All posts by Dan Vander Lugt

Why Are There So Many Christian Denominations?

Divisions in the church go back to the first century. In his first letter to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul lamented that strife and divisions had resulted in some saying, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos” ( 1 Corinthians 3:3 ).

Denominations, which could be called “formalized division,” began a little later in the Apostolic Church, when orthodox1 believers defended the teaching of the apostles against the distortion of the gospel with false teachings based on pagan2 or Jewish3 traditions.

Eventually the true church was firmly established on a foundation of essential doctrinal truth: belief in the deity of Christ and the Trinity, and acceptance of the established Canon of Scripture. This universal agreement of the early church was characterized by the Greek word katholikos, which meant “according to the whole.” The English term was “catholic,” and it meant the true church as accepted by genuine followers of Christ. Outside the catholic church were sects that denied important elements of truth: Gnostics, Ebionites, Montanists, Arians, Pelagians, and others. These were considered “unorthodox” (not accepting the right doctrines).

The two terms, catholic and orthodox, eventually came into common language as indicators of true Christian belief. Sadly, however, they also became the names of the first denominations: A separation occurred within the church in 1054 when the Greek-speaking church of the east separated from the Latin-based church in the west over a number of political and cultural differences, along with some relatively minor doctrinal disputes. The church in the east became known as the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the church in the west was called the Roman Catholic Church. These main divisions continue to the present.

Later, reformers among the Roman Catholics felt a need for spiritual renewal and correction within church. They especially protested the addition of non-biblical tradition to the Bible as essential to the faith and practice of Christianity. These protesting reformers eventually brought about a second major separation. From this “Protestant Reformation” came Lutheran, Calvinist, Baptist, and other denominations.

Finally, in the first part of the 20th Century, the Pentecostal Movement came into bloom. This group of Christians were convinced that all the gifts given by the Holy Spirit to the followers of Christ at Pentecost (the dramatic moment when God’s Holy Spirit descended upon the Christians fifty days after Jesus’ ascension) must be evident in the life of believers today. The Greek word for divine gift is kharisma; hence the term “charismatic” is often used to describe this group of denominations. The additional bestowal of some of these gifts after one accepts Christ as one’s personal Savior is often referred to as the “second blessing.” 4

While there are differences between the denominations, most of the basic doctrines agreed upon by the early catholic church are still accepted by all. For example, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, most Protestants, and most charismatic groups believe in the Trinity and in the Deity of Christ—established by the church councils of Nicaea and Chalcedon. All orthodox Christian denominations agree that Jesus Christ, the God-man, died to atone for the sins of the world, and was raised from the grave to break the power of Satan and death.

With the exception of the reference to Christ descending to hell, the principles contained within the Apostles’ Creed, taken primarily from the old Roman Creed, are also universally accepted. This creed is recited in hundreds of thousands of Christian churches around the world every Sunday, regardless of denomination:

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ His only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Christian church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

It is important not to become so preoccupied with the minor differences between the denominations that we overlook their broad areas of agreement. While some of the doctrinal differences that exist have produced serious perversions of the Gospel, there are other aspects to the presence of a wide range of viewpoints that are positive. Because of denominational differences, there are a variety of practical approaches to Christian living. While this fragmentation makes it more difficult for the world to see the unity of the Body of Christ, it’s also true that these groupings make it harder for the church as a whole to become mired in ritual and formalism than would be the case if one denomination dominated Christian life. As a source of more information regarding Christian denominations, we recommend A History of the Christian Church by Williston Walker (Scribners). We also recommend the books of outstanding historian, Kenneth Scott Latourette.

