The identity of the church

Having now sought to answer the question, "When did the church begin?", we are ready to consider a third matter of introduction to the Apostolic Church which is indeed a crucial issue:

Chapter three

The identity of the church

It is not enough to simply know that the church began.  We need to know specifically, What is this church which began?"  In order to address this question, please refer with me back to our earlier attempt to define the church in the overall introduction to this study:

       The church is the New Covenant group of openly confessed and true disciples of Christ on earth (but which in fact may wrongly include others) (i.e., the universal church) which is largely made up of many groups of such disciples in specific geographical locations at specific times (called local churches).

There are two matters related to the identity of Christ's church in this definition which properly should receive further attention.  We will consider:

I.     The two biblical elements of the church; and:

II.    The composition of the church.

Let us consider in turn each of these issues having to do with the identity of the church.  First, consider:

I.     The two biblical elements of the church.  According to the definition which I have proposed, there are two elements of the church.  There is the universal church, which includes all openly confessed and true disciples of Christ on earth.  And there are the local churches, which largely make up the universal church, and are smaller sub-groups of Christ's disciples which meet in specific geographical locations at specific times.  (Refer at this point to the chart - "The Two Biblical Elements of the Church" (7B).)  Please consider with me some of the biblical data for each of these elements.  First of all, there is:

       A.    The universal church.  When our Lord declared in Mt. 16:18 that He would build His church, and that the gates of Hades would not overpower it, He clearly was not referring to just any particular local church.  Individual local churches have come and gone throughout the history of the church of Christ.  When Christ spoke of His church in this key verse, He had in mind the totality of His church which He intended to build and which would triumph over the Devil and his hosts.  Our Lord was here clearly speaking of the universal church.

Notice also Ephesians 1:22-23.  Here the church is described as being Christ's body which is His (Christ's or God the Father's) fullness.  Although we may wrestle with what exactly this phrase means, I believe that it cannot be anything less here than the totality of what may be called a church, i.e., the universal church.  For no local church would by itself be Christ's or the Father's fullness.

We could pursue the biblical data further, but I trust that I have gained your consciences that there is indeed a universal church which is all openly confessed and true disciples of Christ on earth.

However, the Bible also clearly teaches that there are:

       B.    Local churches.  Here read Acts 14:21-23 and I Cor. 1:1-2.  (Especially note the description of the church at Corinth and remember this for future reference.)  We could multiply the references in Scripture to local churches.  But the bottom line is that the universal church, which is Christ's body, is composed largely of many local churches of Christ's disciples who gather in specific geographical locations during specific periods in church history.  At the beginning of the church there was only one local church, the church at Jerusalem.  For a period of several years the local and universal elements of the church were apparently essentially identical, with Apostles directly presiding over both elements.  However, persecution and missionary endeavours changed all that, so that the church universal was scattered widely, and numerous local churches were established across the world.  After this initial scattering, the existence of the universal church no longer depended upon the existence of any one local church, and for good reason.  For in 70 A.D. or shortly before, the local church in Jerusalem ceased to exist, due to the Roman conquest and destruction of the city.  This is why I have defined local churches as groups of disciples of Christ in specific geographical locations at specific times.

Now it would seem proper that the local churches would together equal the universal church.  However, the biblical data constrains us to recognize:

       C.    Some necessary qualifications.  Notice with me two necessary matters of qualification:

               1.    Not all individuals who are members of the universal church are necessarily members of particular true local churches.  (Refer again to chart 7B.)  In Acts 8:27-39, we find the account of the conversion and baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch as he was returning to his native land from Jerusalem.  Was this eunuch, after his baptism, a member of the universal church of Christ?  Yes, of course.  But was he a member of a local church?  At least until he arrived in Ethiopia, he temporarily was not, and probably there was no already-established local church in Ethiopia at that time.  I.e., providentially there was a time when this man was not part of a local church even though he was part of the universal church, and even though he may have been God's instrument for the raising up of a local church in Ethiopia. 

So too today.  There are and will be true followers of Jesus Christ who because of providential hindrances or ignorance or remaining sin are not members of true local churches of Christ.  Such circumstances are abnormal, and often are disorderly, but they are real nonetheless.

