It’s Not Like the Bible Requires Us to Assemble…

“Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting the assembling of ourselves together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?…

But recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, sometimes being publicly exposed to reproach and affliction, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. For you had compassion on those in prison, and you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one. Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised. For, ‘Yet a little while, and the coming one will come and will not delay; but my righteous one shall live by faith; and if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him.’

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.” — Hebrews 10:23–39

The book of Hebrews is one of admonition and exhortation. The authors are calling on the readers to persevere in the faith, to remain loyal to Christ, to not go back on their confession that Jesus is Lord and Messiah, to not forsake Christianity and return to their former ways (3:6, 14; 4:14; 6:18; 10:23; 11:11). And this admonition (to remain resolute and faithful in our allegiance to Christ) is so needed, only because of the tremendous temptation to do otherwise—to give up, to turn back, to seek relief from the hatred and mocking and misunderstanding of the world.

Here in Hebrews 10, we are urged not to neglect the assembling of ourselves together.

As I’ve pointed out elsewhere:

“The apostles instruct us to not forsake the assembly, as is the habit of some, but to encourage and stir one another up to love and good works (Heb. 10:25). This means the weekly assembly of believers is for the encouragement and edification of our brothers and sisters in Christ, and it ought to be a priority in the rhythm of your weekly routine as a family. By neglecting the regular corporate worship of the church we’ve committed ourselves to, we not only become a discouragement to our brothers and sisters, but we inadvertently teach our children to devalue the local church—while also keeping them, during their most formative years, from one of the primary means God has given for the spiritual growth of His people.”

Assembling together is the most fundamental and foundational thing Christians do. The church is called the “church” (which means “assembly,” or “congregation”), because what characterizes us—what we are marked by—is that we have committed to regularly assemble (to congregate) in Christ’s name to declare, uphold, and proclaim the Word and worth of God, and to officially affirm, equip, and oversee one another’s faith in Christ through discipleship, corporate worship, the teaching and preaching of God’s Word, and the observance of the ordinances.

So, with that being said, I wanted to make two brief but crucial notes about this important passage in Hebrews 10, over which there has been much debate and disputation in 2020 because of the immediate relevance of one’s interpretation of the instruction there to one’s approach to the lockdowns.

First, many have made much of the phrase, “as is the habit of some.” I’ve seen a number of churches getting a lot of mileage out of the defense that “we’re not making a habit of not assembling; this is temporary; therefore, we’re not violating the instruction here.” Without taking the time to argue that churches (or individuals) who do not gather with the body of Christ for even mildly extended periods of time—much less staying away from the assembly “indefinitely,” or “until the virus is under control,” as some have put it—indeed are making a habit of it… I want to point out a common interpretive mistake being made here.

Hebrews 10:25 is not primarily (though an a fortiori argument applies) forbidding the making of a habit of skipping church. It’s merely observing that some have done so, and warning of the danger of it. But the prohibition is not specifically of habitually neglecting the assembly; it is a prohibition of neglecting the assembly. It says not to stay away from the assembly, as is the habit of some.

It’s not merely forbidding the making of a habit, it’s forbidding a practice that others have made a habit of. And that leads to a second note I want to make about this passage.

That activity it’s forbidding is: staying away from the assembly because of the danger of attending. The context is the temptation to stay away from the assembly due to the extreme risk involved with attendance.

The verses later in the same chapter make this evident. When the readers had first become Christians, they endured severe trials of their faith, and had proved faithful. In the face of difficult struggles and suffering and, at times, public shame, disgrace, and maltreatment, they had stood their ground, as well as supporting other believers who had undergone persecution. In that context, it would be very tempting to stay away from the gathering of the body.

Think about it… going to church could jeopardize their very lives. It could endanger their family. It could bring steep legal consequences. And their neighbors certainly wouldn’t understand their going to church—these 1^st-century Christians.

It’s in that context… it’s with regard to that specific temptation—to stay away form the assembly, to neglect assembling together for the sake of safety and risk-aversion—that the injunction comes: “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting the assembling of ourselves together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.”

There are a plethora of articles and resources I could share for further edification. For now, I’ll refer you to my list of the best resources here, and just recommend two more recent articles particularly relevant to this post, here, and here.

And, finally, I’ll leave you with a quote (out of the second article above) from a letter written by Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, “regarding the witness of Christians in contrast to pagans during a fifteen-year plague in the third century:”

“Many terrible things happened to us also before this. At first we were driven out, persecuted, and killed, but we kept our festival even then… But the brightest festival of all was kept by the fulfilled martyrs, who feasted in heaven… Most of our brethren showed love and loyalty in not sparing themselves while helping one another, tending to the sick with no thought of danger and gladly departing this life with them after becoming infected with their disease… The best of our own brothers lost their lives in this way—some presbyters, deacons, and laymen—a form of death based on strong faith and piety that seems in every way equal to martyrdom. They would also take up the bodies of the saints, close their eyes, shut their mouths, and carry them on their shoulders. They would embrace them, wash and dress them in burial clothes, and soon receive the same services themselves. The heathen were the exact opposite. They pushed away those with the first signs of the disease and fled from their dearest. They even threw them half dead into the roads and treated unburied corpses like refuse in hopes of avoiding the plague of death, which, for all their efforts, was difficult to escape.”

