by Pastor Gary Freel
Origin of the Church1
A proper understanding regarding the origin of the church is something that ought to be of importance to all believers desiring to follow the Lord Jesus Christ. As one author put it, the church was planned in the mind of the Father in eternity past (Eph. 3:10-11); it was purchased by the sacrifice of the Son on the cross of Calvary (Acts 20:28); it is produced by the baptism of the Holy Spirit as individuals put their faith and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior (1 Cor. 12:13); and finally, it is preserved by the promise of divine providence throughout its history (Matt. 16:18). Nothing in creation can overcome or conquer this divinely ordained institution. Since the triune Godhead is that concerned about the church and it is clearly precious and meaningful to Him, then God’s people ought to be very careful about how they understand and handle this important doctrine.
A Reason to Address the Issue
The timing of the origin of the church is being debated in certain spheres of Christendom today. Many (the number appears to be rapidly increasing) put the church’s origin at a time other than the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), suggesting it started with Adam, Abraham, John the Baptist, or at some point during the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. Others believe it began after Pentecost at some time during Paul’s ministry. The position of the Fundamental Evangelistic Association and Grace Bible Church of Fresno, California, is that the church began on the day of Pentecost. Our writing and teaching reflect this view, and we have tried to be consistent with this perspective through the years of our ministry.
Some churches and Bible colleges in fundamental circles are now embracing the belief that the church began with Jesus during His earthly ministry and was simply “empowered” on the day of Pentecost. This perspective leads to questions concerning the nature and purpose of the church as well as how texts of Scripture, namely in the Old Testament and the Gospels, should be interpreted and applied. In fact, many who hold to the origin of the church as taking place at a time other than the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 use questionable rules of interpreting texts of Scripture to support their position. Many of the texts used have nothing whatsoever to do with the church. We must be wary of those who lift a verse or text out of its context to try to support their teaching on this or any other doctrine. Handling God’s Word faithfully demands we be clear about a number of doctrines, including the matter of the origin of the church.
The Nature and Purpose of Christ’s Earthly Ministry
Understanding the chronology, nature, and purpose of the earthly life of Jesus Christ gives us a foundation for rejecting the belief that the New Testament church began any time prior to Pentecost. Jesus began His public ministry just after His baptism, which was His own theocratic anointing (Matt. 3:16), and subsequent temptation (Matt. 4:1-11). He perfomed His first miracle in Cana (Jn. 2:11) and began proclaiming the message concerning who He was (Israel’s Messiah, God incarnate) and what He was offering to the nation (the Kingdom, as promised in the Old Testament). For approximately two and a half years, He traveled the country, mostly in Galilee with occasional forays into Judea, proclaiming that twofold message. Thus, the land was saturated with the declaration: The King is present, and He is promising to establish the kingdom. His many miracles substantiated these claims while also giving Israel a foretaste of what was to come in the kingdom.2
During the early part of His great Galilean ministry Jesus called a number of men who became His disciples (Jn. 1:35-51). In Mark 1:14-20, His message was exclusively to Israel and concerned His offer of the kingdom (v. 15). He said nothing about the church nor about the Gentiles being offered that call (cf. Matt. 15:21-28, where He states that His coming was to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”). Within that period of time, the Lord gave no information regarding the church to either the nation Israel or His own disciples. His message was strictly, exclusively an offer of the kingdom to Israel. Even later in Matthew 9:35, the message remained “the gospel of the kingdom.”
Approximately a year prior to the crucifixion, however, a vital event occurred. Matthew 12:22-24 records that both the common people and the leadership of Israel rejected Christ and His offer, attributing an incredible miracle to the devil’s empowerment of Christ. The magnitude of that accusation cannot be overstated. The consequences were devastating. With this definite and clear rejection, Israel committed the unpardonable sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Christ then changed His message and the focus of His attention from publicly announcing His arrival as the King and offering the kingdom to Israel to privately preparing His disciples for the time of His departure and their subsequent role in the church age (Matt. 13ff). He focused on training them for their role of being the foundation for His program during the time known as the interregnum (the period between His first and second comings).
