who belonged to the
visible community in the Old Covenant were in a certain sense
(by virtue of being united to the Covenant people) Christ's,
while Gentiles by the fact of their race were not. Certainly not
every circumcised Jew was the true--Spiritual--seed of Abraham,
yet this does not stop Paul from identifying the whole community
with Christ.
Another way to think about the relation of the universal to
the particular in reference to the Church is to use the word
"generic" for the word universal. In the Matthew passage
especially, the usage of the word Ekklesia is "generic."40
The reference is not to any one local assembly, but this does
not mean that it is not spoken to the visible community of God's
Covenant people. Other examples of such a "generic" use which
clearly refers to visible assemblies considered collectively are
1 Corinthians 15:59; Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3.6 where Paul
describes how he "laid waste "the Church." (See 1 Cor
12:28; 10:32; see the arguments relating to connectionalism
below).
There is strong continuity between the Ekklesia of the
New Covenant and the Qahal of the Old Covenant. There
does not seem to be warrant in the New Covenant for describing
the New Covenant Church as exclusively a "spiritual" Church as
if it were therefore "ethereal" or less concrete than the Old
Covenant "Church."
We must not think of the Church as existing apart from the
visible assembly of God's people. There are "generic" or
"universal" connotations to the term Ekklesia but our
understanding of the "invisibility" of the Ekklesia is
tempered by remembering that the Ekklesia considered as
the (Holy) Spiritual "body of Christ" is made up of Christians
united to the visible, institutional Ekklesia.
Assembly of the Ascended Lord
The book of Acts provides several instructive passages
proving the existence of a New Covenant Qahal gathered
around the Word of God. Stephen (Acts 7:38), in the course of
his defense appeals to Moses whom he describes as being with the
Ekklesia in the desert. Stephen sees a great deal of
continuity between the New Covenant Church with the Old Covenant
Community.
Luke says that news of the progress of the gospel at Antioch
reached "the ears of the Ekklesia " at Jerusalem (Acts
11:22). In vs.26 we read of Barnabas and Saul meeting with the
Ekklesia in Antioch. These two uses seem to favor a
visible assembly of people with a stable (if growing!)
constituency, similar to the Qahal in the Old Covenant.
In Acts 12:1 Herod arrests (literally) "some from the
Church...." Interestingly the NIV renders this phrase "some who
belonged to the Church." This is a correct translation. How else
could Herod arrest Christians? They were identified by their
confession of Christ and their attendance at the visible
assembly of God's people. Again, Luke supposes that we
understand a stable constituency here.
Thus in 12:5 the people praying for Peter's release from
prison are identified as the " Ekklesia ." In vs.12 we
discover this Ekklesia to be a group of people gathered
together in prayer. Acts 13.1 records the names of several
office holders in the Ekklesia at Antioch. The Lord
instructs them to set apart (ordain or sanctify) Paul and
Barnabas for the work to which He had called them. In so doing
these officers placed their hands on Paul and Barnabas and send
them off (vs.3). We can only conclude from this passage that
Luke is describing the operations of a visible assembled
community of believers.
Likewise in Acts 14:23 Paul and Barnabas are said to be
appointing elders in every Ekklesia. When they returned
to Antioch (14:27) they gathered the Church and gave a missions
report! 16:5 speaks of "Churches" being strengthened in faith
and growing in numbers. Upon his arrival at Ephesus (Acts 18:22)
Paul greets the Ekklesia. In his farewell address to the
Elders of the Ekklesia of Ephesus, Paul exhorts them to
keep watch over the Ekklesia of God. Again, unless a
visible assembly is envisioned, the "greeting" and the
"overseeing" make little sense (Acts 20:28-31).
