Search
With this message we shall begin to consider the failures in the churches.
In the Bible there is a record not only of the positive things concerning the church but also a record of the failures in the churches. There are no failures in the universal church; however, there are failures in the local churches. All the failures come out of one source, and this source is Satan, who instigates the weak saints to cause all kinds of local problems. The universal church is heavenly, holy, and even divine. But when the universal church reaches a certain locality to be expressed in a local church, the church in that locality may become contaminated and polluted by certain local customs, practices, and philosophies. Therefore, the failures are not in the universal church but in the local churches which have been contaminated by the things of their localities. For this reason, in the New Testament there is not only a clear vision of the pure, holy, heavenly, and divine church but also a record of all the failures in the local churches.
The first failure in the churches was that of hypocrisy seen in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). Hypocrisy is a matter of pretending to be somebody in order to get a name that we may have vainglory. This is altogether related to ambition. Ambition, therefore, is the seed of the failures in the churches. We all should condemn ambition and not seek to get a name for ourselves in order to have vainglory.
Ananias and his wife Sapphira were seeking a position. They wanted to be somebody and to have a name so that they could enjoy vainglory. This was the cause of their hypocrisy. They did not offer everything to the church for the Lord’s sake but pretended to do this. As a result, although they were saved persons, they were condemned and suffered physical death.
Acts 5:1-11 indicates that two persons were making their residence in Ananias and Sapphira. First, the Spirit was no doubt dwelling in them. Because they were saved, the Holy Spirit had taken up His residence within them. Second, Satan was dwelling in them, for he had filled their hearts to lie to the Spirit (v. 3). Satan was not merely outside them but was in their hearts deceiving them and seducing them.
How could Satan have such ground within Ananias and Sapphira? Satan had this ground because of their ambition. The ground in Ananias and Sapphira that was the basis for Satan’s deception of them was their desire to have a name. They wanted to have the reputation of having sold everything for the church. Because of their ambition, they formed a plan. They sold a piece of property, kept some of the proceeds for themselves, and then brought a certain part and laid it at the feet of the apostles.
Satan is not far from us, and we need to be careful lest we be deceived by him. If we would avoid Satan’s deception, we must reject, condemn, and abandon the position to be somebody in the church life. Whenever we have the thought of being somebody in the church life, Satan has the ground to deceive us.
Ananias and Sapphira had the ambition to be somebody in the church; they had the ambition to have a name. Because of their ambition they were deceived, and that deception brought them into death. As the record indicates, both Ananias and Sapphira died physically.
Acts 5:4 indicates that selling possessions and distributing them to others was not considered by the apostles a practice of legality. The believers were not required to have all things common. That was something that should have been done willingly. If Ananias and Sapphira did not want to sell their property, they were not required to do so. Furthermore, the money from the sale was in their own authority. It would not have been sinful for them to keep their property or to keep the proceeds from the sale of the property. Their sin consisted in lying to the Holy Spirit. Their intention was to cheat the church and to get a name for themselves by lying. This was a gross sin that offended the indwelling Spirit. Their sin was a willing cooperation with Satan, the evil resident within them.
In 5:3 Peter told Ananias that he lied to the Holy Spirit. Then at the end of verse 4 Peter said to him, “You did not lie to men, but to God.” This proves that the Holy Spirit in verse 3 is God.
Later, when Peter was speaking to Sapphira, he said to her, “Why was it agreed together by you to test the Spirit of the Lord?” (v. 9). The Holy Spirit in verse 3, God in verse 4, and the Lord in verse 9 are all one, especially in the experience of the believers.
We should not think that the Spirit to whom Ananias and Sapphira lied was the Spirit in the heavens, the Spirit outside them. They did not lie merely to an objective Spirit; they lied to the very Spirit who was within them. If the Holy Spirit had not been within them, Peter would not have said that they had lied to the Holy Spirit. Both Satan and the Holy Spirit resided in Ananias and Sapphira at the same time.
The fact that Ananias and Sapphira suffered the punishment of physical death for lying to the Holy Spirit does not mean that they will suffer eternal perdition. Although Ananias and Sapphira were saved, they committed a sin unto death (1 John 5:16-17). In God’s governmental dealing, some of His children may be destined to physical death in this age due to a certain sin. This was the situation of Ananias and Sapphira, who were punished with physical death because of their lying to the Holy Spirit. Their case teaches us to be extremely careful about ambition and dishonesty in the church life.
