Search
Recently, a brother who teaches at the National Taiwan University came with his wife to seek fellowship concerning our joining him in a students’ work. I would like to fellowship with you brothers concerning the content of our conversation.
When this brother came to us, he told us that he has no problem with us in regard to our inward condition because we love the Lord, are for the Lord’s purpose, and want to live for the Lord. However, he also indicated that he is not able to have complete and thorough fellowship with us due to the matter of the local ground. He does not consider the local ground to be a serious matter. Moreover, if we were to disregard this matter, he would not have any problem with us. He said that the problem he has with us is entirely due to the matter of the local ground and that it has become a hindrance to our fellowship. In other words, because we find it difficult to participate in a work that does not take the local ground as a prerequisite, he has found it difficult to have thorough fellowship with us. Nevertheless, I felt to openly fellowship with him because he sincerely wanted to have thorough fellowship with us.
I felt to clearly present to him the burden within us. First, I pointed out the need to understand the condition of Christianity today. Intrinsically, we are all in unity and are even one because we are in the Lord and are for the Lord. The problem is not an inward matter; rather, it is in regard to what we want to accomplish outwardly.
There are two aspects related to the condition of Protestantism today. On the one hand, Christian workers have done much for the Lord by spreading the Lord’s name and the Lord’s word to people and by leading people to salvation. Even the Catholic Church has been involved with this temporary matter. However, we cannot deny that there is a negative aspect to their work — their erroneous truths and mixed practices have led believers astray, causing them to go further and further away from God’s purpose. Concerning the matter of fulfilling God’s purpose, much of what the Catholic Church has done is in the nature of destroying and tearing down. We all agree concerning this, and there is no room for debate. However, we should also admit that Protestantism has done much destructive work in relation to God’s purpose.
Under such circumstances we face a great dilemma. In the work of Christianity, if there were no aspect of destruction or tearing down but only a constructive building up, there would be no dilemma. Since all Christians work for the Lord, surely we should be able to work together. The problem, however, is that in addition to a constructive aspect, there is also a destructive aspect. On the one hand, we want to accomplish the constructive aspect, but on the other hand, we do not desire to be involved in the destructive aspect. As a result, we must have a cautious attitude in our work.
The brother acknowledged that organized Christianity is erroneous and deadened and that in its work there is a destructive aspect in regard to God’s will; nevertheless, he still hoped that we would labor with him. Although the purpose of his work is not to help any Christian organization, there are too many considerations that cause us to hesitate. He is asking us to confirm and even encourage his kind of work, but after much consideration we believe that his work may bring in much destruction.
We all acknowledge that God in His eternal plan desires to obtain a Body for His Son and a house for Himself. Both the Body and the house show that God has no intention for us to be individual Christians. The Christian life is a corporate life. Both the Christian living and the Christian work are corporate. The practical expression of the corporate life of Christians is their service in coordination.
In the New Testament God set up only one church in each locality as a practical representation and expression of His universal church. We do not question this truth because we strongly believe that it is correct. However, at present the condition of the church in every place is that of confusion and division. Hence, with regard to serving in coordination, it is difficult to know what to do.
If there were not a destructive aspect and only one church in each locality, it would be no problem for Christians to coordinate and work together. However, at present there is a destructive aspect in addition to many different groups. Consequently, when someone wants to work for the Lord, he needs to consider two aspects. On the one hand, he needs to choose the proper group, and on the other hand, he needs to consider whether the work is constructive.
In which group are we? Since we should not be individualistic, with whom should we serve in coordination? If there were only one church in a locality, we would simply work and serve with the believers there. However, in the present confusing situation we surely need to discern and examine the many Christian groups according to our understanding of the Bible. Once we find the group that is scriptural, we need to work and serve with them. As to whether or not we should participate in any other work outside of this group, we must examine and determine whether that work is constructive or destructive. This examination must be cautious. It is not only a question of whether or not we should participate but whether or not the work is constructive or destructive. There is a big difference between the two.
There are two principles of examination: our person and our burden. First, we need to see who we are; then we need to consider what we want to do. On the positive side, we must see a clear vision concerning God’s will. Not only do we need to see God’s eternal purpose, but we also need to see God’s purpose in this age, that is, what God wants to accomplish today. On the negative side, we need to know the part of Christianity that is constructive and the part that is destructive. We need to see all these matters clearly so that we will know what the degree of our involvement should be. This is not a simple matter. Therefore, whether or not we should be involved in a certain work depends on our person and then on our burden and attitude. What kind of work do we justify, and what kind of work do we condemn? There may be a constructive aspect, but if the destructive aspect is even greater, we must make the choice cautiously.