But now consider a second qualification which must be made regarding the two elements of the church:

               2.    Not all groups which profess to be local churches of Jesus Christ are part of the universal church.  (Refer again to chart 7B.)  Please read Revelation 2:1-5 and 3:14-16.  Some local churches because of their lack of love to Christ have their lampstands removed, and some because of their lukewarmness are literally vomited out of Christ's mouth.  So not all groups who profess to be local churches of Christ today even as they meet together are really part of Christ's body.  The Spirit of Christ has departed from them.

How then should we apply the biblical data which we have considered regarding the two biblical elements of the church?  First:

1.    We should not neglect the reality of the universal church in our perspectives and practice, and should not become fixated upon the restricted world of our own particular local church.  There is much more to Christ's church than any one particular assembly of saints.  For the members of each local church are part of a much larger body.  Therefore, the efforts of local churches should reflect that reality.  A definite portion of our labors as local churches should, as God enables us, extend beyond our own limits as local churches to other parts of our own nation and beyond to foreign lands in preaching the Gospel, planting biblical churches and strengthening other already-established local churches.  For there is a universal church.  But also:

2.    We should not neglect the reality of the local church in our perspectives and practice.  We should not avoid membership and participation in the local church.  Where Christians find themselves in the abnormal situation of not being part of a true local church, they should prayerfully and earnestly seek to correct that deficiency. 

Also, the reality and importance of the local church means that we who are members and leaders of a particular local church should not neglect our own local assembly as we give attention to more universal dimensions of Christ's church.  Those human instruments of God who were most used by God in the church universal like Luther, Calvin, Augustine, and Athanasius almost always had a local church setting where their primary life labors were focused.  It was those local labors from which their wider usefulness sprang.  Therefore, the part of the vineyard where Christ has put us should always be our first priority.  Thirdly:

3.    We should not hastily write-off from Christ's universal church those who for whatever reason are not presently members of a particular local church of Christ.  Charity and our Bibles demand otherwise.  True Christians may for a number of reasons not be members of a true local church.  Of course, charity and our Bibles also demand that we, as the Lord gives us opportunity to do so, graciously urge such individuals to make every effort to become part of a local church for the good of their souls and Christ's church as soon as it is possible.  But notice a further lesson:

4.    Professing Christians who believe that they are true Christians, yet are members in apostate churches which falsely claim to be Christian churches like Roman Catholic churches or churches where the authority of God's Word is denied, need to pause to reflect.  Their present situation is really a contradiction.  They claim to be part of the universal church (the wider circle in chart 7B), yet they are members of apostate churches whom Christ has cast out of that universal church.  To such individuals I would simply ask, "What are you doing there?"  Family ties or tradition or sentiment or a misplaced sense of vocation which stays hoping to do some good are not good enough reasons to remain thus visibly disconnected from the universal church of Christ which is not totally invisible, but has its visible aspects as well.  Come out from among apostates and visibly become part of Christ's true church.

5.    Furthermore, although it is not possible to infallibly determine which professing churches of Christ have had their lampstand removed, and have been vomited out of Christ's mouth, we learn from God's Word that we as Christians in true local churches are under no obligation to receive with open arms clearly apostate churches just because they profess to be part of the universal church of Christ.  This is true even though they may loudly protest that we are treating them "unlovingly".  We are under no obligation to receive as Christian churches those whom Christ has rejected.  In fact, we should, on the level of inter-church fellowship, have nothing to do with such apostate churches.

6.    Finally, we should humbly guard ourselves as a local church least we leave our first love or become lukewarm, and as a result experience the departure of Christ's Spirit from the assembly of which we are part.