The Regional Assembly
In other New Covenant passages: Romans 16:1; 1 Corinthians
1:2; Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; the Apostle addresses
himself to visible assemblies of God's people in the various
regions. Sometimes Paul addresses several Churches in one region
such as in 1 Corinthians 16:1,19; 2 Corinthians 8:1; Galatians
1:2; and sometimes he speaks of "Churches of God" (1 Cor
11:16; 2 Thessalonians 1:4) or distinguishing local assemblies
by background rather than by geography, "Churches of the
Gentiles" (Romans 16:4). In these instances the Apostle speaks
of the Churches inclusively in the plural. That is, somehow
these are individual congregations bound together.
Come to a Better Zion
The writer to the Hebrews (12:18-29) builds his argument for
the importance of the visible assembly in the New Covenant by
comparing our assembly with the Qahal assembled at Sinai.
He tells us that we have not come to Mount Sinai with its fire,
darkness, tempest, and trumpet (12:18,19). Instead we have come
to the mountain that was the goal of the desert pilgrimage--to
Mount Zion. The Mount Zion to which we have come, however, is
not the earthly city where Herod's Temple stood. No, we are come
to the Zion above, to the assembly of God in heaven.41
Rather than making the visible assembling together of God's
people less important, the Ekklesia is more important
because we now have "the awesome privilege of gathering with the
saints and angels with Christ in glory...As we gather we stand
in the presence of the Lord."42
Don't Forsake the Assembly
Hebrews 10:25 confirms our understanding of 12:18-29. Were it
the case that transition to the New Covenant makes the visible,
gathered institutional community obsolete, then we would not
expect these words. Instead we find a clear and strong
exhortation not to take the attitude that we can get along
without the Church. God's Word says:
Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the
habit of doing, but let us encourage one another--and all
the more as you see the Day approaching.
If author William Lane is correct about the situation into
which this epistle was sent, then these believers were under two
threats, one external (the state) and one internal (i.e.,
Judaizers). The former is most important for our purposes. The
reason he mentions the gruesome suffering undergone by Old
Covenant (ch. 11) is to encourage his readers persevere.43
Thus it is significant that the author tells theses
persecuted Christians not to forsake gathering together. He is
calling them to put their very lives on the line by visibly
assembling together. To trivialize this passage by saying, "I
obey this verse by getting together with my Christian friends"
is to do despite to the blood of the martyrs which was shed for
the sake of gathering together and worse than that, it is to
disobey the Word of God.
Corpus Christi (Christ's Body)
Sometimes the Church is described not as Ekklesia but
as a "body." Paul writes to the Corinthian Church,
The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" and
the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!" On the
contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are
indispensable, and the parts that we think are less
honorable we treat with special honor (1 Cor 12:21).
And he goes on to say in verse 27:
Now you are the Body of Christ, and each one of you is a
part of it.
The "body" which Paul describes is rightly understood as
those who are by faith united with Christ. Put in the language
of John 15, the body consists of those branches grafted by faith
onto the vine who is Christ. Still the question of the
relationship between the "body of Christ" and Church as
institute remains. Going back to 1 Corinthians 10:17 may help.
Paul teaches that, "Because there is one loaf, we who are many,
are one body, for we all partake of one loaf."
Though composed of many individuals, the Corinthian Church is
united by faith in one Christ. This unity is illustrated by the
loaf. In vs.16 he identifies the loaf as our "participation in
the body of Christ"
As in chapter 12 the idea of the "body" is closely related to
the visible instituted Church in which the Lord's Supper is
administered. The union of the several individual believers with
Christ results in visibly unity with one another, illustrated by
the Supper.
What Paul's usage of the image of the "body" in this context
shows is that just as the "mystical" (Spiritual) body is
necessary to the Ekklesia also the Ekklesia is
necessary to the body. Organism (the body) is never contemplated
outside of the organization in either the Old Covenant or New
Covenant Scriptures. For example, when Paul addresses the
Corinthians he does not distinguish between regenerate and
unregenerate hearers of the letter (1 Cor 1:1,2). He
addresses the entire assembly as if they were all saints. We
know however from chapter five that not everyone belonging to
the Corinthian Church was sanctified!