  1. Orthodox is a term taken directly from the Greek language. It simply means “correct belief.” Any church is considered to be orthodox in the broadest sense if it accepts the formulations of doctrine that were made by the major councils of the early Church such as those held in Nicaea in 325 and in Chalcedon in 451. These decisions settled such important doctrinal issues as Christ’s Deity and the unity of His personhood while possessing two natures (human and divine). Back To Article
  2. Eerdman’s Handbook to the Bible makes this observation regarding early pagan influences in the church:
    About the time the New Testament letters were being written there began to develop a number of sects which later (in the 2nd century) came under the general heading of “Gnosticism.” They varied considerably in detail, but shared the basic belief that “matter” was evil and spirit was good. It followed that God could not have created the world out of matter, nor could his Son have become incarnate in it. So they envisaged a whole range of subordinate beings between God and the world. Humanity shares in the evil of the material world, but they also (or some of them) contain a divine spark which can be set free and thus redeemed. In order to be redeemed they need to have knowledge (Greek gnosis) of their heavenly origin. These views were expressed in fantastic myths and made known to initiates in sects like those of the mystery religions. Back To Article
  3. The pernicious influence of Judaizers is vehemently denounced by Paul in Galatians 5:1-8 and Philippians 3:1-7. Back To Article
  4. The doctrine of the “second work of grace” or “second blessing” is rooted in the Wesleyan/Armenian tradition. It maintains that we can, if faithful, experience a special time of spiritual growth and renewal. Because the Bible teaches that sanctification is a progressive experience, it is certainly possible that some people will have a wonderful season of renewal that could be called a “second blessing.” However, Scripture nowhere indicates that all Christians will experience this. Many Christians experience the steady growth in their lives that can only be attributed to the power of God’s Spirit.
    The Bible teaches a three-fold aspect of sanctification. First, there is a positional aspect in which every believer is sanctified or set apart for God at the moment of salvation ( 1 Corinthians 1:30; Philippians 1:1; Hebrews 3:1 ). Second, there is a progressive aspect of sanctification in which believers are being sanctified by the work of the Holy Spirit through the Scriptures ( John 17:17; 2 Corinthians 3:18; Ephesians 5:25,26; 1 Thessalonians 5:23,24 ). And third, there is the consummation at the return of Christ when our sanctification will be complete. We shall be in the likeness of Jesus Christ ( Ephesians 5:27; 1 John 3:2; 1 Corinthians 15:51-53 ). Back To Article
Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (11 votes, average: 3.73 out of 5)
Loading...

Do I Have to Attend a Local Church To Be Considered Part of the Body of Christ?

Some people deny that the Scriptures make a distinction between the local, organized church and the universal, spiritual church, claiming that every time the church is mentioned in the New Testament the reference is to the local church. There are, however, practical,common-sense reasons to distinguish between them. In Jesus’ parable of the wheat and the tares ( Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43 ), false Christians (the tares) are portrayed as hidden within the organized, visible church until the end of the age when Jesus and His angels will remove the tares from the wheat. In addition, when the apostles told new converts how they could be saved, they never made involvement with the church or membership in a church a condition ( Acts 3:12-26; 16:30-31 ).

Since some people within the local, visible church are not true believers and some true believers may not yet be associated with a local church, it seems clear that it is possible for people to be part of the body of Christ (as believers in Christ) even if they are not part of the organized, earthly church. Likewise, it seems apparent that a person can be part of a local, organized church and still not be a part of Christ’s true, universal church.

Some groups, such as the Quakers and the Plymouth Brethren, minimize the importance of membership in the institutional church by pointing to the corruption that has always existed within it. They stress the relationship of the believer to God through Christ and avoid the establishment of membership roles and formal patterns of leadership or organization.

Others, like the Roman Catholic Church, believe they can trace their beginning to the establishment of the church by Christ ( Matthew 16:18 ) and claim that they have inherited from the apostles the authority to forgive sins and convey the saving grace of Christ. They believe that the personal spiritual condition of the ministering authorities is irrelevant, as long as they are the duly appointed representatives of the institutional church.

Probably a middle position is best, recognizing that while the local church isn’t necessary for salvation, it plays an essential role as a source of applied doctrinal teaching and fellowship, a place of service and prayer, and as an authority for discipline.