The day will declare it.

Do Churches Need to Adapt?

Everyone seems to be talking about the need for churches (and other entities) to stay up with the times… to adapt to new technologies and new strategies, new philosophies and new methodologies. Change with the times, offer more online options, be more immediately accessible (don’t do anything the world won’t understand), revisit your marketing/growth and outreach strategies, or your church will suffer.

Do you want to know what will not only never be out of style, but also will never cease to be absolutely necessary, essential, and timelessly relevant?—Gathering with Christ’s people, singing with one another, hearing God’s Word preached in person, praying together, celebrating the Lord’s supper—all of which can only really be done in person. The space matters; physical presence matters; embodied fellowship and togetherness matters.

As churches continue to try to convince you that being online is just as good as in person, and that staying away from the assembly is what the Assembly (church) should be doing… and that when the author of Hebrews says that assembling together is essential for our mutual encouragement and edification, he really means we can forsake the assembly sometimes and it will be just as edifying and our church can be “stronger than ever!”… Well, time will tell. But I believe time will tell (and has told) that this is not so.

Christians will realize that it actually is crucial to continue doing what Christians have done for the past 2,000 years—gather with our fellow believers on the Lord’s Day, in the face of all opposition and risk, to corporately declare, uphold, and proclaim the Word and worth of God, and to officially affirm, equip, and edify one another’s faith in Christ through discipleship, corporate worship in song, the teaching and preaching of God’s Word, and the observance of the ordinances.

Assembling together is the most fundamental and foundational thing Christians do.

The calls to “adapt,” and “change,” and “keep up” will last for a little while… but I believe 2021 will see churches beginning to realize the need for a “back to the basics” approach—a strategy of steady faithfulness in the ordinary means of grace—because the “basics” are absolutely critical. Gathering together on the Lord’s Day to pray together, encourage one another, sing together, and sit under the teaching of God’s Word together is foundational to everything else.

If you are looking for a church dedicated to:

• The simple verse-by-verse exposition of the whole counsel of God’s Word,
• Singing songs that exalt the Word and worth of Jesus Christ, are theologically rich, musically appropriate, and designed to be sung by a congregation,
• Upholding grace as the motivation for how the local church functions and for living the Christian life,
• Affirming that God alone is the Lord of the conscience, and thereby protecting the individual’s conscience from being bound by the commandments of men,
• Practicing meaningful hospitality, fellowship, and discipleship,
• Becoming (and helping one another become) committed and competent disciples of Christ in every area of life,

I invite you to consider Fairview Bible Church.

My hope, to borrow wording from a fellow pastor, is that, in an historical sense, Fairview Bible Church is a boringly normal, biblical church. We have no interest in reinventing the wheel or creating a “new kind of church.”

Our church from its conception has been rooted in the conviction that the Bible is our absolute authority and rule of life as God’s true and unfailing Word. It is through the faithful teaching and application of the Word of God that we can grow to better know, obey, and love Christ. And we’re committed to having no problem passages—where the Scriptures speak, we speak.

You’ll find when you spend time with us that we are far from perfect—but that we want to point you to the One who is. I hope you’ll join us as we seek to know Christ more deeply, follow Him more faithfully, and love Him and others more fully.

C.S. Lewis on the Modern State

“The modern state exists not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good—anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence the new name ‘leaders’ for those who were once ‘rulers.’ We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils, or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, ‘Mind your own business.’ Our whole lives are their business… We are tamed animals.” — C.S. Lewis

“Now that [referencing Lewis’ quote] is what we are in a battle to resist as God’s people; and that’s what the churches right now who are meeting should remember, and continue to do.” — Joe Boot

Limited Authority [part 3]

The Ground of the Duty

The ground of this duty of submission, Peter gives in the middle of the phrase: “Be subject, for the Lord’s sake…” This is a distinctly Christian motivation for submission. The temporal and human motive is simply to avoid punishment; and that’s not an inappropriate motive at all. The punishments inflicted by the civil magistrate are, in part, meant to serve as a deterrent, because others will see the punishment meted out and desire to avoid that for themselves (Rom. 13:3-4; Eccl. 8:11). But this is another layer; this is a deeper motivation for living as good subjects of the political community in which we find ourselves. We submit ourselves to the governing authorities for the Lord’s sake. We are to be subject to the civil magistrate out of our submission to Christ’s ultimate lordship.