The Bride of Christ
In Ephesians 5:23 Paul exhorts husbands to,
love their wives as Christ loved the Ekklesia, His
body, of which He is the Savior. Now as the Ekklesia
submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their
husbands in everything.
According to 1 Corinthians 11:4 and 14:26-40 the problem is a
lack of propriety in worship. Such advice envisions a local body
of believers gathered together on a regular basis for worship.
The solution is for everything to done decently and in order in
worship (cf. 1 Timothy 2:15). The same is true for his rebuke to
them regarding their conduct at the Lord's Table. In 1
Corinthians 14:16 Paul even describes a situation in which a
visitor is in Church to worship and does not understand what is
taking place! Surely Paul conceives of the Ekklesia as an
observable gathering of God's people, along the lines of the Old
Covenant Qahal .
Connectionalism in the New Testament
Closely related to the Biblical understanding of the
relationship of the Church Universal to the Church individually
considered is the question of connectionalism in the New
Covenant. It is often assumed in the American Church that the
New Testament Churches were independent of one another and
autonomous, that is, subject to no one's authority but their
own. In fact this is less a New Covenant picture than an amalgam
of the historic Anabaptist view of the Church with traditional
American self reliance.
Connectionalism is sometimes portrayed by its opponents as a
Roman Catholic corruption of the true Church. Nothing could be
farther from the truth.
The First Synod
There are clear New Covenant precedents for regional (and
even larger) assemblies of Churches, considered as one "Church."
God gives a mandate for a larger system of Church co-operation
and government in Acts 15. A council of Church elders and
Apostles was called in Jerusalem to decide the question: what
must a Gentile do to enter the church? In verse 19 we see the
conclusions of James which the Council adopted:
It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it
difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead
we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food
polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of
strangled animals, and from blood.
Now look at verse 30 where we see that Apostle Paul and
Barnabas have been delegated by the Council to deliver the
decree of the council, notice the reaction of the recipients:
The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they
gathered the Church together, and delivered the letter. The
people read it and were glad for its encouraging message.
Notice the context. The Apostle Paul who received his gospel
not from men (Gal 1:12) but directly from the ascended
Lord Jesus, is delegated first by the visible, instituted,
Church in Antioch to go to Jerusalem. This is no casual
gathering of believers which sent Paul and Barnabas, but a
rightly ordered gathering whose authority Paul recognized. That
means that Paul submitted to the will of the local Church to
have this question decided by the larger body. Paul himself was
"sent" by the Church. The Apostle recognized that the Lord has
given the broader Church authority (derived from the Word of
God) to decide questions in the Church according to the
Scriptures.
Here is the first regional assembly or general synod. At this
synod there were missions reports, speeches, discussion over the
meaning of various passages of Scripture and even heated
theological argument (vv.7-11) and finally agreement. The assembly
concluded that circumcision is not necessary for salvation.
Converts were exhorted to avoid sexual immorality and sacrifices
offered to idols.
The assembly drafted a letter which was taken around to various
Churches and presented as the decision of the body. This is not
just an advisory decision. James considered the decision of the
Council binding on all those to whom the letter was to be sent.
Notice that in verse 22 it is the "whole church" which has sent
Paul and Barnabas. Thus the larger assembly assumed that it had
authority to delegate Paul and Barnabas as ambassadors for the
larger, visible, connected, Church which had arrived at a
unified conclusion.
Because the decision was binding the Churches received with
joy, since now Gentiles could be let into the Church without the
whole Old Covenant dietary law being imposed on them. These
churches were in some official arrangement so that the delegates
to this council had real authority, just as the Elders and
Pastors in 1 Timothy have real authority derived from Scripture.