As the brother teaching at the National Taiwan University indicated, he has a problem related to the ground of the church. We have seen that God’s intention is related to the local ground, and we must be firm in this matter. Once brothers and sisters partake of the Lord’s table on this ground, something within them requires them to be separated from and not participate in the divisive and destructive work of Christianity. Even though our brother at the National Taiwan University loves the Lord and has the burden to do a particular work for the Lord, he is not clear concerning the local ground; thus, we are hesitant to labor with him.
For the sake of avoiding an argument, we feel to let him make the decision with whom to labor. May the Lord lead him to receive a clear vision of God’s eternal purpose and also to see the extent to which God disapproves of the condition of Christianity. At that time we will not only confirm but also encourage him in his work; nevertheless, because this is not yet his condition, it is difficult for us to give him a confirming word. Since the brother has doubts concerning the ground of locality, how can we confirm his work? We do not have the peace to do so, and he also has nothing to say.
After our fellowship with the brother, his wife said that although she was not altogether clear concerning the matter of the ground, she was willing to learn to submit to the church and to the authority of the church. Moreover, she was willing to serve and do things under the direction of the brothers. Although she was not clear, she was still willing to obey. Unlike his wife, however, this brother said that he would not submit to the church but would obey only God.
In regard to the authority of the church, our principle is that we do not require others to obey us; however, a person who works for the Lord should always obey the Lord’s truths. We should obey God, yet we should also obey His truths. Otherwise, we are not worthy to be the Lord’s workers or to work for Him.
To which truth do we refer? We refer to the truth regarding God’s desire to obtain a Body for His Son and to gain a house for Himself. Practically, God desires to have a group of Christians in every locality as a corporate expression of the Body of Christ and as His house. We cannot deny this truth. In this light, are we able to affirm that the many Christian groups in the different localities are such an expression? I do not believe that anyone would affirm this. Since we cannot affirm that these Christian groups are such an expression, is it possible to have such an expression? We need to believe that God’s word is never spoken in vain. What He says, He will fulfill. Therefore, in principle, when we go to a certain place, we should first look for such an expression. This is according to the truth.
The building up of the church in a locality is for the fulfillment of God’s eternal purpose. We should not think that this is impossible to achieve, simply because Christianity is in a state of great confusion. God always means business, and He never says that He will do anything that He cannot attain. This brother said that the expression of the church can be only temporary and cannot be eternal. This is altogether a rhetorical argument. I have said only that the local ground of the church is for the fulfillment of God’s eternal purpose; I never said that it is God’s eternal purpose. Even if we eliminated the word eternal and simply said that the expression of the local church is for the fulfillment of the Lord’s purpose, we would still need to take care of this matter because it is related to the Lord’s purpose.
After discussing these matters with him, the brother was still not willing to submit. He said that God’s eternal will is to obtain a Body to be His testimony. In this Body all the members are dependent upon one another. He also said that there is one Spirit in this Body and that no one can divide the Body. He spoke confidently and was right in regard to the positive side. Based on his word, I asked him, “Since this is the case, is there one church in Taipei today?” He said, “As far as the Spirit is concerned, the church is not divided.” I responded by telling him that because the Body is one and the Spirit is one, there cannot be division and there is no division. Nevertheless, consider today’s situation: Are all the Christians in Taipei one, or are they divided? We cannot deny that according to the present situation, they are divided. Who has divided this Body? In other words, who has divided the Spirit of God? He could not answer this question.
Ephesians 4:3-6 speaks of the church as the Body of Christ, the substance of which is the “oneness of the Spirit,” and it also speaks of the seven “ones” that keep the church in oneness. These seven “ones” are one Body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father. Christians know the truth concerning oneness, but I asked this brother whether or not this oneness has been practically lived out and expressed by the believers in Taipei. He had nothing to say.
Eventually, he told me that he had forsaken organized Christianity. Then I asked him, “Where are you today? Can you say that the Presbyterian Church is right and that you should be in it? Or can you say that the Baptist Church is right and that you should be in it? Where do you put yourself today?” He again had nothing to say but replied with a conventional answer: “I am in Christ.” I said to him, “This statement is in the air because it is too abstract. It is true that you are in Christ. But on the practical side, where do you serve God? In which group do you serve? In which kind of coordination do you serve? Where are you practically? With whom do you coordinate in the matter of serving the Lord?” He could not give an answer and was totally subdued in regard to this point.
