|
|
|
|
The Normal
Christian Church Life
Watchman Nee
PREFACE
After the publication of my book
in Chinese, quite a number of missionaries asked for an edition in English. I felt
reluctant to comply, for personally I should prefer to have those books
translated which better represent my ministry, rather than this one which is
liable to be misunderstood and controverted. The book as it now stands is a
greatly abridged and slightly revised edition of the Chinese. Neither in
expression nor in style is it as English as I should wish, but I trust that in
this respect I may count on the leniency of its readers. If all we want is the
truth of God, then the difficulty of understanding the book should prove no
serious barrier to the reading of it.
Because of the vastness of the
subject and the importance of its issues, I have not found it easy either to
write or translate this book. Since some of the same points have had to be
dealt with in different parts of the book, it will be found necessary to read
it right through if full understanding is to result. If, because of seemingly
insurmountable difficulty, the book is laid aside before completed, a false
position will result; whereas by reading it right through many if not all of
the difficulties will be cleared up. Frequently the questions which arise at
certain points are answered further on - sometimes much further on. To do the
book justice, the reader is asked to finish reading it before passing judgment.
The book is not intended for
anyone and everyone. It is for those who feel their responsibility in the
Lord's service. But more than this, it is for such as honestly and truly mean
business for God, for those whose hearts are open, who have no padlocked mind
or prejudices. The book may test one's sincerity and honesty to no small
degree, but I believe the Lord has shown something which is of importance to
the whole body of Christ.
The whole matter will grow upon
the reader and become clearer with relaxed contemplation after the first
reading The door must not be closed with a snap of "Impossible!" or
"Ideal, but not practical!" By prayerful openness of heart, without
argument or discussion, the Spirit of truth should be given a chance, and then
what is of Him will cause all our natural reactions to die away and we shall
know the truth and the truth shall make us free. What is set forth in these
pages is no mere theory or teaching but something we have actually tested in
actual practice.
One of the prayers I have offered
in connection with this book is that the Lord should keep it from those who
oppose and would use it as a chart for attack and also from those who agree and
would use it as a manual for service. I dread the latter far more than the
former.
- Watchman Nee
INTRODUCTION
The content of the following
pages is the substance of a number of talks to my younger fellow-workers during
conferences held in 1938 in
We trust the readers of this book
will bear in mind that its messages as originally given were never meant for
them They were intended exclusively for the inner circle of my most intimate
associates in the work, but by request we share our findings with the wider
circle of all our brethren. This book is something private made public,
something originally intended for the few now extended to the many.
During the past eighteen years
the Lord has led us through different experiences in order that we might learn
a little of the principle as well as the fact of the Cross and Resurrection,
and learn something of the Indwelling Life and Lordship of Christ, the
Corporate Life of the Body, the Ground of the Kingdom of God, and His Eternal
Purpose. It is natural, therefore, that these things have been the burden of
our ministry. But God's wine must have a wineskin to contain it. In the Divine
pattern, nothing is left for man to decide. God Himself has provided the best
wineskin for His wine, which will contain and preserve it without loss,
hindrance or misrepresentation. He has given us His wine, but He has shown us
His wineskin also.
Our work throughout the past
years has been according to certain definite principles, but never until now
have we tried to define or to teach them. We have sought rather to stress those
truths which have direct bearing on the spiritual life of the believer and the
Eternal Purpose of God. But the practical outworking of those truths in the
Lord's service is by no means unimportant. Without that everything is in the
realm of theory and spiritual development is impossible. We would seek,
therefore, by the grace of God not only to pass on His good wine but also the
wineskin He has provided for its preservation. The truths set forth must
therefore be regarded as the sequence, not the introduction to our many years
of ministry.
This book is not a treatise on
missionary methods, but a review of our past work in the light of God's will as
have discovered it in His Word. The Lord had most graciously led us by His
Spirit in our past service for Him, but we wanted to be clear as to the
foundations upon which all divine work should rest. I realized that the primary
need of my younger brethren was to be led of the Spirit and to receive
revelation from Him, but I could not ignore their need of a solid Scriptural
basis for all their ministry. There was no thought of criticizing the labors of
others or even of making any suggestion to them how the work of God ought to be
conducted; we were merely seeking to learn from God's Word, from experience,
and from observation, how to conduct the work in the days to come so that we
might be workmen "approved unto God."
The book is written from the
standpoint of a servant looking from the work towards the churches. It does not
deal with the specific ministry to which we believe the Lord has called us but
only with the general principles of the work. Nor does it deal with the
``Church which is His Body,'' but with the local churches and their relation
with the work. The book does not touch the principles of the work or the life
of the churches; it is only a review of our missions.
The truths referred to in this
book have been gradually learned and practiced during the past years. Numerous
adjustments have been made as greater light has been received, and if we remain
humble and God still shows us His mercy, we believe there will be further
adjustments in the future. The Lord has graciously given us a goodly number of
associates in the work, all of whom have been sent forth on the basis mentioned
in this book, and through their labors numerous churches have been established
in different parts of
Missionary methods, as such, do
not interest me at all. In fact, it is a deep grief to meet children of God who
know practically nothing of the hatefulness of a life lived in the energy of
the natural man and know little of vital experience of the Headship of Jesus
Christ, yet all the while are scrupulously careful to arrive at absolute
correctness of method in God's service. Many a time we have been told, "We
agree with you in everything." Far from it! In reality we do not agree at
all! We hope this book will not fall into the hands of those who wish to
improve their work by improving their methods without adjusting their
relationship to the Lord, but we do hope it will have a message for the humble
ones who have learned to live in tht power of the Spirit and have no confidence
in the flesh.
It is death to have a wineskin
without wine, but it is loss to have wine without a wineskin. We must have the
wineskin after we have the wine. Paul wrote the Ephesian Epistle but he could
also write the Corinthian Epistle, and Corinthians presents us with Ephesians
truths in practical expression. Corinthian teachings are practical and touch
the earthly sphere, so if there is the slightest difference of opinion a
reaction is felt at once. Corinthians is very practical. It tests our obedience
more than does Ephesians!
The danger with those who know
little about life and reality is to emphasize mere outward correctness, but
with those to whom life and reality are a matter of supreme importance, the
temptation is to to throw away the divine pattern of things, thinking it legal
and technical. They feel that they have the greater and can therefore dispense
with the lesser. But God has not only revealed the truths relating to the
outward expression of that life. God prizes the inner reality but He does not
ignore its outward expression. We might think it sufficient for God to instruct
us through Romans. Ephesians. and Colossians as to our life in Christ, but He
has thought it necessary to instruct us through Acts, Corinthians, and Timothy
as to how to do His work and how to organize His Church. God has left nothing
to human imagination or human will. It is not our place, therefore, to suggest
how we think divine work should be done. but rather to ask in everything.
"What is the will of the Lord?"
We must seek to follow the
leading of God's Spirit, but at the same time we must seek to pay attention to
the examples shown us in His Word. The leading of the Spirit is precious. but
if there is no example in the Word then it is easy to substitute our fallible
thoughts and unfounded feelings for the Spirit's leading, drifting into error
without realizing it. If one is not willing to obey God's will in every
direction, it is easy to do things contrary to His word and still fancy one is
being led of His Spirit. We emphasize the necessity of following both the
leading of the Spirit and the examples of the Word, because by comparing our
ways with the written Word we can discover the source of our leading. The
Spirit's guidance will always harmonize with the Scriptures. God cannot lead a
man one way in the beginning and another way today. In externalities the
leading may vary but in principle it is always the same, for God's will is
eternal and therefore changeless. God is the Eternal God. He takes no
cognizance of time, and His will and ways all bear the stamp of eternity. This
being so, God could never act one way at one time and another way later on.
Circumstances may differ and cases may differ, but in principle the will and
ways of God are just the same today as they were in the days of the Acts.