The change in His message and ministry tactics stunned the disciples (Matt. 13:10). They had fully expected Jesus to establish the promised kingdom, with Himself as the King. However, after the official rejection by Israel, that privilege was no longer possible. Up to this point, the message He and the disciples had proclaimed (Matt. 10:1-11:1) dealt with the nation of Israel and the promised kingdom they will be given. Jesus did not discuss or teach about the church during His earthly ministry. He did not even mention the church until His question to the disciples in Matthew 16.
The Nature and Purpose of the New Testament Church
An Explanation of Key Terms (Mystery, Foundation, Building)
Confusion concerning the very nature of the church arises when one puts the origin of the church at any time other than the day of Pentecost. Consider the following:
(1) The church was a mystery (Eph. 3:3-4, 9). This does not mean it was something weird, strange, odd, or mystical. Rather, it was something that, while existing eternally in God’s mind, He had not previously revealed specifics and details prior to Paul and his contemporaries (the apostles and prophets). To combine the church and Israel into one entity, as those who place the birth of the church prior to Pentecost do, effectively removes any unique distinctions between Israel and the church. They teach that the church has merged with Israel or has replaced Israel in some way. This explains why and how these proponents utilize many of the texts in the Gospels and give them meanings that confuse and often manipulate people into believing or practicing things not really found in the context.
(2) Paul spells out in Ephesians 2:11-3:21 (especially in 3:7-11) the importance of his own role in the plan of God, namely, his role in this structure known as Christ’s body, the church, which was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (it was not in existence until after the resurrection and ascension of Christ). Paul says in Ephesians 2:11-3:21 that he and the other apostles and prophets served as the foundation of this new body, comprised of Jews and Gentiles. The objections to this premise can be addressed in question format: Why would new revelation concerning the church even be necessary in the book of Acts and in the epistles? If the church began prior to Paul and the other apostles and prophets—in the Old Testament or the Gospels for example—who, then, served as the foundation, and how did they serve in that capacity? If the church began post-Pentecost, during Paul’s ministry exclusively, why even have the other apostles and prophets at all?
(3) The metaphors of a building and body are important because they teach that this was something to progress, to grow. The church was not to stay at the foundation stage on a permanent basis. There was to be an increase of this body into a superstructure that would become worldwide.
This new program of God had not been revealed prior to Christ’s statement in Matthew 16:18. Allusions to and allowances for the church age may be inferred prior to this (Matt. 12:21), but no specific instruction about the origin, nature, or ministry of the church, the body of Christ, can be found until Paul’s writing ministry.
An Explanation of Key Texts
We affirm the importance of the church, both in its universal and local forms. In other words, we believe in the existence of the two: one comprising all believers from the day of Pentecost until the rapture; the other consisting of believers in specific locales throughout the world who gather for corporate worship with one another.
The following reasons explain the traditional or “classic” dispensational understanding that the church began on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), for the following reasons:
(1) The church is the body of Christ. “And gave Him to be the head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:22-23). “He is the head of the body, the church” (Col. 1:18). We see in each of these texts that the church is referred to as “the body,” of which the Lord Jesus Christ is “the Head.” By design, He is the one in charge and in control over the functions of the body, determining what His body is supposed to be and do.
(2) How does an individual become a part of the church, the body of Christ? “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13)The baptism of the Holy Spirit is God’s unique work in which Christians are placed into Christ’s body, the New Testament church. God’s act of placing believers into the body of Christ is limited to a specific period of time, namely from the ascension of Christ and His sending the Holy Spirit to the removal of the church in the rapture. This particular ministry of the Holy Spirit has a tim limit that is exclusive to this present church age. This leads to the the question, “When did the baptizing work of the Spirit first take place?”
(3) According to Matthew 16:18, which is after Christ’s Galilean ministry, the church was still future—“I will build My church.” It was not something that existed in the past and needed retooling or reformation. Neither was it something existing at that present time which simply needed to be reinvigorated. It had not yet been formed, but it would be shortly.
(4) The baptizing work of the Holy Spirit was still future, even after our Lord’s resurrection and just prior to His ascension: “Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence (from now)” (Acts 1:5).