But now we must hasten on to consider a second matter regarding the identity of the church:

II.    The composition of the church.  (Refer to the chart - "The Composition of the Visible Church in History" (7C).)  Who are members of the universal church and of local churches?  When we take up this issue, especially with reference to a study of church history, there are really two key questions which must be addressed regarding the composition of the church:

       A.    What should it be?, and:

       B.    What is it actually?

Let us consider each issue in turn.  First there is:

       A.    What the composition of the church should be.  Read Acts 2:41; 4:4; and 5:14.  According to these passages, those who are rightly members of Christ's church are those who have "received" the Apostolic testimony, have "believed" the message about Jesus, and are "believers in the Lord".  (See chart 7C.)  If you remember, the members of the local church in Corinth were described as being "those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling" (I Cor. 1:2).  It does not matter whether or not you were raised in a Christian home, or others think you are a Christian, or you have gone through a ritual of baptism, or are even presently a member of a group which calls itself a Christian church.  If Christ has not been embraced as Lord and Saviour from sin and hell, if one's religion is not a matter of the heart, and if there is not a personal relationship with the Son of God, he should not be a member of the visible church of Christ whether local or universal.

Furthermore, according to Acts 2:41, the members of Christ's church should also be biblically baptized as believers.

This then is what the composition of the church should be.  It should be true believers in Jesus Christ who also should be baptized as believers.  However, what should be is not the same as what is and has been true of the composition of the visible church of Christ, whether local or universal.  Which brings us to the issue of:

       B.    What it actually is.  One reality which immediately confronts us as we view the church of Christ as she is and has been, is the presence in her of many paedo-baptist brethren who are true believers in Christ and who believe that they were biblically baptized when they were infants.  Were they indeed biblically baptized?  Since we are unable to find any clear biblical basis for the baptism of any except true believers in Christ, we who are Baptists are forced to say no.  Should they be biblically baptized?  Again we would be forced to say yes.  Does that fact then mean that such paedo-baptist brethren are not actually part of the universal and visible church of Christ?  Historically, a number of Baptists have answered yes, and have basically treated such truly Christian paedo-baptists as being outside the church.  We have been unable to draw such a conclusion regarding true believers in Christ, especially when they indeed believe that they have been baptized properly.  Their situation according to our understanding of Scripture is irregular and ought to be corrected.  But while we believe that such paedo-baptist believers remain in error on this point, we also believe that we should still recognize them as being part of Christ's church.  This has included welcoming them to the Lord's Supper when those who are members in good standing of paedo-baptist local churches visit among us.

However, there are others who are and have been part of the visible professing church of Christ regarding whom we cannot be so charitable.  We cannot because of the pressure of the Word of God.  I would simply remind you of the examples of Ananias and Sapphira, and of Simon the magician found in Acts 5:1-6 and 8:12-23, respectively.  These and other passages indicate that some may and do sneak into local churches as members who have no business being there whatsoever.  This even happened in Apostolic churches.  If that was true then, how much more so now?  Please consider with me some of the categories of these illegitimate church members who have often been a significant portion of the visible professing church in history.  (Review briefly the three outer circles on chart 7C.)

How then should we apply what we have seen regarding the composition of the church?  Consider two final applications.  First:

1.    We should ever be laboring to make Christ's visible church what it should be.  The reality of what Christ's church has often been and even is today is no excuse to passively tolerate unbiblical situations.  In the first case to which I just referred (Ananias and Sapphira), the living God acted to expose and remove the hypocrites in the first church at Jerusalem.  But the second case (Simon), and God's Word elsewhere (Mt. 18:17; I Cor. 5), indicate that local churches bear a responsibility to deal with individuals who manifest that they do not belong within Christ's church.  We can and should act to guard the front door of the church so that those who obviously should not be allowed into church membership are not allowed in.  And we can and should use the back door of the church to remove those who are exposed as not properly being members of Christ's church.

However, there is a balancing application which we must keep before us as we study church history:

       2.    We should humbly recognize the reality that Christ's church has not been and will not fully be what it should be until Christ returns.  Keeping this reality in perspective will greatly help us as we view a church in church history which failed repeatedly and often grossly to have a proper composition, and therefore to bring forth all her proper fruits.  It will help keep us from denying the great works of God in His church because of the faultiness of the church at the time.  And it will help keep us from inaccurately skewing history in an attempt to find the "truly pure church" in every period of church history.