Another consideration in favor of connectionalism, that is,
organized visible connections between local Churches is the way
Luke uses the singular Ekklesia to describe several
bodies at once. Acts 8:3 says that Paul was going about
destroying the Church in Jerusalem, which consisted of more than
one congregation, yet is spoken of as one body.
Another important passage is Acts 9:31. There is a difficulty
here because there is a textual question. The Textus Receptus
(the Greek Text behind the Authorized Version of 1611) and the
Majority Text (the Greek text behind the New King James Version)
reads Churches." The oldest and most reliable manuscripts,
however, read "Church."44
It is significant that Luke uses the singular to describe
several local Church bodies in the region. He apparently feels
comfortable speaking of several Churches as though they are one.
Luke speaks this way because he conceives the various Churches
as being bound together in unity under the authority of the
Scriptures.
Offices in the Church 45
Another indication that the visible, local and even regional,
institutional, assembly was important in the New Covenant
organization of the Ekklesia is the establishment of
authoritative offices in the Church. Contrary to some views
which say that all such offices are man-made, there is clear
divine and Biblical warrant for three offices in the Church of
Jesus Christ. How could the Apostles establish (Acts 6) offices
and describe the function of these offices in the visible,
institutional Church, if there is no such thing as offices or an
institutional Church?
Presbyter/Episkopos
In 1 Timothy 3:1-11 Paul lays out specific requirements for
those who aspire to fulfill the office of overseer/elder. He
does the same thing in Titus 1:5-9. Hebrews 13:7-17 also
describes the type of relationship expected in the New Covenant
Church between elders and the congregation. In James 5:14 the
Word of God instructs those who are physically ill to call for
the elders of the Church to come and pray with him and anoint
him with oil.
1 Peter 5:1-4 addresses those who fulfill the office of elder
in the Church. We know this because Peter identifies himself as
a fellow elder. It seems unlikely that he is referring to his
age. Vs.2 instructs them to be shepherds of the flock, not to be
greedy, (vs.3) not to lord it over those whom God has put under
them, to be examples to the flock, (vs.4) to remember their
accountability to the Divine Shepherd who will one day make the
final pastoral visit.
Diakonos
Scripture also speaks clearly about the office of "deacon."
The Apostles instituted this office in Acts 6:1-7 as a measure
to allow them to better use their time to advance the gospel. As
with the office of elder Paul lays out specific guidelines for
the office of deacon in 1 Timothy 3:12,13. It seems difficult to
imagine that the Lord, through His Apostles, established these
offices if there were no visible Qahal or Ekklesia
in which to serve.
Membership in the Local Church-Body
We can complete the last part of the task by looking at a
couple of new considerations as well as drawing relevant
conclusions from our earlier arguments regarding the nature and
unity of the Church.
There is a widespread notion that a truly Spirit-led
congregation would not keep anything so earthy as membership
records. This is an unfounded and unbiblical assumption which
does not square with biblical history and teaching.
In the Old Covenant, God is a bookkeeper. In Exodus 32:32 we
see a very interesting phrase. In a prayer, Moses pleads with
God not to blot him out of "the Book you have written." The Lord
replies to Moses that He will indeed blot anyone who sins out of
His "Book."46 David declares in Psalm 9.5 that the
Lord has "blotted out" the name of his enemies forever.47
In Psalm 40:7 David is assured that his righteousness is written
on God's scroll.
Many of these same themes regarding the "Book of Life" are
evident in the Revelation of the Apostle John. To the Church in
Sardis the Lord Jesus writes that He will not "blot out his name
from the Book of Life" who is faithful and obedient to the Lord.
Revelation 13:8; 17:8; 20:12,15; also refer to the Book of Life.
It would seem that we are to conceive of a divinely kept book in
which are recorded the names of all believers of all ages. This
is not to say that there is an actual book, though there may
well be.