Ananias and Sapphira pretended to be absolute for the Lord (vv. 3b-4a, 8). They pretended to give everything to the church. This was their hypocrisy, which was due to their ambition to be somebody and to have a name for vainglory.
The second failure in the churches was the failure of being overcome by racial difference. Acts 6:1 says, “In these days, when the disciples were multiplying, there was a murmuring of the Hellenists against the Hebrews, because their widows were overlooked in the daily dispensing.” The Hellenists were Jews who spoke Greek, and the Hebrews were Jews who spoke Hebrew. At the very beginning of the practice of the church life, there was a failure that seemed to be caused by different languages. Apparently the problem in the church at Jerusalem was a problem of language related to those who spoke Hebrew and those who spoke Greek. Actually, this was a problem not mainly of language but of race.
We know from Acts 2 that Jews had come from their dispersion to Jerusalem to keep the feast of Pentecost. Those who had been dispersed among other races gradually came to speak the languages of those races. Thus, when they came to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of Pentecost, they were not able to speak Hebrew but spoke their native languages. In particular, the Hellenists spoke Greek. The difference of language became a problem. Actually, the source of the trouble was not language but race. If all of mankind were of one race, there would probably be just one language. Different languages are the result of different races. According to Genesis 11, the source of this problem was Babel.
Since the time of Babel, mankind has been divided into different races that have formed their own nations and kingdoms. This division is the basic problem of the human race. According to Ephesians 2, the Lord Jesus on the cross abolished all the ordinances among the races. Nevertheless, the church at Jerusalem suffered from racial differences.
Acts 6:1 tells us that there was a murmuring of the Hellenists against the Hebrews, because their widows were overlooked in the daily dispensing. This indicates that the failure in being overcome by racial differences was in the matter of eating.
The problem in Acts 6 in the matter of eating caused the practice of having all things common (Acts 2:44-45) to wane. Eventually, that practice was discontinued because it did not work well. The reason the practice of having all things common did not work well was mainly the racial difference. The Hellenistic Jews were somehow despised and mistreated by the typical Jews. As a result, there was murmuring concerning the daily dispensing. This led to the waning of the practice of having all things common.
Another failure was that of bringing in the legal practices of the Old Testament (Acts 15:1-2). This damaged the church life in the first century during the lifetime of the first group of apostles.
Acts 15:1 says, “Certain men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” The men who came down from Judea had a strong purpose to exercise Judaic influence on the Gentile believers. The claim that unless one is circumcised according to the custom of Moses he cannot be saved is an annulling of the faith in God’s New Testament economy, and it is a real heresy.
Circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, and a particular diet are the three strongest ordinances according to the law of Moses that caused the Jews to be distinct and separate from the Gentiles, who are regarded by them as unclean. All these scriptural ordinances of the Old Testament dispensation became an obstacle to the spreading of the gospel to the Gentiles according to God’s New Testament dispensation (Col. 2:16). Acts 15:1 speaks of the custom of Moses. To keep the custom of Moses, that is, to practice the outward ordinances of the law, is not only to nullify the grace of God and make Christ’s death of no effect (Gal. 2:21), but also to bring the believers, whom Christ has set free, back to the slavery of law (Gal. 5:1; 2:4).
Circumcision was an outward ordinance inherited by the Jews from their forefathers, beginning from Abraham (Gen. 17:9-14). This ordinance made the Jews distinct and separate from the Gentiles. Circumcision became a dead, traditional formality, a mere mark on the flesh without any spiritual significance, and it became a great obstacle to the spread of God’s gospel according to His New Testament economy (Gal. 2:3-4; 6:12-13; Phil. 3:2). To be circumcised in God’s New Testament economy is to make Christ of no profit to the believers (Gal. 5:2).
The teaching that one must be circumcised in order to be saved annuls Christ’s redemption, God’s grace, and the entire New Testament economy of God. Therefore, in Acts 15 Paul and Barnabas could not tolerate this heresy, and they “had no little dissension and discussion” (v. 2) with those who had come down from Judea and taught it to the Christian brothers. Here Paul and Barnabas were contending for the faith (Jude 3) against one of the greatest heresies so that the truth of the gospel might remain with the believers (Gal. 2:5).