God said to the Israelites:
"Moses for your hardness of heart allowed you to put away your wives"
(Mt. 19:8), but the Lord Jesus said, "What God has joined together, let
not man separate." (Mt. 19:6). Is there not a discrepancy here? Not at
all! "Moses for your hardness of heart allowed you to put away your wives;
but from the beginning it hath not been so" (Mt. 19:8). It is not that in
"the beginning" it was permissible, and later became permissible
again, as though God were a changeable God. No, the Lord said, "From
the beginning it has not been so" showing that God's will had never
been altered. "From the beginning" right on until today it is just
the same. Here is a most important principle. If we want to know the mind of
God, we must look at His commands in Genesis and not look at His permissions
later on, because every later permission has this explanation: "for your
hardness of heart." It is God's directive will we want to discover, not
His permissive will. We want to see what God's purpose was "from the
beginning." We want to see things as they were when they proceeded in all
their purity from the mind of God, not what they have become because of
"hardness of heart" on the part of His people.
If we would understand the will
of God concerning His Church, then we must return to the beginning, to the
"genesis" of the Church, to see what He then said and did. It is
there we find the highest expression of His will. The Book of the Acts is the
"genesis" of the Church's history, and the Church in the time of Paul
is the "genesis" of the Spirit's work. Conditions in the Church today
are vastly different from what they were then, but these present conditions
could never be our example or our authoritative guide. We must return to
"the beginning."
A word of explanation may be
needed regarding the examples God has given us in His word. Christianity is
built not only upon precepts but also upon examples. God has revealed His will
not only by giving orders but by having certain things done in His Church, so
that in the ages to come others might simply look at the pattern and know His
will, God has directed His people not only by means of abstract principles and
objective regulations but by concrete examples and subjective experience. God
does use precepts to teach His people, but one of His chief methods of
instruction is through history. God tells us how others knew and did His will,
so that we by looking at their lives may not only know His will but see how to
do it, too. He worked in their lives, producing in them what He Himself
desired, and He bids us look at them so that we may know what He is after.
In closing, may I stress the fact
that this is not a book on missionary methods. Methods are not to be despised,
but in God's service what matters most is the man, not his methods. Unless the
man is right, right methods will be of no use to him or his work. Carnal
methods are suited to carnal men, and spiritual methods to spiritual men. For
carnal men to employ spiritual methods will only result in confusion and
failure. This book is intended for those who, having learned something of the
Cross, know the corruption of human nature and seek to walk not after the flesh
but after the Spirit. Its object is to help those who acknowledge the Lordship
of Christ in all things and are seeking to serve Him in the way of His own
appointment, not of their own choosing. May none of my readers use this book as
a basis for external adjustments in their work, without letting the Cross deal
drastically with their natural life.
In God's work everything depends
upon the kind of worker sent out and the kind of convert produced. On the part
of the convert, a real Holy Spirit new birth is essential, and a vital
relationship with God. On the part of the worker, besides personal holiness and
enduement for service, it is essential that he have an experimental knowledge
of the meaning of committal to God and faith in His sovereign
To the Lord and to His people I
commend this book, with the prayer that He may use it for His glory, as He sees
fit.
1. The Apostles
God is a God of works. Our Lord
said, "My Father works even until now." He is the God "who works
all things after the counsel of His will." But God does not do everything
directly by Himself. He works through His servants. Among the servants of God
the apostles are the most important ones.
The First Apostle
In the fullness of time God sent
forth His Son into the world to do His work. He is known as the Christ of God,
that is, "the Anointed One." The term "Son" relates to His
Person; the name "Christ" relates to His office. He was the Son of
God, but He was sent to be the Christ of God. "Christ" is the
ministerial name of the Son of God. Our Lord did not come to the earth or to
the Cross on His own initiative; He was anointed and set apart for the Work by
God. He was not self-appointed, but sent. Frequently throughout the Gospel of
John we find Him referring to God as "the One who sent Me." He took
the place of a sent one. If that is true in the case of the Son of God, how
much more should it apply to His servants? If even the Son was not expected to
take any initiative in God's work, is it likely that we are expected to do so?
The first principle to note in the work of God is that all His workers are sent
ones. If there is no divine commission, there can be no divine work.
Scripture has a special name for
a sent one, namely, an apostle. The meaning of the Greek word is "the sent
one." The Lord Himself is the first Apostle because He is the first one
specially sent of God; hence the Word refers to Him as "the Apostle"
(Heb. 3:1).
The Twelve
While on earth, the Lord was all
the time aware that His life in the flesh was limited, so that as He went about
the work committed to Him by the Father, He prepared a group of men to continue
it after His departure. These men were also termed apostles. They were not
volunteers; they were sent ones. We cannot overemphasize this fact that all
divine work is by commission, not by choice.
These apostles occupy a special
place in the purpose of God, because they were with the Son of God while He
lived in the flesh. They were not just called apostles, they were called
"the Twelve Apostles." They occupied a special place in the Word and
plan of God. Our Lord told Peter that one day they should "sit on thrones
judging the twelve tribes of
The Apostles in Scripture Days
The Lord Jesus has now gone, but
the Spirit has come. The Holy Spirit is come to bear all responsibility for the
work of God on earth. The Son was working for the Father; the Spirit is working
for the Son. The Son came to accomplish the will of the Father; the Spirit has
come to accomplish the will of the Son. The Son came to glorify the Father; the
Spirit has come to glorify the Son. The Father then appointed Christ to be
"the Apostle"; the Son while on earth appointed "the
twelve" to be apostles. The Son has returned to the Father, and now the
Spirit is on earth appointing other men to be apostles. The apostles appointed by
the Holy Spirit cannot join the ranks of those appointed by the Son, but
nonetheless they are apostles. The apostles we read of in the fourth chapter of
Ephesians are clearly not the original twelve, for those were appointed when
the Lord was still on earth, while these date their appointment to
apostleship after the ascension of the Lord - they were the gifts of the
Lord Jesus to His Church after His glorification. The twelve apostles then were
the personal followers of the Lord Jesus, but the apostles now are ministers
for the building up of the Body of Christ. We must differentiate clearly
between the apostles who were witnesses to the resurrection of Christ (Acts
1:22,26), and the apostles who are ministers for the edifying of the Body of
Christ. It is evident, therefore, that God has other apostles beside the
original twelve.
Immediately following the
outpouring of the Spirit the twelve apostles carried on the work. Until the
twelfth chapter of Acts they are seen as the chief workers, but with the opening
of the thirteenth chapter we see the Holy Spirit beginning to manifest Himself
as the Agent of Christ and the Lord of the Church. In that chapter we are told
that in Antioch, when certain prophets and teachers were ministering to the
Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Separate Me now Barnabas
and Saul for the work to which I have called them" (Acts 13:2, Darby). Now
is the time that the Spirit begins to send men forth. At this point two new
workers were commissioned by the Holy Spirit.
After these two were sent out by
the Spirit, how were they designated? When Barnahas and Paul were working in
Iconium, "the multitude of the city was divided; and part held with the
Jews, and part with the apostles" (Acts 14:4). The two sent forth in the
previous chapter are in this chapter referred to as "apostles," and
in the same chapter (Acts 14:14) the designation "the apostles" is
used with reference to Paul and Barnabas, which proves conclusively that the
two men commissioned by the Holy Spirit were also apostles. They were not among
the twelve, but they were apostles.
Who then are apostles? Apostles
are God's workmen, sent out by the Holy Spirit to do the work to which He has
called them. The responsibility of the work is in their hands. Broadly
speaking, all believers are responsible for the work of God, but apostles are a
group of people specially set apart and bear a peculiar responsibility for its
conduct.