At this point we have completed studying matters of introduction to the Apostolic Church including the setting prepared by God for the church and the beginning and identity of the church.  (Notice the "Church History Study Outline" (1C) at this point.)  We are now ready to begin studying more explicitly the Apostolic period of church history - that period from approximately 30 to 100 A.D. during which capital "A" Apostles of Jesus Christ were functioning in the church as living Apostles.  First of all, we come to:

Section One - Major Human Instruments of God.  We will not be studying in detail the lives of major individuals involved in this period of church history.  If we did so, we would definitely study the earthly life and labors of the Head of the church, Jesus Christ; and also the lives and labors of at least three of His key Apostles:  Simon Peter, Paul, and John.  The reason for the selection of Christ should be obvious since He is the Redeemer, Founder and Head of the church; and since four books in the New Testament, the four Gospels, are devoted largely to events in His life and ministry.  Peter and Paul should be selected for their key roles in bringing the Gospel to Jews and Gentiles, respectively, and because we are told the most in Scripture - especially in the book of Acts - regarding their labors.  Although we are told less about the Apostle John, he should also probably be included because he, of the 12 Apostles, had the closest relationship with Jesus during His earthly labors, was the final Apostle to die, and was the human author of the five books of the New Testament which were the last to be penned.

A more detailed study of the lives and labors of each of these individuals would be very profitable, I am sure.  However, I have chosen not to do so at this point for the reasons outlined at the beginning of our study of the Apostolic Church, and also because it is very difficult to attempt to study the lives and labors of each of these individuals in the brief time available to us due to the amount of Scriptural material available.  Such a study would be cursory and rapid at best, and I question the wisdom and even profit of such a hurried approach to the biographical study of these major biblical characters.  Therefore, we will pass by Section One of our outline without further comment and proceed now to study:

Section Two - The Growth of the Church.  Let us pause for a little bit to focus especially upon the quantitative growth of the church - considering it from two different perspectives.  First, the Apostolic Church grew:

I.     Numerically.  It is very difficult to estimate the numbers of individuals who openly professed faith in Christ during the Apostolic Church period.  And of course, it is impossible to know how many of those who professed to be Christians really had experienced the new birth, even as it is impossible to accurately arrive at that number today.  However, we do know that the numbers of Christians rapidly increased during this period from approximately 30 to 100 A.D.

The first day of the church (from one perspective) dawned with her membership numbering about 120 Christians, and ended with 3,000 souls being added to her by its ending (an increase of 26 times the number present at the start) (Acts 1:12-15; 2:41).  In an explosive way, our resurrected Lord began to fulfill His promise to build His church.  And this mighty work was but an initial and small indicator of the harvest to be gathered in subsequent days, and years, and decades, and centuries.

Next, we are told that, during an apparently brief period of time following Pentecost, the number of just men who were members of the church at Jerusalem had reached about 5000 (Acts 4:4).  If we assume at least an equal number of women, the number of members would have been about 10,000, or over three times the number at the end of the day of Pentecost.

As far as I know, this is the last specific indication of numbers of Christians in the New Testament.  However, the pattern of rapid increase which was clearly evident from the beginning is in general terms declared to have continued.

Furthermore, we have a non-scriptural confirmation of the striking increase from Pliny, governor of the province of Bithynia in northwest Asia Minor in 112 A.D. (not long after the death of the last Apostle, John).  This governor wrote to the Roman emperor, Trajan, regarding the Christian "plague" which he was trying to hold back.  Parts of what Pliny wrote in his letter are as follows:

       Later, as usually happens, the trouble (Christianity) spread by the very treatment of it (by capital punishments!), and further varieties came to my notice...

       ...The case seemed to me to be a proper one for consultation, particularly because of the number of those who were accused.  For many of every age, every class, and of both sexes are being accused and will continue to be accused.  Nor has this contagious superstition spread through the cities only, but also through the villages and the countryside.  But I think it can be checked and put right.  At any rate the temples, which had been well-nigh abandoned, are beginning to be frequented again; and the customary (idolatrous) services, which had been neglected for a long time, are beginning to be resumed . . .[1]

Schaff draws the following conclusion:

       As to the numerical strength of Christianity at the close of the first century, we have no information whatever.  Statistical reports were unknown in those days.  The estimate of half a million among the one hundred millions or more inhabitants of the Roman empire is probably exaggerated.  The pentecostal conversion of three thousand in one day at Jerusalem, and the `immense multitude' of martyrs under Nero (along with the report of Pliny above), favor a high estimate.[2]