As Christians, we should not be independent; rather, we need to serve corporately. Our service should be corporate, and our work should be in coordination. Where should we coordinate? Should we place ourselves in those groups that we consider to be wrong? Where should we place ourselves? Since we have a physical body, we must place ourselves somewhere. Where should we in Taipei place ourselves? If a person says that he is in the universal church, where is the universal church? Is it hanging in the air? It is too idealistic and impractical to say that a person is in the universal church. Practically, the universal church must be expressed in a definite location. Doctrinally, it is correct to say that we are in Christ and that the church is one and has the Spirit as her essence and cannot and must not be divided; nevertheless, how is this carried out? The only way is to have the local ground of the church.
This brother wanted to coordinate with us in carrying out his work. Since a local church must include all of God’s people within its locality, he hoped that he would be able to find co-workers from other groups as well. I told him that what he is trying to do can be likened to a person going to Martin Luther and telling him, “Brother, I think that you are the closest to God’s will, and my group is most connected to yours. Hence, I would like to coordinate with you in the work.” However, if this person also invited different ones from the Catholic Church to preach at Luther’s place, how could they have preached? Would it be logical for a brother to say that Luther was closest to God’s will and then invite people from the Catholic Church to come and preach in Luther’s group? In his day Luther opposed the Catholic Church. If someone on his side had been invited to preach in the Catholic Church, could that person have justified the Catholic Church? In the same principle, it is a contradiction that the brother from the National Taiwan University does not justify today’s organized Christianity, yet he desires to work among them.
When the Lord Jesus was on earth, He preached in the Jewish synagogues; Paul also preached there (Matt. 4:23; 13:54; Mark 1:39; Acts 13:5; 18:4). However, they did not confirm or strengthen the Jewish way of worship; rather, they urged the Jews to come out of the synagogues. The brother claimed that when the apostles went to the Jewish synagogues, they preached only Christ and not the ground of the church. This is correct. Indeed, the apostles preached Christ wherever they went, including in all the synagogues; however, when some in the synagogues believed in Christ, the apostles did not leave them there. The New Testament tells us clearly that the apostles gathered them together and established them as the church in their locality.
I asked this brother, “Since you labor in the various Christian groups and preach Christ there, when people receive the Christ whom you preach, where should they go?” He said, “They themselves need to receive the Lord’s leading.” Then I asked, “Where do you think the Lord will lead them? If some were to ask you this, how would you answer them?” He said, “I would not tell them where to go. One day the Lord will tell them.” I said, “What do you suppose the Lord will tell them? Where do you think the Lord will lead them? Do you think that the Lord will lead them into organizations that He condemns?” Eventually, he said, “No, the Lord will want them to come out of such organizations.” Then I questioned insistently, “So where will they go when they come out?” For this, the brother did not have an answer.
I then told the brother, “What you have said is too theoretical. We do not say that we should go everywhere to preach the ground of the church. How much do we actually preach the ground of the church? We mostly preach the Lord Jesus as Savior, as Christ, as the Head, as the Lord of all, and as the all-inclusive One. When we allow the Lord to work in us, things definitely happen. When people are enlightened to see what does not match God’s will and what is incompatible with what God desires, they leave and come out of those organizations. After these ones forsake these organizations, where should they go?”
I then continued, “You strongly disapprove of the ground of the church. But I would like to ask, If we forsake the ground of the church, where should we go? Should we go to your home?” On the one hand, he acknowledged that what I said was right, but on the other hand, he still disagreed with us, saying that we should not emphasize the ground of the church, or we would become like the Brethren, who claimed that only their ground is right and that the other grounds are wrong. I pointed out to him that the church is built in definite places; otherwise, the church would be something in the air, and we would have nowhere to meet. He said, “As long as there is a piece of land, we can meet there.” I said, “The ground of the church is our ‘land’; if we sell our ‘land’ and are without the ground, we will have nowhere to meet.”
Finally, I presented to him the same conclusion that I had spoken at the beginning. We cannot be merely individual Christians; we must be corporate Christians. Today among Christians there is division after division. We cannot accept these divisions. We must choose a place to be in order to serve with other saints. As to whether or not we should participate in a work carried out apart from the local church, we must carefully observe the group that is carrying out the work. We need to know whether the group is destructive or constructive. This is to care for not only the truth but also the practice.