(5) Later, Peter tells us that the baptism of the Holy Spirit began “at the beginning” (of the church) when the Spirit came upon them. “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that He said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 11:15-16). Thus, it was before Acts 11 but after Acts 1 that this baptizing work of the Spirit began placing men and women into Christ’s body. In addition, we note that Peter specifically marks, or distinguishes, the day of Pentecost as “the beginning,” not a continuation or a modification of something. This is the only time that the book of Acts records a certain day as being “the beginning” of something. It is not a vague or general reference Peter is pointing to in Acts 11. The underlying word denotes the exact or precise start of the object.
(6) The church was already in existance in Acts 2:47—“And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” Clearly it was not begun later, subsequent to that specific date.
Since the only way to become a member of the church is through the baptizing work of the Holy Spirit, and that occurred at the beginning when the Spirit came upon the disciples after Acts 1:5 and before Acts 2:47, the church evidently began at Pentecost as recorded in the first part of Acts 2. The church, Christ’s body, did not and could not exist prior to the arrival of the Holy Spirit, who baptizes believers into that body.
Further, according to John 16:7, the Holy Spirit could not come until after Christ’s departure, and without the Holy Spirit, the church would have no life. In addition, according to Ephesians 1:20-23, Christ could not be the Head of the church prior to His resurrection and ascension: ”Which He [the Father] wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be the head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.”
Finally, prior to Christ’s resurrection and ascension, New Testament spiritual gifts were not yet given to believers (Eph. 4:8). In addition, nowhere in the Old Testament or in the Gospels is anyone ever baptized by the Holy Spirit and placed into Christ’s body (though the practice of water baptism was known and used, Matt. 3:11-12).
Conclusion
Several problems arise when trying to place the origin of the church at a time other than the day of Pentecost. First, it confuses the distinction between Israel and the church and God’s program for each in the past, present, and future. Second, if the church did begin prior to Pentecost, is true, then much of Scripture would essentially be unnecessary, especially Paul’s writings; the Old Testament and the four Gospels would be sufficient. In fact, much of what Paul wrote could potentially be considered null and void, especially his words in Ephesians 2:11-3:21 and other texts and would become very confusing as we would be forced to spiritualize a great deal from many of those texts. Third, it confuses the ministry of the Holy Spirit in this age of grace for the New Testament church, namely, baptizing believers into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). For example, how were people placed into Christ’s body prior to His resurrection and ascension? The answer is that they were not. The body of Christ did not and could not have existed until His death, resurrection, and ascension. Finally, in terms of the post-resurrection ministry of Christ, it deems His headship (authority) over the church as unnecessary. If the body existed prior to Christ’s becoming the Head, who was the head before that? Was there a head? How does a headless body function?
As traditional or “classic” dispensationalists, we increasingly see the need to consistently maintain the distinctions between Israel and the church; this is important in terms of “rightly dividing” God’s infallible Word. We are not under the Mosaic Law as a rule of life today. For example, the location of our worship is not in a single geographic area. We have the privilege of worshipping the Lord from wherever we reside. Nor are we to sacrifice animals; the once-for-all sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ is adequate payment for our sin. Nor are we restricted to certain of Paul’s letters exclusively. We have “all Scripture” and are to use it in its entirety for our rule of life (2 Tim. 3:15-17).
Our prayer is that this article and subsequent ones dealing with dispensational issues will provide not only understanding concerning our position but also answers to questions raised about the doctrine of the origin and purpose of the church. Let us be fully persuaded about what God is doing today and the importance of understanding His plan (Rom. 11:36).
End Notes:
1 I am deeply indebted to a number of writers and teachers whose instruction has been of help to me in the formulation of this article. While the thoughts are my own, the truths conveyed herein have been those handed down to me by faithful men (2 Tim. 2:2).
2 Those miracles done by our Lord were not simply to bring temporary healing and/or relief to the people, but they were to illustrate that He is who He claimed to be. The miraculous sign-gifts ceased with the passing of the apostles and the completion of the canon of Scripture. No one does any miracles in the biblical sense today, and this includes the modern charismatic movement with all of its bogus claims (for further information on the topic of miracles, read Renald Showers’ article “The Purpose of Jesus’ Miracles,” Israel My Glory, December-January 1975-1976).
Comments are closed.