This is the best I can do in evaluating the numerical increase of the Apostolic Church.  However, there is another method of analyzing quantitative growth for which we have further information.  We may also consider growth:

II.    Geographically.  There is one key text in the New Testament which sketches out for us the path by which the geographical spread of the church took place.  Read it at this point in Acts 1:8.  In a real sense, this verse provides us with an outline of the entire book of Acts as follows:

       A.    In Jerusalem (Acts 1:1 - 7:60);

       B.    In all Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1 - 11:18); and:

       C.    Even to the remotest part of the earth (Acts 11:19 - 28:31).

The book of Acts begins in Jerusalem, the capital of the Jews, and ends in Rome, the capital of the Roman Empire, while in the middle stopping in Athens, the philosophical center of the Greeks (Acts 17).  Each of these three key cultures of the day were being impacted by the Gospel.

But not only does Acts 1:8 provide us with a helpful outline of the book of Acts.  It also provides us with an outline of the geographical spread of the Apostolic Church, which was wider than the details provided in the book of Acts.  So, following this outline, let us briefly consider each region of gospel advance in turn.  First there was the advance:

       A.    In Jerusalem.  Many had, to one degree or another, believed in Jesus during His earthly ministry in Palestine and neighboring regions.  But a fully-revealed Gospel of a crucified and resurrected Savior and Lord was first preached in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost.  And the first local church was established at Jerusalem.  As we have already noted, for a time, the local and universal church were virtually identical.

This state of affairs continued until the opposition of the unbelieving Jews erupted in murderous violence with the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:59-60; 8:1-4; 9:1-5).  It appears that Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus was probably not too long after the stoning of Stephen.  And from dates which we can pinpoint, and from information which Paul elsewhere provides regarding his life, Paul's conversion probably occurred somewhere between 34 and 36 A.D.  Since Christ's crucifixion, resurrection and ascension probably occurred in 30 A.D., this means that the church in Jerusalem was evidently allowed to grow and increase in relative peace for about four to six years before being scattered.  So for approximately five years, the church was mainly limited to Jerusalem.  It took persecution to spread it out beyond that city.  And spread out it did!  The next two stages, "in all Judea and Samaria", and "even to the remotest part of the earth", appear to have both begun with the Jerusalem persecution and scattering, although the first of these two stages is largely recorded first in Acts, and the final stage just begins to be described in the latter part of Acts.  Briefly consider with me each of these latter two stages in order, beginning first of all with:

       B.    In all Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1).  Although Christ had spent a brief time preaching among the Samaritans (compare. John 4), it appears that it was only at this time that the completed Gospel of Jesus Christ was heralded to this group of half-breed (or even less-related) Jews who were so despised by the Jews around them (Acts 8:4-8, 14-15, 25).  Next, in Acts 8:40 we find Philip preaching in western Palestine.  Then in Acts 9:31 we are told that the church now existed not only throughout all Judea and Samaria, but also Galilee.  I.e., the Gospel had fruitfully spread throughout all three major regions of Palestine.  And it ended up reaching into the Gentile population in Palestine, as well as the Jewish and Samaritan populations, by the time we come to Acts chapter 10 and Peter's ministry to Cornelius and his relatives and friends at Caesaria.

However, the Gospel spread far more widely than this after the martyrdom of Stephen, which brings us to:

       C.    Even to the remotest part of the earth.  Notice first of all:

               1.    The initial spread following the Jerusalem scattering during the years of approximately 35 to 44 A.D..  We have in Scripture specific indications or at least hints of the spread of the church to the following locations during this time or soon thereafter:  the land of Ethiopia south of Egypt (Acts 8:26-28, 39); the city of Damascus with the surrounding province of Syria to the northeast of Palestine (Acts 9:1-2, 10, 19; compare Galatians 1:21); the land of Arabia to the southeast of Palestine (Galatians 1:17); the city of Tarsus and the surrounding province of Cilicia in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) (Acts 9:30; compare Galatians 1:21 and Acts 15:41), the region of Phoenicia north of Palestine, the island of Cyprus northwest of Palestine in the Mediterranean Sea, the city of Antioch north of Palestine, and the city of Cyrene in northern Africa west of Egypt (Acts 11:19-26); and possibly other homelands of people present on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:9-11) including the strategic cities of Rome in Italy and Alexandria in Egypt where churches were established very early and became key centers of the Christian faith along with Jerusalem and Antioch..