We want to examine now the
teaching of the scriptures as touching apostles. God appointed His Son to be
"the Apostle"; Christ appointed His disciples to be "the
Twelve Apostles"; and the Holy Spirit appointed a group of men (apart from
the Twelve) to be the Body-building apostles. There are many belonging to this
latter order chosen and sent forth by the Spirit of God. In 1 Cor. 4:9, we
read: "God has set forth us the apostles last." To whom do the words
"us the apostles" refer? The pronoun "us" implies that
there was at least one other apostle besides the writer. If we study the
context, we note that Apollos was with Paul when he wrote (1 Cor. 4:6), and
Sosthenes was a joint writer with Paul of the epistle. It seems clear that the
"us" here refers either to Apollos or to Sosthenes or to both. It
follows then that either or both of these two must have been apostles.
Rom. 16:7: "Salute
Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among
the apostles." The clause "who are of note among the apostles"
does not mean that they were regarded as notable by the apostles, but rather
that among the apostles they were notable ones. Here you have not only another
two apostles, but another two notable apostles.
1 Ths. 2:6: "We might have
been burdensome, as the apostles of Christ." The "we" here
refers clearly to the writers of the Thessalonian letter, namely, Paul,
Silvanus, and Timothy (1 Ths. 1:1), which indicates that Paul's two young
fellow-workers were also apostles.
1 Cor. 15:5-7: "He was seen
by Cephas, then by the Twelve; after that, He was seen by about five hundred
brethren at once; after that, He was seen by James; then by all the
apostles." Besides the Twelve Apostles there was a group known as
"all the apostles." It is obvious, then that apart from the Twelve
there were other apostles.
Paul never claimed that he was
the last apostle and that after him there were no others. Please read carefully
what he said: "Last of all He was seen of me also...for I am least of the
apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle." (1 Cor. 15:8,9).
Notice how Paul used the words "last" and "least." He did
not say that he was the last apostle, he only said he was the least apostle. If
he were the last there could be no more after him, but he was only the least.
In the Book of Revelation it is
said of the Ephesian church: "You have tried them which say they are
apostles, and are not, and have found them liars" (Rev. 2:2). It seems
clear from this verse that the early churches expected to have other apostles
apart from the original Twelve, because when the Book of Revelation was written
John was the only survivor of the Twelve and by that time even Paul had already
been martyred. If there were to be only twelve apostles, and John was the only
one left, then no one would have been foolish enough to pose as an apostle and
no one foolish enough to be deceived, and where would have been the need to try
them?
The Meaning of Apostleship
Since the meaning of the word
"apostle" is "the sent one," the meaning of apostleship is
quite plain, namely, the office of the sent one. Apostles are not primarily men
of special gifts, they are men of special commission. Many called of God are
not as gifted as Paul, but if they have received a commission of God, they are
just as truly apostles as he. The apostles were gifted men, but their
apostleship was not based upon their gifts; it was based upon their commission.
Of course, God will not send anyone who is unequipped, but equipment does not
constitute apostleship. It is futile for anyone to assume the office of an
apostle simply because he thinks he has the needed gifts or ability. It takes
more than mere gift and ability to constitute men apostles; it takes God
Himself, His will and His call. No man can attain to apostleship through
natural or other qualifications; God must make him an apostle if he is ever to
be one. "A man sent of God" should be the main characteristic of our
entering upon His service and of all our subsequent movements.
Our Lord said, "The servant
is not greater than his Lord: neither the apostle [Greek] than He that sent
him" (Jn. 13:16). Here we have a definition of the term
"apostle." It implies being sent out - that is all, and that is
everything. However good human intention may be, it can never take the place of
divine commission. Today those who have been sent out by the Lord to preach the
Gospel and to establish churches call themselves missionaries, not apostles,
but the word "missionary" means the very same thing as
"apostle," i.e. "the sent one." It is the Latin form of the
Greek equivalent, "apostolos." Since the meaning of the two words is
exactly the same, I fail to see the reason why the true sent ones of today
prefer to call themselves "missionaries" rather than
"apostles."
Apostles and the Ministry
"But to
each one of us has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of
Christ. Wherefore he says, Having ascended up on high, He has led captivity
captive, and has given gifts to men. But that He ascended, what is it but that
He also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the
same who has also ascended up above all the heavens, that He might fill all
things; and He has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some
evangelists, and some shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints;
with a view to the work of the ministry, whh a view to the edifying of the body
of Christ; until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge
of the Son of God, at the full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the
fulness of the Christ." (Eph. 4:7-13, Darby)
There are many ministries
connected with the service of God, but He chose a number of men for a special
ministry - the ministry of the Word for the building up of the Body of Christ.
Since that ministry is different from others, we refer to it as "the
ministry." This ministry is entrusted to a group of people of whom the
apostles are chief. It is neither a one-man ministry, nor an "all
men" ministry, but a ministry based upon the gifts of the Holy Spirit and
an experimental knowledge of the Lord.
Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors
and teachers are our Lord's gifts to His Church to serve in the ministry.
Strictly speaking, pastors and teachers are one gift, not two, because teaching
and shepherding are closely related. In enumerating the gifts, apostles,
prophets, and evangelists are all mentioned separately, while pastors and
teachers are linked together. Further, the first three are each prefixed by the
word "some," whereas the word "some" is attached to pastors
and teachers unitedly, thus - "some apostles," "some
prophets," "some evangelists," and "some pastors and
teachers," not "some pastors and some teachers." The fact that
the word "some" is used only four times in this list indicates that
there are only four classes of persons in question. Pastors and teachers are
two in one.
Pastoring and teaching may be
regarded as one ministry, because those who teach must also shepherd, and those
who shepherd must also teach. The two kinds of work are interrelated. Further,
the word "pastor" as applied to any person is found nowhere else in
the New Testament, but the word "teacher" is used on four other
occasions. Nowhere in God's word do we find anyone referred to by name as a
pastor. This confirms the fact that pastors and teachers are one class of men.
Teachers are men who have received
the gift of teaching. This is not a miraculous gift but a gift of grace, which
accounts for the fact of its being omitted from the list of miraculous gifts in
1 Cor. 12:8-10, and included in the list of the gifts of grace in Rom. 12. It
is a gift of grace which enables its possessors to understand the teachings of
God's Word and to discern His purposes, and thus equips them to instruct His
people in doctrinal matters. In the church in
Evangelists are also our Lord's
gift to His Church, but exactly what their personal gifts are we do not know.
The Word of God does not speak of any evangelistic gift, but it does refer to
Philip as being an evangelist (Acts 21:8), and Paul on one occasion encouraged
Timothy to do the work of an evangelist and fill up the measure of his ministry
(2 Tim. 4:5). Apart from the three occasions in Scripture, the noun "evangelist"
is not found in Scripture, though we frequently meet the verb which is derived
from the same root.
In the Word of God the place of
prophets is more clearly defined than that of teachers and evangelists.
Prophecy is mentioned among the gifts of grace (
Of the classes of gifted men
bestowed by the Lord upon His Church for its upbuilding, the apostles were
quite different from the other three. They were specially commissioned of God
to found churches through the preaching of the Gospel, to bring revelation from
God to His people, to give decisions in matters pertaining to doctrine and
government, and to edify the saints and distribute the gifts. Both spiritually
and geographically their sphere is vast. That their position is superior to
that of prophets and teachers is clear from the Word: "God has set some in
the Church, first apostles..." (1 Cor. 12:28.)
It is important to note that
apostleship is an office, not a gift. An office is that which one receives as
the result of a commission; a gift that which one receives on the basis of
grace. "I was appointed...an apostle" (1 Tim. 2:7). "I was
appointed...an apostle" (2 Tim. 1:11). We see here that an apostle is
commissioned. It is in this that he differs from the other three ministers,
though he may have received the prophetic gift and thus be a prophet as well as
an apostle.
An apostle may be a prophet or a
teacher. Should he exercise his gift of prophecy or teaching in the local
church, he does so in the capacity of a prophet or a teacher, but when he
exercises his gifts in different places he does so in the capacity of an apostle.
The implication of apostleship is being sent of God to exercise gifts of
ministry in different places. It is immaterial to his office what personal gift
an apostle has, but it is essential to his office that he be sent of God.