The Extent of the Duty

Next, we look at the extent of this duty. Peter says to “be in subjection for the Lord’s sake to every human institution: whether to a king as supreme…” Now, the word here is “king.” It’s not “emperor,” and it’s not “Caesar,” though in Peter’s context this clearly would be the emperor, as the supreme monarch. The fact that he says “king,” instead of Caesar, and, even more so, the fact that he says “a king,” rather than “the king,” indicates that he’s giving principles; this is the case across the board, across empires, across centuries, across the variety of particular forms of government a community might take, this instruction holds. Be in submission to—be upstanding, humble, and responsive subjects under—whatever the supreme authority is in your context. Again, in Peter’s context the supreme authority is the emperor. A lot of translations actually render this as “the emperor;” but, technically, that’s too much interpretation. What Peter says is, “whether to a king,” because he’s talking in principles about being in subjection to the supreme authority of your land.

Now, just to make sure I’m not losing you, and to make sure you don’t have to read between the lines, let me spell it out. Who is the supreme authority in America? Let me be more pointed: what holds that slot that Peter refers to with “whether to a king as supreme?” What is in that place, that position, of supreme monarch, in America? It is not the president; it’s not Congress. At the federal level, it is, in fact, the Constitution. The supreme authority in Pennsylvania is not the governor; it’s not the General Assembly; it’s not the courts; it’s the PA Constitution. And I’m not stretching to pull that out of a hat. The founding of America was deliberately leaning on Samuel Rutherford and his work “Lex Rex,” which means “the Law is King.” America doesn’t have a human king, but we explicitly have a constitution that is positioned as the supreme authority—the law is king. And governing authorities—the president, congress, the courts, governors, county councils, executives, mayors, township supervisors, policemen—are all in the position of what Peter refers to as “governors as those delegated by” (“sent from”) the supreme authority.

The supreme authority is the one you appeal to when the lesser magistrates (lower authorities) fail to rule in keeping with the will of the supreme authority. When the local authorities were treating Paul unjustly according to his Roman citizenship, Paul appealed to Caesar. We appeal, ultimately, to the constitutions as supreme. Christians are not to be scofflaws, and they are not to be revolutionaries. We are not anti-authority. Christians ought to be upstanding citizens, respecting and being in cheerful subjection to the governing authorities—the institutions—in the society in which we find ourselves.

To be continued in part 4…

1 Peter 2 and Limited Authority [part 1]

1 Peter 2:13-17

“Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to a king as supreme, or to governors as sent from him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God: that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free—and not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but as bondservants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.”

In 1 Peter 2:12, Peter urges Christians to keep their conduct honorable among the unbelieving society in which they find themselves. This basically functions as the head exhortation out of which flows the rest of Peter’s instruction through chapters 2 and 3. So, what does it look like to keep our conduct honorable?

In verse 13, Peter begins by addressing the civil sphere, and our duties of honorable conduct with regard to the civil magistrate. Now, let me define my terms before we get into this; “civil magistrate” is not a very familiar term for modern Christians. In biblical studies and doctrinal discussions, “magistrate” doesn’t refer to a kind of judge. “Civil magistrate” is just the old term for any office holder—any authority—in the civil sphere. So, let me back up and define the civil sphere.

God has established in society three institutions: the household, the church, and the civil magistrate—the civil realm. And each of these institutions has a sphere of authority. This is often referred to as the spheres of sovereignty—the family, the state, and the church. Now, it gets complicated the further into it you go. The state is not really an institution in the same way the household and the church are. God established the household—the family—as the basic building block of society. Then, after the flood, He prescribed the role (the function) of what we call civil authority—the role of upholding justice. Civil justice is upheld by defending innocent life from aggression, and punishing intra-jurisdictional crime. That function—upholding justice—is decentralized at the tower of Babel when God scatters the nations, enforcing His commission to fill the earth, and establishing independent, sovereign nations. My point there is simply to highlight that the existence of independent, sovereign nations, and the function of upholding justice in the civil realm, are distinguishable issues—although closely tied.

The civil sphere—the civil authority, the role of enforcing justice—is an extension of the authority of the household; and the job of enforcing justice is established and prescribed by God… but the particular form that function takes is not prescribed. There can be a variety of ways a community might organize itself to carry out the mandate of upholding justice.

Then, with the ratifying of the New Covenant through Christ’s death and resurrection, Christ established a third institution, a third and independent sphere of sovereignty—the church. The church is established as an embassy of Christ’s coming kingdom, and so the church is actually the first, and only, truly independent institution. But that’s beyond the scope of our focus here.

So then, “civil magistrate” is the term for the civil authority in general—the police, the president, a governor, a judge, a legislature, a king, a constitution… It just refers to the authorities in the civil sphere (not church or household).