In Psalm 69:28 David prays for the utter destruction of
enemies and for them to be blotted out of "the Book of Life" and
not to be listed with the righteous. In this same Psalm vv.9,10
David turns from the "book" to speak twice of the Qahal
(which is translated in the LXX with Ekklesia and
Synagogue (cf. Deuteronomy 9:10,14 where these two ideas are
also closely connected). There is a close connection in David's
mind between the Qahal and the "book."
Because God is revealed as a book keeper His Covenant people
were also (according to the commandments of God) also book
keepers.
There is significant evidence that in the Old Covenant there
were membership rolls with the names of all the Covenant
families and the Covenant heads of households. Genesis 5:1ff.
speaks of the "book of the generations." Moses worked from
existing books in compiling his (selective) genealogies. This
idea of membership roll figured conspicuously in the life of the
Qahal. Later after the exile when the beginnings of the
Synagogue can be traced, there is archeological evidence that
there were membership rolls there as well. It took at least
twelve men in good standing in the community to form a
synagogue.
God commanded Moses in Exodus 17:14 to write down the
destruction of the Amelakites because without this record there
would not be any. In turn (Deutronomy 25.19), God will "blot
out" the Amelakites. In Exodus 24:7 we read of the "Book of the
Covenant" which contained the laws by which God's Covenant
people were to live. God commanded Moses to take a census of the
people and to make a record of them (Exodus 30:11). Psalm 87:6
speaks of a "register of the peoples" (NIV). Ezekiel 13:9 speaks
of a "register of the house of Israel" (NASB). There was a
written record of the descendents of Aaron (Nu 3:10). It would
seem to be beyond controversy that God's people kept written
records during the Mosaic theocracy. The question remains then
whether similar practices continued into the New Covenant era.
There is a great deal of unity and continuity between the Old
Covenant conception of the Qahal and the New Covenant
Ekklesia. Thus there is good reason to suspect that there is
continuity in the practice of record keeping. Remember that in
both the Old Covenant and the New Covenant, one had to join the
visible assembly and take the sign of the Covenant.
The most obvious examples of this sort of record keeping are
the genealogies of Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. We know from
Acts that the Apostles met first in the temple, and then later
during missionary journeys, in the synagogue. The organization
of the synagogue did play some roll in the beginning of the
visible Church. We see in Luke 4:18ff. that there was a reading
of the Scriptures and an exposition of the Scriptures in the
Synagogue. This practice was continued in the early New Covenant
Church.
Another piece of evidence which adds to the presumption of
Church membership in the New Covenant Church is the mention in
Acts 16:5 that the Church grew greatly in numbers. If the Church
in the New Covenant largely equals the Qahal of the Old
Covenant and if it grew in numbers then we can fairly say that
these converts 'joined' the Church.
There is positive evidence of record keeping (membership
lists) in the New Covenant Church. The problem in the daily
distribution of bread in Acts 6:1 assumes some sort of record
keeping of eligible widows. In
1 Timothy 5:9-16 Paul speaks explicitly about a list of names of
Christian widows who were eligible for financial assistance from
the Church. He even lays out the qualifications to be on the
list. If the Church kept such lists for financial aid, can we
reasonably assume that these widows were not on a membership
roll? Moreover we cannot help but notice that again Paul's
instructions regarding widows presupposes some sort of organized
visible body of Christ who administered this aid to its members.
Conclusion
The Church is the people of God assembled together under the
authority of the Word of God for worship, instruction, and
mutual edification. By his Word through the Apostles, God has
ordained that we unite together to accomplish these purposes.
The organized Church is not a mistake, but instead, the Biblical
and Apostolic institution for the advancement of the Kingdom of
God.
ENDNOTES
*I owe the expression "Christ Confessing Covenant Community"
to my dear friend Derke Bergmsa.
1 James Bannerman, The Church of Christ, 2
vols (Edinburgh, 1848), 2. This essay has been strongly
influenced by an early version of the material which is now
published in Edmund P. Clowney, The Church (Downers
Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1995).