Nevertheless, apostles have
personal gifts for their ministry. "Now there were at
Then why does the Word of God
say, "He gave some apostles"? It is not a question here of
apostleship being a gift given to an apostle, but a gift given to the Church;
it is not a spiritual gift given to a man, but a gifted man given to the
Church. Ephesians 4:11 does not say that the Lord gave an apostolic gift to any
person, but that he gave men as apostles to His Church. The gifts referred to
in this passage are not the gifts given to men personally, but the gifts given
by the Lord to His Church, and the gifts mentioned here are gifted workers whom
the Lord of the Church bestows upon His Church for its edification. The Head
gives to the Church which is His Body certain men to serve the Body and build
it up. We must distinguish between those gift given by the Spirit to
individuals and those given by the Lord to His Church. The former are given
to believers personally, the latter are given to believers corporately. The
former are things and the latter are persons. "For to one is given through
the Spirit the word of wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge, according
to the same Spirit: to another faith, in the same Spirit; to another gifts of
healings in the one Spirit; and to another workings of miracles; and to another
prophecy; and to another discernings of spirits; to another diverse kinds of
tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues" (1 Cor. 12:10).
This passage provides us with a list of all the gifts which the Holy Spirit
gave to men, but it includes no apostolic gift. "And God hath set some in
the church, firstly apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then
miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diverse kinds of
tongues" (1 Cor. 12:28). The first passage enumerates the gifts given to
individuals, the second enumerates the gifts given to the Church. In the former
there is no mention of any apostolic gift; in the latter we find that "apostles"
head the list of God's gifts to the Church. It is not that God has given His
Church the gift of apostleship, but that He has given it men who are apostles;
and He has not given the gifts of prophecy and teaching to His Church, but He
has given it some men as prophets and some as teachers.
The difference between the
apostles and the prophets and teachers is that the latter two represent both
gifts given by the Spirit to individuals and at the same time gifts given by
the Lord to His Church, but they do not represent any special personal gift of
the Spirit.
"And God has set some in the
Church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers" (1 Cor.
12:28). What church is this? It comprises all the children of God, therefore it
is the Church universal. In this Church God has set "first apostles,
secondly prophets, thirdly teachers." In 1 Cor. 14:23 we read of "the
whole church...assembled together." What church is this? Obviously the
local church, for the Church universal cannot gather together in one locality. It
is in this local church that the brethren exercised their spiritual gifts. One
would have "a psalm," another "a teaching," another "a
revelation," another "a tongue," and another "an
interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:26), but more important than all these was the
gift of prophecy (1 Cor. 14:1). In Chapter 12 apostles took precedence over the
other ministers, but in Chapter 14 prophets take the precedence. In the Church
universal apostles are first, but in the local church prophets are first. How
does it come about that prophets take first place in the local church, since in
the universal Church they only occupy the second place? Because in the Church
universal the question is not of personal gifts of the Spirit, but of God's
gift of ministers to the Church, and of these, apostles rank first; but
in the local church the question is one of personal gifts of the Spirit
and of these, prophecy is chief, because it is most important. Let us
remember that apostleship is not a personal gift.
The Sphere of their Work
The sphere of an apostle's work
is quite different from that of the other three special ministers. That
prophets and teachers exercise their gifts in the local church is seen from the
statement, "There were at
As to evangelists, we do not know
their special sphere, as very little is said of them in God's Word, but the
story of Philip, the evangelist, throws some light on this class of ministers.
Philip left his own locality and preached in
The Evidence of Apostleship
Is there any evidence that one is
really commissioned of God to be an apostle? In 1 Cor. 9:1-2, Paul states that
apostleship has its credentials. "You are the seal of my apostleship in
the Lord," he writes, as if to say, "If God had not sent me to
Of the four questions asked by
Paul, three relate to his person and one to his work. These three are on the
same plane and are quite independent of one another. Paul was not arguing that
because he was free and because he was an apostle, therefore he had seen the
Lord; nor was he reasoning that because he was an apostle and because he had
seen the Lord, therefore he was free. No more was he seeking to demonstrate
that because he was free and had seen the Lord, therefore he was an apostle.
The facts are he was free, he was an apostle, and he had seen the Lord. These
facts had no essential connection one with the other, and it is absurd to
connect them. It would be as reasonable to argue that Paul's apostleship was
based upon his being free as that it was based upon his seeing the Lord. If he
was not seeking to prove his apostleship from the fact of his freedom, no more
was he seeking to prove it from his having seen the Lord. Apostleship is not
based on having seen the Lord in His resurrection manifestations.
Then what is the meaning of 1
Cor. 15:5-9? "He was seen by Cephas, then by the Twelve: After that, He
was seen by over five hundred brethren at once; ...after that He was seen by
James; then by all the apostles. And last of all He was seen by me also."
The object of this passage is not to produce evidence of apostleship but
evidence of the resurrection of the Lord. Paul is recording the different
persons to whom the Lord appeared; he is not teaching what effect was produced
upon these persons by His appearing. Cephas and James saw the Lord, but they
were Cephas and James after they saw the Lord, just as they were Cephas and
James before; they did not become Cephas and James by seeing Him. The same
applies to the Twelve Apostles and the five hundred brethren. Seeing the Lord
did not constitute them apostles. They were twelve apostles before they saw the
Lord, and they were twelve apostles after they saw the Lord. The same argument
applies in Paul's case. The facts were, he had seen the Lord, and he was the
least of the apostles; but it was not seeing the Lord that constituted him the
least of the apostles. The five hundred brethren were not apostles before they
saw the Lord, nor were they after. Seeing the Lord in His resurrection
manifestations did not constitute them apostles. They were simply
"brethren" before, and they were simply "brethren" after.
The Word of God nowhere teaches that seeing the Lord is the qualification for
apostleship.
But apostleship has its credentials. In 2 Cor.
12:11-12, Paul writes, "In nothing am I behind the most eminent
apostles...truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all
patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds." There was abundant
evidence of the genuineness of Paul's apostolic commission and the signs of an
apostle will never be lacking where there is truly an apostolic call. From the
above passage we infer that the evidence of apostleship lies in a twofold power
- spiritual and miraculous. Endurance is the greatest proof of spiritual power,
and it is one of the signs of an apostle. It is the ability to endure
steadfastly under continuous pressure that tests the reality of an apostolic
call. A true apostle needs to be "strengthened with all power, according
to the might of His glory, unto all patience and longsuffering with joy"
(Col. 1:11). Yes, it takes nothing short of "all power according to the
might of His glory" to produce "all patience and longsuffering with
joy." But the reality of Paul's apostleship was not only attested by his
patient endurance under intense and prolonged pressure, it was evidenced also
by the miraculous power he possessed. Miraculous power to change situations in
the physical world is a necessary manifestation of our knowledge of God in the
spiritual realm, and this applies not to heathen lands only but to every land.
To profess to be sent ones of the omnipotent God, and yet stand helpless before
situations that challenge His power, is a sad contradiction. Not all who can
work wonders are apostles, for the gifts of healing and of miracle-working are
given to members of the body (1 Cor. 12:28) who have no special commission, but
miraculous as well as spiritual power is part of the equipment of all who have
a true apostolic commission. 2. The Separation and Movements of the Apostles
The church in
Since the completion of the New
Testament the Holy Spirit has called many of God's children to serve Him
throughout the world, but strictly speaking none of these can be regarded as
our examples. We must always look at the first act of the Holy Spirit in any
given direction to discover His pattern for us in that particular direction.
The first recorded sending forth of workers from the first church established
on absolutely clear Church ground is our best example in the sending forth of
apostles or missionaries.