So Peter is going to describe what it looks like to keep our conduct honorable—with reference to the civil magistrate, in our households, and in the church. He begins with the magistrate—civil rulers. And we’ll dive into his instruction in the next post.

Composing a Doctrinal Statement [Church and State]

Composing a doctrinal statement (or any other essential documents) can be one of the most arduous (but crucial) projects undertaken by a church. In this series, I shared my own doctrinal statement, a section at a time, in an attempt to provide a helpful example of a detailed statement a church might use that is worded positively, but articulated precisely enough to exclude certain theological positions for the protection and unity of the church.

I’ve recently been working on an additional point, covering the relationship between church and state, and the political nature of the local church. I’d like to take the time to make notes on my wording choices, as I did with the other sections; but for now, I’ll share what I have in its entirety, and I welcome any questions or suggestions.

Church and State: We believe the church and state ought to remain distinct as institutions. God has delegated certain authority to various spheres, or governments—namely, the household, the local church, and the civil magistrate. Neither the family nor the church exists by the permission of the state. Nor does the civil magistrate bear the authority of the keys of the kingdom to declare individuals as citizens of Christ’s kingdom. Nor should the church swing the sword as a civil authority.

This distinction between the institutions of church and civil government ought not be construed, however, to mean that religion and politics should, or can, be separated. The religious convictions of individuals ought rightly to shape and direct their every action—including the policies, strategies, penalties, and measures employed by those in governing positions. Christians ought to seek to influence for good the public square, including the policies of the civil magistrate, through whatever course be available to them. Nor ought this be construed to mean that churches must not speak to political issues. Within the commission to make committed and competent disciples by teaching them to observe all that Christ has commanded, churches are to teach what accords with proper justice, righteousness, mercy, and peace. Churches ought also to call upon the magistrate to uphold justice and to acknowledge the lordship of Jesus Christ, demonstrating the peace and righteousness of the coming King, to whom the nations owe their fealty.

The ordinance of the civil magistrate is established by God in Genesis 9 as the means for man to uphold civil justice under the administration of the Noahic covenant. The governing authorities that exist are in place by the providence of God to punish evildoers and to protect the lives of the innocent under their watch. God has delegated to the civil magistrate the power of the sword in order to be a servant of God for good, to establish the justice and tranquility needed for their people to be secure in their person and property and to pursue virtue and godliness. The civil magistracy receives its authority from the ordinance of God, and rulers must never presume to act above or outside the Noahic commission, recognizing rather that they too are subject to the justice mechanism of the Noahic covenant. God has delegated the authority of the sword to civil government for certain ends only, and its rule is legitimate to the extent it pursues just ends by just means.

The church is not the kingdom, but is an outpost, or embassy, of the coming kingdom. Jesus has been given possession of all authority in heaven and on earth; he has been declared Lord over all creation. However, the political reality of his reign is not yet being exercised until he returns in power and glory to sit upon the throne in Jerusalem, thus establishing justice and peace over all nations. As an embassy of Christ’s coming kingdom, the church does not swing the sword for itself, but it does speak on behalf of the coming king who will judge the nations at his return. As such, the church has a prophetic ministry to proclaim Christ’s lordship, and to teach the nations the proper standard of justice. The civil magistrate ought to govern by the standard of Scripture, as taught by the local church, so as to uphold justice and minister for good as ordained by God; yet the church is not to coerce the state, just as the state is not to coerce the church.

Christians are to render submission and respect unto the governing authorities in all things lawfully commanded by them. The Christian’s first and highest allegiance is to Jesus Christ, though Christ calls us to seek the well-being of the country in which we reside and to submit to the governing authorities. The Christian must not obey rulers when they command that which Scripture forbids, or forbid that which Scripture requires. We are to offer supplications and prayers for all who are in positions of authority, that under them we might lead peaceable and quiet lives in all godliness, piety, and dignity—which ought to be the aspiration of all men.

It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate, when called thereunto. In the managing thereof, they ought especially to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each commonwealth. To that end, they may swiftly carry out the just retribution of the wicked, and may lawfully wage war, upon just and necessary occasion, for the defense of borders. We affirm the Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel.

(Genesis 9:5–7; 41:39–43; 1 Samuel 8:10–20; 2 Samuel 23:3–4; Nehemiah 12:26; 13:15–31; Psalm 2; 82; Proverbs 8:15–16; Ecclesiastes 8:11; Jeremiah 29:7; Daniel 2:48–49; Matthew 14:4; 16:18–19; 18:15–20; 22:21; 25:31; 28:18–20; Mark 12:17; Luke 3:14, 19; 19:11–27; Acts 5:29; 17:6–7; 24:25; Romans 1:5; 13:1–7; Ephesians 1:20–23; Philippians 2:11; 1 Thessalonians 4:10–12; 1 Timothy 2:1–4; Titus 3:1–2; 1 Peter 2:13–17)