The fact that hypocrisy exists within the visible, institutional, local church doesn’t justify a blanket condemnation of the church and its work. The earliest believers saw a need for united prayer, study, and fellowship ( Acts 2:41-47 ). The writer of Hebrews actually warned people not to forsake the assembling of themselves together ( Hebrews 10:25 ). The apostle Paul emphasized the interdependency of believers by describing how every believer is gifted spiritually in ways that build up other believers ( Romans 12:1-8; 1Corinthians 12:12-27; Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Peter 4:10-11 ).

People who willingly ignore or disregard church fellowship imply that they have no need of the spiritual gifts God has bestowed on others for the common good ( Romans 12:1-8; 1 Corinthians 12:1-31 ). Just as we are born into a family for our care and nurture as infants, so believers are born into the family of God and need more mature Christians to nurture them in their years of immaturity ( 1 Corinthians 3:1-15 ).

Participation in a local church, with a realistic eye toward the shortcomings of all institutions and other believers, is the best way that we can grow spiritually and help build God’s kingdom.

Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...

Why Should I Get Involved in the Imperfect Church?

Selfishness, hypocrisy, and other “people problems” in church can be discouraging. But selfishness and hypocrisy shouldn’t drive us away from church involvement. Rather, it should make us aware of how much we all need it!

As children, we grow up in a world governed by adult authority figures who appear all-knowing, just, and wise. But as we approach adulthood, we learn how flawed and imperfect adult authority is. This awareness creates disillusionment, some of it painful. Disillusionment often turns into rebellion. As teenagers, most of us rebel to one degree or another against adults we perceive as arbitrary and unloving.

If we are fortunate enough to have loving parents, we are encouraged to “work through” our rebellion and anger. As we gradually mature into adulthood, we become aware of our own imperfections and conflicting ideals. This awareness of our own imperfection usually has the effect of humbling us, making us more realistic, and changing our rebellion into understanding and forgiveness.

Organizations, whether secular or religious, are made up of imperfect people. As adults we sometimes continue to expect perfection from organizations long after we have stopped expecting it from other individuals or ourselves. But just as teenagers grow into adults,Christians mature in their relationship with Christ. As we mature, we begin to discover how much we owe to God’s grace and how little we earn through our own efforts. This makes it easier to see how God is able to use His church, which, like us, can serve as an instrument of divine grace in spite of imperfection and sin.

Sinful individuals or a sinful church can’t produce lasting effects for the kingdom of God, but the power of God’s Spirit working through them can! ( 2 Corinthians 4:7 ). As Jesus said, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance” ( Mark 2:15-17 ). If we were all perfect we wouldn’t need the church. It is our imperfection that calls for the purifying process of membership in the body of Christ. Our mission is to love each other ( 1 Peter 4:8 ) in such a way that we gain the spiritual strength that can only be developed in union with other believers ( Ephesians 4:14-16 ).

We shouldn’t overlook the hypocrisy and problems that exist in the church. We need to do what we can to confront and deal with them in loving ways. The apostle Paul was probably as aware of hypocrisy and imperfection within the church as anyone who ever lived, yet he wrote:

Bear one another’s burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But let each one examine his own work, and then he will have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. For each one shall bear his own load (Galatians 6:2-5).

Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4 votes, average: 3.25 out of 5)
Loading...

How Important Is Good Personal Character to Effective Leadership?

Some people don’t think it is very important. Since leadership requires flexibility, some think that a person with high ideals and deep moral convictions will be less pragmatic or realistic than a person with fewer scruples.