The Holy Spirit's Call
In the first two verses of Acts
13 we read: "Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets
and teachers as Barnabas and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of
Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and
Saul. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Spirit said,
'Separate unto Me Barnabas and Saul for the work which I have called them
to." (Acts 13:1-2) Kindly note a few facts here. There was a local church
in Antioch, there were certain prophets and teachers who were ministers in that
church, and it was from among those that the Holy Spirit separated two for
another sphere of service. Barnabas and Saul were two ministers of the Lord
already engaged in the ministry when the call of the Spirit came. The Holy
Spirit only sends to other parts such as are already equipped for the work and
are bearing responsibility where they are, not those who are burying their
talent and neglecting local needs while they dream of some future day when the
call will come to special service. Let us note first that the Holy Spirit
chooses apostles from among the prophets and teachers.
"And as they ministered to
the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, 'Separate unto Me Barnabas and Saul
for the work which I have called them to." These prophets and teachers
ministered so whole-heartedly to the Lord that when occasion demanded they even
ignored the legitimate claims of their physical being and fasted. What filled
the thoughts of those prophets and teachers at
It was to the divine call they
responded, not to the call of human need. They had heard no reports of
man-eaters or head-hunting savages. Their compassions had not been stirred by
doleful tales of child-marriage, or foot-binding, or opium smoking. They had
heard no voice but the voice of the Spirit; they had seen no claims but the
claims of Christ. No appeal had been made to their natural heroism or love of
adventure. They knew only one appeal - the appeal of their Lord. It was the
Lordship of Christ that claimed their service, and it was on His authority
alone that they went forth. Their call was a spiritual call. No natural factor
entered into it. It was the Holy Spirit who said, "Separate unto Me
Barnabas and Saul for the work which I have called them to." All spiritual
work must begin with the Spirit's call. All divine work must be divinely
initiated. The plan conceived for the work may be splendid, the reason
adequate, the need urgent, and the man chosen to carry it out may be eminently
suitable; but if the Holy Spirit has not said, "Separate unto Me that man
for the work to which I have called him," he can never be an apostle. He
may be a prophet or a teacher, but he is no apostle. God desires the service of
His children, but He makes conscripts, He wants no volunteers. The work is His,
and He is its only legitimate Originator. Human intention, however good, can
never take the place of divine initiation. Earnest desires for the salvation of
sinners or the edification of saints will never qualify a man for God's work.
One qualification, and only one, is necessary - God must send him.
It was the Holy Spirit who said,
"Separate unto Me Barnabas and Saul for the work which I have called
them to." Only the divine call can qualify for the apostolic office.
The tragedy in Christian work today is that so many of the workers have simply gone
out, they have not been sent. Personal desire, friendly persuasions, the advice
of one's elders and the urge of opportunity - all these are factors on the
natural plane, and they can never take the place of a spiritual call. That is
something which must be registered in the human spirit by the Spirit of God.
When Barnabas and Saul were sent
forth, the Spirit first called them, then the brethren confirmed the call. The
brethren may say you have a call, and circumstances may seem to indicate it,
but the question is, have you yourself heard the call? If you are
to go forth then you are the one who must first hear the voice of the
Spirit. We dare not disregard the opinion of the brethren, but their opinion is
no substitute for a personal call from God.
If God desires the service of any
child of His, He Himself will call him to it, and He Himself will send him
forth. The first requirement in divine work is a divine call. Everything hinges
on this. A divine call gives God His rightful place, for it recognizes Him as
the Originator of the work. Where there is no call from God, the work
undertaken is not of divine origin, and it has no spiritual value. Divine work
must be divinely initiated. A worker may be called directly by the Spirit, or
indirectly through the reading of the Word, through preaching, or through circumstances;
but whatever means God may use to make His will known to man, His voice
must be the one heard through every other voice; He must be the one who
speaks, no matter through what instrument the call may come. We must never be
independent of the other members of the Body, but we must never forget that we
receive all our directions from the Head.
Separation of Workers
Yes, it was the Holy Spirit who
called Barnabas and Saul, but He said to the other prophets and teachers as
well as to them, "Separate unto Me Barnabas and Saul for the work which I
have called them to." The Holy Spirit spoke directly to the apostles, but
He also spoke indirectly through the prophets and teachers. What was said
privately to the two was confirmed publicly through the other three. All
apostles must have a personal revelation of God's will, but to make that alone
the basis of their going forth is not sufficient. On the one hand the opinion
of others, however spiritual and however experienced, can never be a substitute
for a direct call from God. On the other hand, a personal call, however
definite, requires the confirmation of the representative members of the Body
of Christ in the locality from which the workers go out.
Let us observe that the Holy
Spirit did not say to the church in
And here was the result -
"When they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent
them away" (Acts 13:3). The setting apart of the apostles by the prophets
and teachers followed the call which came to them from the Spirit. The call was
personal, the separation was corporate; and the one was not complete without
the other. A direct call from God, and a confirmation of that call in the
setting apart of the called ones by the prophets and teachers, is God's
provision against freelances in His service.
The calling of an apostle is the
Holy Spirit speaking directly to the one called. The separating of an apostle
is the Holy Spirit speaking indirectly through the fellow-workers of the called
one. It is the Holy Spirit who takes the initiative both in the calling and
separation of workers. Therefore if the representative brethren of any assembly
set men apart for the service of the Lord, they must ask themselves, Are we
doing this on our own initiative, or as representing the Spirit of God? They
must be able to say of every worker they send forth, He was sent out by the
Holy Spirit, not by man. No separation of workers should be done hastily or
lightly. It was for this reason that fasting and prayer preceded the sending
forth of Barnabas and Saul.
As regards all sent ones, they
must pay attention to these two aspects in their separation for the service of
God. On the one hand there must be a direct call from God and a personal
recognition of that call. On the other hand there must be a confirmation of
that call by the representative members of the Body of Christ. And as regards
all who are responsible for the sending forth of others, they must on the one
hand be in a position to receive the revelation of the Spirit and to discern
the mind of the Lord; on the other hand they must be able to enter
sympathetically into the experience of those whom they, as the representative
members of the Body of Christ, send forth in the Name of the Lord. The
principle that governed the sending forth of the first apostles still governs
the sending forth of all apostles who are truly appointed by the Spirit to the
work of God.
The Expression of the Body
On what ground did these prophets
and teachers set certain men apart as apostles, and whom did these prophets and
teachers represent? Why did they, and not the entire church, separate those
workers? What is the significance of such separation, and what is the
qualification required on the part of those who assume responsibility in the
matter?
The first thing we must realize
is that God has incorporated all of His children into one Body.
When we speak of the one Body we
emphasize the oneness of the life of all God's children: when we speak of its
many members we emphasize the diversity of functions in that unity. The
characteristic of the former is life: the characteristic of the latter is work.
In a physical body the members differ one from another, yet they function as
one because they share one life and have the upbuilding of the whole body as
their one aim.
Because the Body of Christ has
these two different aspects - life and ministry - it consequently has two different
outward manifestations. The church in a locality is used to express the life of
the Body, and the gifts in the Church are used to express the ministry of its
members. In other words, each local church should stand on the ground of the
Body, regarding itself as an expression of the oneness of the life of the Body,
and it should on no account admit of division, since it exists as the
manifestation of an indivisible life. The various ministers of the Church
should likewise stand on the ground of the Body, regarding themselves as an
expression of the oneness of its varied ministries. Perfect fellowship and
cooperation should characterize all their activity, for though their functions
are diverse, their ministry is really one.
A cursory reading of Eph. 4:11-12
might lead us to conclude that apostles, prophets evangelists, pastors and
teachers functioned outside the Body, because they were given by the Lord to
His Church for her upbuilding (verse 12); but the sixteenth verse makes it
clear that they do not stand outside the Body to build it up: they seek to
build it up from within. They themselves are part of the Body, and it is only
as they take their rightful place in it, as ministering members, that the whole
Body is edified.