2 The Latin text says, "Credo in Spiritum sanctum;
sanctam ecclesiam catholicam." Historically Protestants have
sometimes been reluctant to repeat the preposition "in."
Properly one believes 'in' the Spirit, because God is the proper
object of faith. One believes the holy catholic (universal)
church when she speaks as such, as in the Creeds.
3 Heidelberg Catechism (1563), Q.54.
4 Ibid., Q.55.
5 The division of the English Bible into two
"Testaments" is somewhat misleading. A testament is a means of
disposing of property after death. The basis for the use of the
word testament lies in the traditional interpretation of Hebrews
9:15-16 which appears to refer to a testament rather than a
covenant. It is possible that Hebrews 9:15-16 refers to the
testamentary disposition of an estate. There is, however, an
equally probable interpretation of this passage which
understands it to refer to the making of a covenant.
First, one must remember that the testamentary concept is
certainly not the primary in the Biblical notion of a covenant.
The OT term is Berith or Covenant which occurs more than
250 times throughout the Old Covenant Scriptures. Nearly all
major O.T. scholars agree that the Covenant is a major unifying
theme of the Old Covenant Scriptures. In the New Covenant
Scriptures the Greek word for Covenant (Diatheke) occurs
33 times. The idea, however, of the Berith/Diatheke
(covenant) underlies all of the New Covenant Scriptures and
covenantal language is common in the N.T. See Acts 2:39; Acts
7:1-53; Romans 4:17, 2 Corinthians 3:7-17; Galatians ch's 3 and
4 [all]; Hebrews 7:22; ch.8 [all]; 9 [all]; 10:16,29; 12:24;
13:20.
Second, it should be noted that the language of Hebrews 9
closely parallels the Covenant making language in the Old
Covenant where covenants are 'cut' and enforced through the
(symbolic-ritual) death of the covenant maker. Thus Hebrews says
that the covenant is not in force while the covenant maker is
alive because a covenant maker had to 'die' in the process. When
in Gen. 15.9-17 Yahweh passed through the pieces in the torch or
those men in Jeremiah 34.18-19 walked between the pieces , they
'died' symbolically. When Christ died in fact he did so taking
on the curse of covenant breakers. In this view the word
translated testament in Hebrews 9.15-16 is more accurately
translated by the English word Covenant. See M. G. Kline, By
Oath Consigned (Grand Rapids, 1968).
6 Genesis 3.14-16.
7 Genesis 6.18; 9:9-17.
8 Genesis 15:1-18; 17 [all]; 1 Chronicles 16:16;
Ps 105:8; Acts 3:25; 7 [all]; Romans 4 [all]; 9 [all]; Galatians
3 [all].
9 The Biblical teaching of the covenant is perhaps
the sharpest dividing line between the Baptist and Reformed
understandings of the Bible. Baptist scholars do write about the
covenant. Reformed scholars, however, have been working out the
relations between the covenant of grace and baptism since
Huldrych Zwingli wrote on baptism in 1525. For a notable attempt
to synthesize the Biblical teaching on the covenant with a
Baptist position see Paul Jewett's article Baptism, in The
Encyclopedia of Christianity (Marshallton, 1964), 2.517-26.
10 Jeremiah 31.32,33; Ezekiel 34:35.
11 Luke 22:20; 2 Corinthians 3:7-18; Hebrews
8:1-10:18.
12 Luke 22:20.
13 2 Corinthians 3:6.
14 Luke 1:54,55,72,73; Acts chapter 7.
15 1 Peter 1:10-12.
16 Hebrews 1:2; 1 Peter 1:20.
17 John 14:25-27; 15:26,27.
18 This is why the Bible speaks of 'types' and
'shadows." See Romans 5:14 (NIV-uses "pattern"); 1 Corinthians
10:1-13; Hebrews 8 [all].
19 Compare Jeremiah 31.31-34 with Hebrews 7.22,
chapter 8, 9:15, 10:24.