In Philippians 3:2 Paul uses the word “concision,” meaning “mutilation”; it is a contemptuous term for circumcision. Originally the word “circumcision” was a term of honor among Jews. But when the Apostle Paul wrote the Epistle to the Philippians, fleshly circumcision was no longer honorable but dishonorable. Therefore, he used the word concision, a term of despite.
In Philippians 3:2 Paul was very bold, saying, “Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the concision.” Since there is no conjunction used in this verse between these three clauses, they must refer to the same class of people. Dogs are unclean (Lev. 11:4-8), the workers are evil, and the concision are those deserving contempt. The “dogs” refer to the Judaizers. In nature they are unclean dogs, in behavior they are evil workers, and in religion they are the concision, people of shame. Paul certainly is very strong in charging the Philippians to beware of the dogs, the evil workers, the concision. Here Paul is saying that the Judaizers, those who promote circumcision, are dogs.
The legal practices of the Old Testament annul the believers’ freedom in Christ. In Galatians 2:3 and 4 Paul says, “Not even Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. And it was because of the false brothers, brought in secretly, who stole in to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into slavery.” The false brothers were the Judaizers who perverted the gospel of Christ by smuggling the ordinances of the law into the church. The freedom Paul speaks of here is freedom from the bondage of the law. Slavery here refers to slavery under the law.
The false brothers to whom Paul refused to be subject (v. 5) were spreading the concept that the believers had to be circumcised in order to be saved. Paul stood against this and did not yield even for an hour. He would not be subject to those who sought to damage our freedom in Christ and to bring us into slavery. To be free in Christ is to enjoy liberation from the bondage of the law with its requirement of circumcision. All the believers are now free from obligation to the law, especially from the obligation to be circumcised. In order to maintain this freedom, Paul refused to have Titus circumcised or to yield in subjection to the Judaizers.
In Galatians 2:12 and 13 Paul, referring to Peter, says, “Before some came from James, he ate with those of the nations; but when they came, he shrank back and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.” The fact that Peter shrank back proves that he was very weak in the pure Christian faith. He had received an exceedingly clear vision from the heavens concerning fellowship with the Gentiles, and he took the lead to put that vision into practice in Acts10. But here, out of fear of those of the circumcision, Peter backslid to shrink from eating with the Gentile believers. Paul specifically points out that Peter feared those of the circumcision.
In verse 13 Paul says, “The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy.” When Peter, the leading one, backslid, the rest easily followed. It is almost incredible that Peter, the leading apostle, practiced hypocrisy in relation to the truth of the gospel.
In verse 13 Paul points out that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. Barnabas participated in Paul’s first journey to preach the gospel to the Gentiles and to raise up the Gentile churches. Even one who had so much fellowship with the Gentile believers was carried away by Peter’s hypocrisy.
A very serious failure in the churches was the failure of compromising with Judaism (Acts 21:20-26). The Apostle James, a brother in the flesh of the Lord Jesus, was highly regarded for his piety. However, he took the lead to compromise the church with Judaism. This is recorded in Acts 21, which speaks of Paul’s last visit to Jerusalem. Paul went to Jerusalem with the intention of doing something to clear up the compromising situation there.
As Acts 21:20 indicates, James did not give Paul the opportunity to do anything. Although James and the other elders in Jerusalem glorified God for what He had done among the Gentiles through Paul’s ministry, they nevertheless said to him, “You observe, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews who have believed, and all are zealous for the law” (v. 20). This word indicates how the Jewish believers in Jerusalem still kept the law of Moses, still remained in the Old Testament dispensation, and still were strongly under the Judaic influence, mixing God’s New Testament economy with the out-of-date economy of the Old Testament.
Referring to the thousands of Jews who believed and were zealous for the law, James went on to say to Paul, “They have been instructed concerning you that you are teaching all the Jews throughout the nations apostasy from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children, nor to walk according to the customs” (v. 21). To leave the law of Moses, not to circumcise, and not to walk according to the customs of dead letters are really according to God’s New Testament economy. But these were considered by the unbelieving Jews and even by the Jewish believers in Christ to be apostasy from God’s Old Testament dispensation. But it certainly is not apostasy to put aside the Old Testament economy.