That churches are the local expression
of the Body of Christ is an established fact, so we need not go into that here;
but some explanation is called for regarding the gifted ministers whom God has
set in the Church as the expression of the ministry of the Body. In 1 Cor. 12
Paul is clearly dealing with the question of Christian service. He likens the
workers to different members of a body, and shows that each member has its
specific use, and all serve the body as belonging to it, not as distinct from
it. In verse 27 he writes, "Now you are the Body of Christ, and
individually members thereof"; and in the following verse he says,
"And God has set in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly
teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diverse
kinds of tongues. A study of these two verses makes it clear that the gifted ministers
of verse 28 are the members of verse 27, and that the Church of
verse 28 is the Body of verse 27; therefore, what ministers are to the Church,
members are to the Body. The gifted ministers are the functioning members of
the Body, and all their operations are as members. They are to the Church what
hands, feet, mouth and head are to the physical body. They are in the
Body, serving it by the use of those faculties which they, as members, possess.
In reading 1 Cor. 12:28 one
cannot but be arrested by the striking difference between the description of
the first three gifts and the remaining five. Paul, under the inspiration of
the Spirit, takes special care in enumerating them "first apostles;
secondly prophets; thirdly teachers." The first three are specifically
numbered, but not the rest; and they are quite distinct in their nature as well
as their numbering. They are men, the rest are things. The three first-named
gifts of the Lord to His Church - apostles, prophets and teachers - stand apart
from all the others. They are ministers of God's Word, and their function, to
edify the Body of Christ, is the most important function in the Church. They
are the representatives of the ministry of the Body.
The only Scriptural record of the
sending forth of apostles is found in Acts 13, and there we see that it
is the prophets and teachers who set them apart for their
ministry. Scripture provides no precedent for the separation and sending forth of
men by one or more individuals, or by any mission or organization; even the
sending out of workers by a local church is a thing unknown in the Word of God.
The only example provided us there is the separating and sending forth of
apostles by the prophets and teachers.
What is the significance of this?
In
In sending Barnabas and Saul from
That Christ is the Head of the
Church is a recognized fact, but that fact needs emphasis in relation to the ministry
as well as the life of the Church. Christian ministry is the ministry of the
whole Church, not merely of one section of it. We must see to it that our work
is on no lesser basis than the Body of Christ. Otherwise we lose the Headship
of Christ, for Christ is not the Head of any system, or mission, or
organization: He is the Head of the Church.
In Scripture we find no trace of
man-made organizations sending out men to preach the Gospel. We only find
representatives of the ministry of the Church, under the guidance of the Spirit
and on the ground of the Body, sending out those whom the Spirit has already
separated for the work. If those responsible for the sending out of workers
sent them out not as their own representatives or the representatives of any
organizations but only as representatives of the Body of Christ, and if those
sent out stood on the ground of no particular "church" or mission but
on the ground of the Church alone, then no matter from what places the workers
came or to what places they went, cooperation and unity would always be
possible and much confusion would be avoided.
Their Movements
After the apostles were called by
the Spirit and were separated for the work by the representative members of the
Body, what did they do? We need to recall that those who separated them had no
authority to control the apostles. Those prophets and teachers at the base
assumed no official responsibility in regard to their movements, their methods
of work, or the supply of their financial needs. In Scripture we nowhere find
that apostles are under the control of any individual or any organized company.
They had no regulations to adhere to and no superiors to obey. The Holy Spirit
called them and they followed His leading and guidance. He alone was their
director.
In Chapters 13 and 14 of the Book
of Acts we find the first Scriptural record of missionary movements. Though
today the places we visit and the conditions we meet may be vastly different
from those of the Scripture record, yet in principle the experience of the
first apostles may well serve as our example. Let us glance for a moment at
these two chapters.
"So they, being sent forth
by the Holy Spirit, went down to
"Now Paul and his company
set sail from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departed from
them and returned to
"Now when the synagogue
broke up, many of the Jews and of the devout proselytes followed Paul and
Barnabas: who speaking to them, urged them to continue in the grace of
God" (Acts 13:43). Here is the outcome of a short period of witness in
Antioch of Pisidia - many of the Jews and religious proselytes believed. A week
later almost the whole city gathered together to hear the Word (verse 44); but
this enthusiastic response on the part of the people provoked the Jews to
jealousy and they opposed the,apostles (verse 45). At this point the apostles
turned to the Gentiles (verse 46), and "as many as were ordained to
eternal life believed" (verse 48). On the previous Sabbath a number of
Jews had received the Word of life. This Sabbath a number of Gentiles believed
on the Lord. So not long after the arrival of the apostles in Antioch of
Pisidia we find a church there.
But the apostles did not argue,
"Now we have a group of believers here, we must stay awhile and shepherd
them." They founded a local church at Antioch of Pisidia, but they did not
stay to build it up. On they went again, publishing the Word of the Lord
"throughout all the region" (verse 49). Their objective was not one
city, but "all the region." The modern custom of settling down in one
place to shepherd a particular flock has no precedent in Scripture.
Persecution followed (verse 50).
The opponents of the Gospel message expelled the apostles from their coasts,
and they answered by shaking the dust from their feet (verse 51). Many a
present-day missionary has no dust to shake from his feet! But those who gather
no dust lack the characteristic of an apostle. The early apostles never settled
down in comfortable homes, nor did they stop for long to pastor the churches
they founded. They were constantly itinerating. To be an apostle means to be a
sent one, that is, to be always going out. A stationary apostle is a
contradiction in terms. A true apostle is one who in times of persecution will
always have dust to shake off his feet.
What effect had this early
departure of the apostles upon the infant church? Here was a group of new
believers, mere babes in Christ, and their fathers in the faith forsook them in
their infancy. Did they argue, Why should the apostles take fright at
persecution and leave us to face the opposition alone? Did they plead with the
apostles to remain awhile and care for their spiritual welfare? Did they
reason, If you leave us now we shall be as sheep without a shepherd? If both of
you cannot stay, surely one at least can remain behind and look after us The
persecution is so intense, we shall never get through without your help. How
amazing the Scripture record is: "And the disciples were filled with joy
and the Holy Spirit" (verse 52).
There was no mourning among the
disciples when the apostles went, because the apostles' departure meant an
opportunity for others to hear the Gospel. What was loss to them was gain to
Iconium. Those believers were not like the believers of today, hoping for a
settled pastor to instruct them, solve their problems and shelter them from
trouble. Those apostles were not like the apostles of today; they were
pioneers, not settlers. They did not wait till believers were mature before
they left them. They dared to leave them in mere infancy, for they believed in
the power of the life of God within them.
But those disciples were not only
filled with joy, they were filled with the Holy Spirit. The apostles might go,
but the Spirit remained. If they had had a pastor to throw light on all their
problems they would have felt little need of the Spirit's instruction, and they
would have felt little need of His power if they had one in their midst who was
bearing all responsibility for the spiritual side of the work while they
attended to the secular. In Scripture there is not the slightest hint that
apostles should settle down to pastor those they have led to the Lord. There
are pastors in Scripture, but they are simply brethren raised up of God from among
the local saints to care for their fellow believers. One of the reasons why so
many present-day converts are not filled with the Spirit is because the
apostles settle down to shepherd them and take upon themselves the
responsibility that belongs to the Holy Spirit.
Praise God that the apostles
"moved on to Iconium," for "a great multitude of both Jews and
Greeks believed" (Acts 14:1). Before long "the multitude of the city
was divided; and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles"
(verse 4). The saved were obviously "a great multitude," since their
coming out from the unsaved so vitally affected the place as to cause a
division in the city. Only a short time after the apostles left
Does Paul stay to shepherd them
awhile, or at least to tend them till the fierceness of the opposition has
subsided? No! "On the morrow he went forth with Barnabas to Derbe"
(verse 20). And there again the Gospel is proclaimed and many disciples are
made (verse 21). So another church is formed! And with the founding of a church
in Derbe the first missionary tour of the apostles closes.
Looking back over thee two
chapters, we note that a fundamental principle governs the movements of the
apostles. They travel from place to place, according to the leading of the
Spirit, preaching the Gospel and founding churches. Nowhere do we find them
settling down to shepherd and instruct the converts, or to bear any local
responsibility in the churches they have founded. In days of peace the apostles
were on the move, and in days of persecution likewise. "Go!" was the
word of the Lord, and "Go!" was the watchword of the apostles. The
outstanding trait of a sent one is that he is always on the move.