Furthermore, we are absolutely different from the Brethren. First, the Brethren are exclusive, and we are not. The Brethren think that if a person does not leave the denominations and remains connected to them, he is a “companion of evil.” We do not think this way. If a brother is genuinely saved and comes to meet with us, we will receive him and break bread with him, even if he is wearing the robe of a Catholic priest. Second, the Brethren also think that whoever holds a different view in regard to the truth is “heretical” and cannot be received. We, however, pay attention only to the fundamental truths. Thus, we open the Lord’s table to all genuine believers; whoever is saved by believing in the Lord can partake of this table.
As far as the work is concerned, we cannot casually give approval to participate in the work of others. If someone wants to have mutual participation with us in a matter related to the work, we must first consider his person. Then we will decide. We do not want our trumpet to give two kinds of sound; once we give two kinds of sound, the work will be in confusion, and the result will not be profitable (1 Cor. 14:8). For example, the brother spoken of earlier breaks bread with us, and we are happy about this. However, he still has some disagreements and different opinions concerning the ground that we consider to be proper. Since his attitude is such, when we calmly consider the matter, we realize that we cannot participate with him in his work. How can we give him a confirmation regarding his view of the work? We have no intention to hurt his feelings. If this brother feels that he should work in other groups, this is a personal matter, and we leave it to him to decide.
On the other hand, if a person is clear regarding the ground of the church and the purpose of God, we will not only give him a confirmation but will also encourage him in the work. Some people, however, have a different opinion regarding the ground on which we stand. We cannot encourage them in the work. Moreover, if the work of a group of Christians was only constructive and not destructive, we would still encourage them in their work. However, the present condition of the work of most groups is in a state of confusion. On one hand, there is building up, but there is also tearing down. If a person is not clear concerning the ground and carries out the work in a negative situation, we do not have the confidence to encourage him in his work. This kind of consideration is not unreasonable.
While it may be easy for people to affirm that what they do is constructive and that they will not touch anything destructive, they may find that there are practical problems in carrying out their work. We do not want to speak of others’ faults, but according to what we know, the background of every group can become a problem in the work. For example, when the brother we are speaking of first came to Taipei, he met in a certain group for a few years. We are very clear about the background of this group. If we had wanted to speak of others’ faults, we would have told him a long time ago about the mistakes of that group. However, we waited until recently to share some facts with him, but only because he sought to have fellowship with us.
First, the founder of the group was a classmate of mine. He came from the same province as I. Originally, he intended to take the Brethren assembly as his base for establishing a Christian group in China. In the end, he did not succeed. In 1942 he came to Chefoo from Tsinan, the capital city of the province of Shantung. He cooperated with the Japanese military police to form a Christian organization that demanded that all Christian groups join it. We refused to join. Later, two of their representatives came to see me and said, “Are you ready to be a martyr? Are you ready to sacrifice yourself?” Nevertheless, I stood firm to reject them. When the Japanese military police decided to send some police to coerce me, my former classmate told them that he would see if I could be persuaded to join them, but if I should refuse, they should send the police. What kind of person is this? Why would the Japanese military police receive his suggestions?
Second, after he came to Taiwan, he still used the name Brethren Assembly. Upon learning of this, I inquired of him concerning this designation. He told me that when he came to Taipei, he had searched everywhere and could not find a place that was gathered into the Lord’s name; hence, he adopted the designation of Brethren. Was it ethical to do this?
Third, once he preached in Tamsui and said that I had come to Taiwan to establish churches and that because of this, he also came to Taiwan to establish churches. Now he seeks to copy whatever we do. The group under his leadership also copies whatever we do.
Fourth, he later went to Singapore and told the responsible ones in Singapore that he belonged to the local church. The brothers there were very happy, so they invited him to preach. Later, when the brothers became clear, they closed the door to him. He then established another group. With this kind of history, how can we feel at peace concerning his group? Seemingly, they love the Lord and are spiritual, but we are clear concerning their actual situation, and we surely cannot confirm the work of anyone working with them.
Many of the terms they adopt at present have been used by us in the recent years, and they were not formerly found in the Chinese language. For instance, the term the coordination of the Body is used almost exclusively by us. Although such terms are used almost exclusively by us, we would like others to also use them. However, this group opposes us to the uttermost, yet they borrow our terms. If you were directly involved, how would you feel? You can ask them concerning this matter. Did they receive these terms in their prayer or from their reading of the Scriptures? I have seen them do this same thing in mainland China. They imitate us completely without trying to conceal anything.