In 21:23b-24 we have the requirement James and the other elders made of Paul. “Four men are with us who have a vow on themselves; take these and be purified with them, and pay their expenses that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things of which they have been instructed concerning you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the law.” The vow mentioned in verse 23 was the Nazarite vow (Num. 6:2-5). For Paul to be purified with the Nazarites was to become a Nazarite with them, joining them in their vow. To take the Nazarite vow is a purification before God.
In addition to telling Paul to be purified with the four who had a vow on themselves, they told him to pay their expenses so that they might shave their heads. Paying their expenses refers to the cost of the offerings which a Nazarite had to pay for the completion of his purification (Num. 6:13-17).
Acts 21:26 says, “Then Paul took the men on the following day, and having been purified with them entered into the temple, giving notice of the completion of the days of the purification, until the offering was offered for each one of them.” Here we see that Paul participated in their Nazarite vow. In order to do this, Paul had to enter into the temple and remain there with the Nazarites until the completion of the seven days of the vow. Then the priest would offer the offerings for each one of them, including him. Paul surely was clear that such a practice was of the out-of-date dispensation, which, according to the principle of his teaching in the New Testament ministry, should be repudiated in God’s New Testament economy. Yet he went through with it, probably because of his Jewish background and because he was practicing his word in 1 Corinthians 9:20. However, his toleration jeopardized God’s New Testament economy, and this God would not tolerate.
The compromise with Judaism brought in the mixture of Judaism with God’s pure grace. In chapter twenty-one of Acts we see that James and the elders in Jerusalem had formed a mixture of God’s New Testament economy with the Old Testament dispensation. Actually James and the elders were even promoting this mixture. Of course, they did not neglect faith in Christ, but they were still zealous for the Old Testament. As a result, there was a religious mixture in Jerusalem.
This mixture spoiled the purity of the church life. The Jewish believers in Jerusalem had two practices: the old Judaic practice of Judaism and the practice of the semi-church life. Because of the compromise with Judaism, the purity of the church life was spoiled.
The compromise with Judaism damaged the pure testimony of Jesus Christ as the embodiment of God’s pure grace (John 1:17). The Lord Jesus came as the embodiment of the Triune God for men to receive Him as the all-inclusive grace which is sufficient to meet man’s need in every way. To compromise God’s grace of God’s New Testament economy with the keeping of any ordinance of the law of the Old Testament dispensation is a mixture of God’s grace with man’s work that nullifies the effect of all the Lord Jesus is and does for us. This was a trouble that transpired in the church at Jerusalem under James’ leadership.
The mixture of Judaic practices with God’s New Testament economy was not only erroneous in God’s dispensation but also abominable in the eyes of God. This gross mixture was terminated by God a mere ten years or so later in A.D. 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the center of Judaism, through Titus and his Roman army. This rescued the church and absolutely separated it from the devastation of Judaism.
Paul was God’s chosen vessel not only for the completion of His New Testament revelation (Col. 1:25) but also for the carrying out of His New Testament economy (Eph. 3:2, 7-8). God would not allow such a vessel to participate in the Nazarite vow, a serious Judaic practice. Paul might have intended in going to Jerusalem to clear up the Judaic influence on the church there, but God knew that it was incurable. Hence, in His sovereignty He allowed Paul to be arrested by the Jews and imprisoned by the Romans so that he might write his last eight Epistles, which completed the divine revelation and gave the church a clearer and deeper view concerning God’s New Testament economy (Eph. 3:3-4). Thus, God left the Judaic-influenced church in Jerusalem to remain as it was until the devastating mixture was terminated with the destruction of Jerusalem.
Because of the compromise with Judaism, the church in Jerusalem was polluted with a satanic mixture. Because this was intolerable, the church there was terminated by the judgment of God through the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army under Titus in A.D. 70. That destruction was a fulfillment of the Lord’s prophecy in Matthew 24. Along with the temple, the entire city of Jerusalem was leveled. That was the judgment God exercised upon rebellious Israel and also upon the compromising church. This judgment indicates that God will not allow His church to have any compromise. The church must be a pure golden lampstand without any dross or mixture. Once the church has mixture because of compromise, the church is polluted. God will terminate such a church. The church in Jerusalem was terminated so that its satanic mixture would no longer have any influence upon the believers.