20 See Genesis 3:14-16. Jesus fulfilled this
promise by his death on the Cross.
21 Romans 4:11,17.
22 Ephesians 2:1-22, gentiles were brought into
covenant relationship with God by faith; compare Romans
11:17-24.
23 God nearly took Moses' life because he failed
to circumcise his second son! See Exodus 4:24-26. On the threats
attached to circumcisions see Genesis 17:14.
24 Genesis 15.18, Exodus 24.8, 34.27; Deuteronomy
4.23,5.2, 9.9.
25 For a clear example of this curse bearing see
the book of Jeremiah. Repeatedly God prosecutes Israel for
failing to live up to the "terms of the covenant." In 34: 17-20
the Lord says, "The men who have violated my covenant and have
not fulfilled the terms of the covenant they made before me, I
will treat like the calf they cut in two and then walked between
its pieces. The leaders of Judah and Jerusalem, the court
officials, the priests and all the people of the land who walked
between the pieces of the calf. I will hand over to their
enemies who seek their lives. Their dead bodies will become food
for the birds of the air and the beast s of the earth." This is
a direct re-enactment of the covenant-oath ceremony of Genesis
15:8-21. God graciously, sovereignly enters into a covenant with
his people, i.e., "I will be your God, you will be my people."
That Covenant-oath-promise is always sealed in blood. This is a
common practice of the Ancient Near Eastern world. See K. A.
Kitchen, Ancient Orient and the Old Testament (Downers
Grove, 1966); M. G. Kline, The Structure of Biblical
Authority (Grand Rapids, 1972); ibid, Treaty of the Great
King (Grand Rapids, 1963); George E. Mendenhall,
Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East
(Pittsburgh, 1955). This is not just an Old Covenant occurrence.
In Galatians 5:12, Paul wishes this very curse upon enemies of
the gospel.
26 See the Song of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah
52:13-53:12. Isaiah 53:4,8; Hebrews 13:12; see the section above
on being "cut off" from the covenant. See also Deuteronomy
21:22,23.
27 Hebrews 9:11-10:1.
28 Ephesians 2:1-13 3:6; 1 Peter 2:9,10, 4:17.
29 Romans 4:11,17.
30 1 Corinthians 10:3; Ephesians 2:8-9.
31 Galatians 5:2-6.
32 E. P. Clowney, Living in Christ's Church
(Philadelphia, 1986), 9.
33 Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.
s.v. Qahal.
34 J. Murray, "The Nature and Unity of The Church," The
Collected Writings of John Murray 4 vols (Edinburgh,
1976-82), 1.323.
35 See Deuteronomy 32.4-37 2 Samuel 22.47; Psalm
18; 42.9; 62.2,6,7.
36 Ephesians 3.23. See. Acts 5.1-11, 1 Corinthians
5 and 2 Corinthians 7.5-13 for examples of the use of the
"keys."
37 See H. Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom,
ch.8.
38 Murray, "Nature and Unity..." p.323.
39 "Nature and Unity....," 326.
40 Murray, 323.
41 Clowney, Christ's Church, .11.
42 Ibid, p.12.
43 W. L. Lane, Call to Commitment:
Responding to the Message of Hebrews (Nashville, 1985).
44 Used in translations such as the NIV, NASB, ASV.
45 For a clear and helpful discussion of the
threefold structure of the special offices in Scripture see
Derke Bergsma, "Prophets, Priests and Kings: Biblical Offices,"
in John Armstrong, ed., The Compromised Church
(Wheaton: Crossways, 1998).
46 See 2 Kings 23:21.
47 See Deuteronomy 9:14
© 2009 R. Scott Clark. All rights reserved. This essay may
not be reproduced electronically without the express written
permission of the author. You are welcome to post links to the essay without permission.
|
EMAIL TO A FRIEND
PRINT
SHARE