My conclusion is that the matter of the work is intricate. For example, in a human body, muscles and blood vessels all grow together in a coordinated way. Likewise, the work and the ground are interrelated. We must have a clear vision regarding this. Today it may seem that we always speak concerning the ground, and it may also seem that we are speaking of something abstract. However, if we do not speak concerning the local ground, we will have problems. If we do not pay attention to this matter, Satan will bring in mixture. We cannot be loose concerning the matter of the ground. Once we become loose, we will not be able to accomplish anything.
Let me use an illustration. If I offer tea to people, no one can hold the tea in his hands. A person needs a cup to hold the tea. Nevertheless, it seems that some people are so “extraordinary” that they attempt to drink tea without a cup. In other words, they hold themselves to be so “transcendent” that they consider it unspiritual to talk of the ground of the church or to mention the matter. This kind of transcendence is impractical because it provides no way to hold real spiritual content.
Some people may agree with us on many matters and want to labor with us; however, they may not want the ground. As a result, they remain in their own group. This is not forthright. If they think that their ground is right, they should remain and labor there. If their ground is not right, however, we cannot agree with their way. Our work has come to a turning point. If there is no place to contain the work, the work will not have a future.
Brother T. Austin-Sparks wrote us a letter of praise, saying that we have a condition and situation that cannot be found even in Honor Oak. Although he praised us for our condition, he also sought to disrupt our situation. This is paradoxical. This can be compared to someone appreciating the tea within a teapot while simultaneously trying to break the teapot. Without a teapot, how can the tea be contained? It is useless to do this.
It is difficult to fellowship concerning these matters because the main points are delicate. If we do not pay attention to the ground of the church, we will suffer loss in every respect. I hope that the brothers and sisters will pray for me. I am afraid that if I do not handle the matter properly, the brothers and sisters will not receive the benefit. All the meetings among us must be strengthened. The ground of the church is but the base for the practical expression of the church. When we come together to meet, we must express Christ. Where is Christ? He is in the fellowship, in our loving one another, and in the prayer. Hence, we must be strengthened in these aspects.
There are many brothers and sisters in Taipei who are indifferent. The reason they come to meet with us is that our meeting place is close to their home. They come to the meeting but do not receive an impression concerning why the Lord put them here. Because they do not have such a realization, we must continue to labor. It is futile to fight merely for the ground. We fight for the ground so that the church of God as the Body of Christ and the house of God can be expressed practically. Our prayer meetings should be for fighting the spiritual warfare and for doing “business.” On one hand, it is like going to a battlefield; on the other hand, it is like going to an office. If the saints come to the prayer meeting and sense that it is plain and boring, this kind of situation is not acceptable.
In 1940 for the first time in China the whole church went out to preach the gospel. The meetings began on Chinese New Year. In the evening of the two days before the gospel meeting, the whole church fasted and prayed. It was the warfare of the church. Those who were there can testify that all the saints came to pray girded at their waist. They put on the whole armor of God and aggressively took the offensive against the enemy. When the day came to preach the gospel, the morale was very strong, and we were as one person.
Let us take a look at the disciples’ prayer in Acts 4. It says that they lifted up their voice with one accord to God in prayer. After they prayed, the place in which they were gathered was shaken, and they were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak the word of God with boldness (vv. 24-31). Today the contents of our prayer meetings are not sufficiently rich. Outwardly, it has become somewhat like a Sunday service. This is not right, and God does not bless this. We must deal with the Lord, we must be desperate, and we must labor intensely to turn this situation around.
Although we always pay attention to the matter of the ground of the church, the ground of the church is for the expression of the universal Body of Christ and for the expression of the things in the spiritual realm. We must strive for genuine spiritual experiences. We should not make the local ground just a matter of doctrine; rather, we should stand on the local ground as the base for rich spiritual experiences. This is difficult to realize. The local ground is not merely a doctrine for someone to preach. The Brethren constantly fought over doctrines. All such fighting only makes people weary. Today many of the messages released from the podium allow people to sleep peacefully after listening to them. However, when we release messages, we need to stir people up. Perhaps they may think that they have not gained anything, yet when they go home they will not be able to sleep, because something in them will not sleep peacefully. This should be our attitude.