On Their Return
But the question arises, How were
these new converts shepherded and instructed? How were the newly-founded
churches established? In studying the Word of God we find that the missionary
tour of the apostles consisted of an outward and a return journey. On their
outward journey their first concern was to found churches. On their return
journey their chief business was to build them up.
Having "made many disciples,
they returned to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch, confirming the souls
of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that through
many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:21,22).
Here we see Paul and Barnabas returning to do some construction work in the
churches already founded; but as before on their outward journey, so now on
their return, they never settle down in any one place.
It is clear then that the
apostles did not just move from place to place founding churches, they also did
definite construction work. Merely to found churches without establishing them
would be like leaving newborn babes to their own resources. The point to note
here is, that while the instruction of the new converts and the building up of
the churches was a very vital part of the apostles' work, they did it not by
settling down in one place but rather by visiting the places where they
had been before.
Before they left a place where a
church had been founded and some construction work done, they appointed elders
to bear responsibility there (Acts 14:23). This is one of the most important
parts of an apostle's work. (This subject will be dealt with more fully in a
subsequent chapter.)
Thus the early apostles worked,
and the blessing of the Lord rested on their labors. We shall do well if we
follow in their steps, but we must realize clearly that even though we adopt
apostolic methods, unless we have apostolic consecration, apostolic faith and
apostolic power, we shall still fail to see apostolic results. We dare not
underestimate the value of apostolic methods they are absolutely essential if
we are to have apostolic fruits - but we must not overlook the need of
apostolic spirituality, and we must not fear apostolic persecution.
Back to Antioch
"And from there they sailed
to
In the matter of reporting, we
should on the one hand avoid all unnatural reticence and soulish seclusiveness;
on the other hand we must carefully guard against the intrusion of any personal
interest. In all reports of the work our aim should be to glorify God and bring
spiritual enrichment to those who share them. To utilize reports as a means of
propaganda, with material returns in view, is base in the extreme, and unworthy
of any Christian. When the motive is to glorify God and benefit His children,
but at the same time to make known the needs of the work with a view to
receiving material help, it is still far from acceptable to the Lord, and is
unworthy of His servants, Our aim should be this alone - that God shall be
glorified and His children blessed. If there were this perfect purity of motive
in our reports, how differently many of them would be worded!
Each time we write or speak of our work let us
ask ourselves these questions: 1) Am I reporting with a view to gain publicity
for myself and my work? 2) Am I reporting with the double object of glorifying
the Lord and advertising the work? 3) Am I reporting with this aim alone, that
God shall be glorified and His children blessed? May the Lord give us grace to
report with unmixed motives and perfect purity of heart! 3. The Elders
Appointed by the Apostles
"Elders" is a
designation of Old Testament origin. We find reference made in the Old
Testament to the elders of
When were elders first instituted
in the Church? Acts 11:30 refers to them in connection with the church in
Jerusalem, and this is the first mention of elders in connection with any
church; but though their existence is mentioned, nothing is said of their
origin. Not till Acts 14:23, when we read of Paul and Barnabas returning from
their first missionary journey, do we discover who they were, how they were
appointed, and by whom. "When they had appointed for them elders in every
church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord..."
The Appointment
We have seen that the apostles
themselves could not remain with the new believers to shepherd them and to bear
the responsibility of the work locally. How then were the new converts cared
for, and how was the work carried on? The apostles did not request that men be
sent from
Nowhere did the apostles settle
down and assume responsibility for the local church, but in every church they
founded they chose from among the local believers faithful ones upon whom such
responsibility could be placed. When they had chosen elders in each church,
they committed them to the Lord with prayer and fasting. If this committal of
elders to the Lord is to be of spiritual value, and no mere official ceremony,
a vital knowledge of the Lord will be required on the part of the apostles. We
need to know Christ as Head of His Church in no mere intellectual way if we are
to let all its management pass out of our hands at the very outset. Only
an utter distrust of themselves, and a living trust in God, could enable the
early apostles to commit the affairs of every local church into the hands of
local men who had but recently come to know the Lord. All who are engaged in
apostolic work and are seeking to follow the example of the first apostles in
leaving the churches to the management of local elders, must be spiritually
equipped for the task; for if things pass out of human hands and are not
committed in faith to Divine hands, the result will be disaster. Oh, how we
need a living faith and a living knowledge of the living God!
The Word of God makes it clear
that the oversight of a church is not the work of apostles but of elders.
Although Paul stayed in
In God's plan provision has been
made for the building up of local churches, and in that plan pastors have a
place, but it was never His thought that apostles should assume the role of
pastors. He purposed that apostles should be responsible for the work in different
places. while elders were to bear responsibility in one place. The
characteristic of an apostle is going: the characteristic of an elder is
staying. It is not necessary that elders resign their ordinary professions
and devote themselves exclusively to their duties in connection with the
church. They are simply local men, following their usual pursuits and at
the same time bearing special responsibilities in the church. Should local
affairs increase, they may devote themselves entirely to spiritual work, but
the characteristic of an elder is not that he is a "full-time Christian
worker." It is merely that as a local brother he bears responsibility in
the local church. According to the usual conception of things, one would think
it necessary for a considerable time to elapse between the founding of a church
and the appointment of elders, but that is not according to God's pattern. The
first missionary tour of the apostles covered less than two years, and during
that period the apostles preached the Gospel, led sinners to the Lord, formed
churches, and appointed elders wherever a church had been formed. The elders
were chosen on the apostles' return journey. Not on their first visit to any
place, but the interval between their two visits was never long - at most a
matter of months. They appointed elders "in every church."
Some may ask, If all the members of a church are in a low spiritual condition,
how is it possible to appoint elders among them? It may solve the problem of
many if they only consider the implication of the term "elder." The
existence of an "elder" implies the existence of a junior. The word
"elder" is relative, not absolute. Among a group of men in their
seventy-ninth year it takes a man in his eightieth year to be their
"elder," but it only takes a child of eight to be "elder"
to a company of children of seven. Even among the spiritually immature there
are bound to be those who, in comparison with them, are more mature and have
spiritual possibilities, which is all the qualification they require to be
their "elders."
A church may come far short of
the ideal, but we cannot on that account deprive it of the status of a church.
Our responsibility is to minister to it and so seek to bring it nearer the
ideal. Even the comparatively advanced ones in a locality may not reach the
ideal of elders, hut we cannot for that reason deprive them of the status of
elders. We must remember that the office of an elder according to Scripture is
limited to a locality. Being an elder in Nanking does not qualify a man to be
an elder in
The appointing of comparatively
spiritual brothers to be elders is a principle set forth in the Word of God,
though it runs counter to the modern conception of things. But even while we
recognize this principle, we must not seek to apply it in any legal way. That
would spell death. We must force nothing, but must be continually open to the
leading of the Spirit. He will indicate the right time for the appointment of
elders in any church. Should there be no leading of the Holy Spirit, and
circumstances not permit of an immediate appointment of elders on the second
visit of the apostles, then a Titus could be left behind to see to their
appointment later. This is the first subject dealt with in the book of Titus,
and it is a most important one. Paul gives Titus injunctions to
"establish" elders in every city in
In the appointment of elders the
apostles did not follow their personal preferences; they only appointed those
whom God had already chosen. That is why Paul could say to the elders in Ephesus,
"The Holy Spirit has made you bishops" (Acts 20:28). The apostles did
not take the initiative in the matter. They merely established as elders those
whom the Holy Spirit had already made overseers in the church. In a
man-made organization the appointment of an individual to office entitles him
to occupy that office, but not so in the Church of God. Everything there is on
a spiritual basis and it is only divine appointment that qualifies a man for
office. If the Holy Spirit does not make men bishops, then no apostolic
appointment will ever avail to do so. In the Church of God everything is under
the sovereignty of the Spirit; man is ruled out. Elders are not men who think
themselves capable to control church affairs, or men whom the apostles consider
suitable, but men whom the Holy Spirit has set to be overseers in the Church.