In the short term it’s undeniable that unscrupulous people sometimes have an advantage. People often find personal accountability and a long-range vision less appealing than immediate advantages and an opportunity to fall in line behind a charismatic leader.1

The psalmist eloquently described the temporary success of the wicked ( Psalm 37:35; 73:3 ). Jesus also recognized the short-term advantages of the unprincipled ( Luke 16:8 ). But although unprincipled people in power may gain quick success, they and their followers always reap the consequences of their immorality and opportunism. The Old Testament writers vividly described the results of evil leadership ( Psalm 7:11-16; 9:15; 37:7-15 ; Proverbs 28:10; 29:6 ; Ecclesiastes 10:5-9 ), as did Jesus ( Matthew 6:23; 15:14; 23:15 ; Luke 6:39-40; 11:34 ).

In the long term, however, a person of integrity has the advantage. Good character may limit a person’s options at times, but wisdom flows from good character (In the long term, however, a person of integrity has the advantage. Good character may limit a person’s options at times, but wisdom flows from good character ( Job 28:28 ; Psalm 1:1-4; 111:10 ; Proverbs 3:3-4 ). Furthermore, a good person doesn’t have to be naive. Jesus told His disciples to be “as wise as serpents but gentle as doves.” Because they live as sheep in the midst of wolves ( Matthew 10:16 ), Christians need to be able to understand the mind of a predator (“wise as a serpent”), while remaining gentle and uncorrupted within (“harmless as a dove”). A truly effective leader — and especially a Christian leader — won’t be characterized by inflexibility but by his steady, underlying motivation ( Matthew 20:25-28; 23:8-12 ). Dedication to principle and genuine concern for others may on occasion be a short-term disadvantage, but in the long run it will attract loyal followers, create lasting success, and earn the blessing of God (Psalm 37:34 ; Isaiah 40:31 ; Galatians 6:9).

  1. This is why the people of Israel insisted on having a king, against the counsel of the prophet Samuel ( 1 Samuel 8:7-8,19-20 ). Back To Article
Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 3.67 out of 5)
Loading...

Does the Bible Permit Divorced Persons to Serve as Church Leaders?

Bible students differ in their interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:2 and 1 Timothy 3:12 . In Greek, the expression translated in the Authorized Version “husband of one wife” actually reads “one-woman man.” Some pastors believe this passage teaches that a man who has been divorced or widowed and subsequently remarried should not be allowed to serve as an elder or as a deacon.

Others believe that marriage is an actual requirement for a man if he is to serve as a deacon or an elder. Still others allow a remarried widower or a single man to serve as a deacon or an elder but believe that this passage bars a man from serving in these roles if he has been divorced and remarried.

Because of the wide range of possible interpretations of the “one-woman man” criterion, it’s important to view it in the context of the other New Testament standards for the selection of church leaders. In addition to being a “one-woman man” (husband of one wife), 1 Timothy 3:2-7 lists all of the following qualifications:

  • blameless
  • temperate
  • self-controlled
  • respectable
  • hospitable
  • an apt teacher (teachable)
  • not given to drunkenness
  • gentle
  • not quarrelsome
  • not greedy or covetous
  • a good manager of his household and children
  • a seasoned believer
  • a good reputation with outsiders

A reasonable interpretation of “one-woman man” is one that is in agreement with the other criteria.

Jesus named adultery the only basis for divorce and remarriage( Matthew 5:32 ; Mark 10:11 ). What if a man were divorced prior to his conversion? Would the “one-woman man” requirement forever exclude him from church leadership, while a converted murderer or embezzler would be eligible? What if a Christian man and his children were abandoned by an unfaithful wife, in spite of his extraordinary efforts to preserve their marriage? If he has biblical grounds for divorce and remarriage, consequently remarries, and meets all of the other leadership standards in the view of his church, would his divorce and remarriage permanently exclude him from a position of leadership?

The key point in interpreting the “one-woman man” standard is that when a single qualification can be reasonably interpreted in a variety of ways, it becomes necessary to understand it in the light of the entire list of qualifications. If a local congregation knows that a man’s divorce had truly biblical grounds and considers him “blameless” and well-qualified upon the basis of all the other criteria, they may consider him a “one-woman man” even though remarried.

Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (50 votes, average: 3.62 out of 5)
Loading...