The church which resulted in Antioch was especially significant at this time because it was, as far as we know, the first church in which a major part of the members were Gentiles.  And this church was to very influential in launching missionary enterprises in the days to come.

In summary thus far, during approximately the first five years after Christ's ascension, the church was established in Jerusalem.  Then during the next nine years  it began to expand much more widely.  But further geographical expansion lay ahead, which brings us to:

               2.    Later missionary efforts in the Apostolic Church.  At this point we are focusing upon the years from approximately 44 A.D. on.  As we consider this period, we should especially note that the Jewish Dispersion greatly aided the spread of the Gospel.  Nearly everywhere Paul went, there was a Jewish synagogue which provided an initial toe-hold for his Gospel labors.

Since the labors of the Apostle Paul fill so much of the biblical record, let me briefly mention the places where he labored during his three missionary journeys which are recorded in Acts 13:1 - 21:15, and which lasted from approximately 45 to 58 A.D.:  the island of Cyprus, a number of areas in the region of Asia Minor (modern Turkey); several cities in the province of Macedonia (north of Greece); and the key cities of Athens and Corinth in Greece proper.  Paul also possibly later visited Spain (64 A.D.?) - something which he indicated to be his desire in Romans 15:23-24, 28.

There is a legend that the Apostle Thomas travelled east, preaching in Persia, and finally India.  Indeed there was an early Christian church established in India.

Furthermore, evidence of Christian influence has been found in the ruins of Pompei in Italy which was destroyed in 79 A.D. by a volcanic eruption.

These then are some of the recorded or at least reported missionary efforts and fruits during the later years of the Apostolic Church period.  But next, notice:

       D.    A significant geographical recession.  During the years of geographical, as well as numerical expansion, the wars of the rebellious Jews against the Romans broke out (66 A.D.), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.  Although the local church escaped Jerusalem before its final destruction, this key city which had been the originating center of the church of Christ now ceased to be a major Christian center.  But in a real sense, this significant event at this point in the history of the church did not matter.  For the church was now widespread far beyond the region of Judea.

Conclusion and applications.  The far-reaching spread of the Apostolic Church took place in just a few short years.  By approximately 62 A.D., just 32 years after Christ's ascension, the Apostle Paul was able to write an amazing statement from prison to the Colossian church.  Read what he wrote in Colossians 1:3-6.  The word "world" in verse 6 is evidently a reference to the then civilized world, which was primarily the Roman Empire.[3]  But the bottom line is that Paul could declare that "in all the world . . . (the gospel) is constantly bearing fruit and increasing . . ."  The church of Christ was widely advancing.

How then should we apply this phenomenal growth of the Apostolic Church to ourselves in the 21st Century?  Please notice the words of Acts 1:8 once again.  This verse provides a two part answer to the question, "From where did such phenomenal growth come?":

1.    First of all, this growth was the result of obedience to the command of Christ (although a prod of persecution was needed).  It was men witnessing about Christ by whom Christ's church advanced.  God uses means to forward His work.  We who are the people of God making up Christ's church are the means God uses, and thus we are called to act.

But there is a second and even more foundational answer to the question, "From where did this phenomenal growth come?"

2.    It came from the enablement of men and of the church by the Holy Spirit.  We read in Acts 1:8, ". . . but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you . . .".  It is true that these words were especially addressed to those who were Apostles.  But in light of the enduring Great Commission of our Lord in Mt. 28:18-20, there is a broader application here for the church of all ages.  It is the same application which we find in the words of our Lord Jesus in John 15:5: ". . . for apart from Me you can do nothing."

---

     [1]  Bruce, The Spreading Flame, book 2, pp. 22-3.

     [2]  P. 196.

     [3]  We see a similar usage in Luke 2:1 where we read, ". . . a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered" (New King James Version).