Apostles and Elders
Elders were local men appointed
to oversee affairs in the local church. Their sphere of office was limited by
the locality. An elder in Ephesus was not an elder in Smyrna, and an elder in
Smyrna was not an elder in Ephesus. In Scripture there are no local apostles,
nor are there any extra-local elders; all elders are local, and all apostles
are extra-local. The Word of God nowhere speaks of apostles managing the affairs
of a local church, and it nowhere speaks of elders managing the affairs of
several local churches. The apostles were the ministers of all the churches,
but they had control of none. The elders were confined to one church and they
controlled affairs in that one. The duty of apostles was to found churches.
Once a church was established, all responsibility was handed over to the local
elders, and from that day the apostles exercised no control whatever in its
affairs. All management was in the hands of the elders, and if they thought
right they could even refuse an apostle entry into their church.
How did Paul deal with the
adulterous believer in Corinth? He did not just notify the church that he had
excommunicated the man. The utmost he could do was to instruct its members
regarding the seriousness of the situation and seek to admonish them to remove
the wicked person from their midst. (1 Cor. 5:13). If the church was right
spiritually they would pay attention to Paul, but if they disregarded his exhortations,
while they would be wrong spiritually, they would be legally right.
An apostle can deal with the
disorders of a church whenever his advice and counsel are sought, as was the
case with Paul and the church in Corinth. It was because of their enquiries
that he could say to them, "And the rest will I set in order when I
come." (1 Cor. 11:34). But the point to note here is that "the
rest" of the matters which Paul intended to "set in order" on
his arrival in Corinth were to be attended to in the same way as those he had
dealt with in his Epistle, and they were dealt with doctrinally. In like manner
as he had instructed them concerning certain affairs there, so he would
instruct them concerning the remaining matters on his arrival; but the
Corinthians themselves, not Paul, were the ones who would have to deal
with the situation.
Since Peter and John were
apostles, how did it come about that they were elders of the church in
Jerusalem? (1 Pet. 5:1; 2 Jn. 1; 3 Jn. 1). They were elders as well as apostles
because they were not only responsible for the work in different places, but
also for the church in their own place. When they went out they
ministered in the capacity of apostles, bearing the responsibility for the work
in other parts. When they returned home they performed the duties of elders,
hearing the responsibility of the local church. It was not on the ground of
their being apostles that they were elders in Jerusalem; they were elders there
solely on the ground of their being local men of greater spiritual maturity
than their brethren.
Paul was sent out from Antioch
and he founded a church in Ephesus. We know he did not hold the office of elder
in any church, but it would have been possible for him to be an elder in
Antioch, not in Ephesus. He spent three years in Ephesus, but he worked there
in the capacity of an apostle, not an elder: that is, he assumed no
responsibility and exercised no authority in local affairs, but simply devoted
himself to his apostolic ministry. Let us note carefully that there are no
elders in the universal Church and no apostles in the local church.
Their Responsibilities
It is the responsibility of every
saved man to serve the Lord according to his capacity and in his own sphere.
God did not appoint elders to do the work on behalf of their brethren. After
the appointment of elders, as before, it is still the brethren's duty and
privilege to serve the Lord. Elders are also called "bishops" (Acts
20:28; Tit. 1:5,7). The term "elder" relates to their person; the
term "bishop" to their work. "Bishop" means
"overseer," and an overseer is not one who works instead of others,
but one who supervises others as they work. God intended that every Christian
should be a "Christian worker," and He appointed some to take the
oversight of the work so that it might be carried on efficiently. It was never
His thought that the majority of believers should devote themselves exclusively
to secular affairs and leave the church matters to a group of spiritual
specialists. This point cannot be over-emphasized. Elders are not a group of
men who contract to do the church work on behalf of its members; they are only
the head-men who superintend affairs. It is their business to encourage the
backward and restrain the forward ones, never doing the work instead of them,
but simply directing them in the doing of it.
The responsibility of an elder
relates to matters temporal and spiritual. They are appointed to
"rule," and also to "instruct" and "shepherd."
"Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor,
especially those who labor in the word and in teaching" (1 Tim. 5:17).
"Tend the flock of God which is among you, exercising the oversight, not
by constraint, but willingly, according unto God; nor yet for dishonest gain,
but of a ready mind; neither as lording it over the charge allotted to you, but
making yourselves examples to the flock " (1 Pet. 5:2,3).
The Word of God uses the term
"rule" in connection with the responsibilities of an elder. The ordering
of church government, the management of business affairs and the care of
material things, are all under their control. But we must remember that a
Scriptural church does not consist of an active and a passive group of
brethren, the former controlling the latter and the latter simply submitting to
their control, or the former bearing all the burden while the latter settle
down in ease to enjoy the benefit of their labors. "That the members
should...care one for another" is God's purpose for His Church (1 Cor.
12:24). Every church after God's own heart bears the stamp of "one
another" in all its life and activity. Mutuality is its outstanding
characteristic. If the elders lose sight of that, then their ruling the church
will soon be changed to lording it over the church. They were not
appointed to be "lords" of their brethren, but to be their
"examples." What is an example? It is a pattern for others to follow.
For the elders to be a pattern to the brethren implied that the brethren worked
and the elders worked as well. It implied that the elders worked with special
diligence and care, so that the brethren should have a good example to follow.
Such is the Scriptural conception of the rule of the elders.
But their responsibility does not
merely relate to the material side of church affairs. If God has equipped them
with spiritual gifts, then they should also bear spiritual responsibility. Paul
wrote to Timothy, "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of
double honor, especially those who labor in the word and in teaching" (1
Tim. 5:17). It is the responsibility of all elders to control the affairs of
the church, but such as have special gifts (as of prophecy or teaching) are
free to exercise these for the spiritual edification of the church. Paul wrote
to Titus that an elder should "be able both to exhort in the sound
doctrine, and to convict those who contradict" (Tit. 1:9). The preaching
and teaching in the local church is not the business of apostles but of local
brethren who are in the ministry, especially if they are elders.
On the spiritual side of the work
the elders help to build up the church not only by teaching and preaching but
by pastoral work. To shepherd the flock is peculiarly the work of elders. Paul
said to the Ephesian elders: "Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the
flock, in the which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to feed the church
of God" (Acts 20:28). And Peter wrote in the same strain to the elders
among the saints of the Dispersion, "Tend the flock of God which is among
you" (1 Pet. 5:2). The present-day conception of pastors is far removed
from the thought of God. God's thought was that men chosen from among the
local brethren should pastor the flock, not that men coming from other
parts should preach the Gospel, found churches, and then settle down to care
for those churches.
The Plurality of Elders
This work of ruling, teaching and
shepherding the flock, which we have seen to be the special duty of the elders,
does not devolve upon one man only in any place. In Scripture we see that there
was always more than one elder or bishop in a local church. If the management
of the entire church rests upon one man, how easy it is for him to become
conceited, esteeming himself above measure and suppressing the other brethren
(3 Jn.). God has ordained that several elders together share the work of the
church, so that no one individual should be able to run things according to his
own pleasure, treating the church as his own peculiar property and leaving the
impress of his personality upon all its life and work. To place the
responsihility in the hands of several brethren rather than in the hands of one
individual, is God's way of safeguarding His Church against the evils that
result from the domination of a strong personality. God has purposed that
several brothers should unitedly bear responsibility in the church, so that
even in controlling its affairs they have to depend one upon the other and
submit one to the other. Thus in an experimental way they will have opportunity
to give practical expression to the truth of the Body of Christ. As they honor
one another and trust one another to the leading of the Spirit, none taking the
place of the Head but each regarding the others as fellow-members, the element
of "mutuality," which is the peculiar feature of the Church, will be
preserved.
|
HOME I INDEX I PRAYER REQUESTS SITES I LINKS I CONTACT US I TOP |
|
|