Search
In the past several chapters we have covered the reality and practicality of the church. We have seen that the church is one in substance, one in existence, and one in manifestation. The church is one substantially both universally and locally. Apart from God, nothing in the universe is more one than the church. The church is an entity of oneness.
The church is one universally and locally. There is just one church. Universally, the church is one in existence, and locally the church is one in manifestation. The church in the universe is one, and the church manifested in a locality is also one. The Lord’s word, “Upon this rock I will build My church” (Matt. 16:18), is related to the universal church. Following this, in Matthew 18 the Lord spoke about the manifestation of the church in a locality. If two or three cannot solve a problem themselves, they should tell it to the church. This certainly is not the universal church but the church in the locality where those believers live. In the four Gospels the Lord mentioned the church twice, once for the universal aspect and once for the local aspect.
In the book of Acts the church is not mentioned in a universal way but in a local way. Acts 8:1 speaks of the church in Jerusalem, not the church in the universe. Acts 13:1 speaks of the church in another locality, the church in Antioch. We know from Revelation 1:11 that there were seven churches in seven cities in Asia Minor: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. Churches were also raised up in Europe. For example, there was a church in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:2). It is clearly portrayed in the Bible that the church is universally one in its existence and locally one in its manifestation. Wherever the church is, it is always one. Although there is just one universal church, in the many cities there are the many local churches, with one church in each city.
Although the picture regarding the church in the Bible is clear, the history and present situation of Christianity give us another picture—a picture of divisions. Instead of one church in a locality, there are numerous divisions. But according to the Bible it is wrong to say that there are many “churches” in a locality. This is against God’s economy. What are called the many “churches” in a locality are actually divisions. Using other terms, we may say that they are denominations, sects, groups, or organizations. This is what we see everywhere in Christianity today.
As we stand here as the church in Anaheim, some say that we are merely another division. They claim that our coming here simply added another to the list of divisions. Someone might say to you, “I am a pastor of a certain group in this city. I have heard that you people say that you are the church and that we are not the church but rather are Babylon or organized Christianity. I don’t agree with this. Am I not a real Christian? I was reborn before you were born. Since we all are Christian brothers, why do you say that you are the church and that we are not the church? It seems to me that you are simply another Christian group. You have added yourselves to the number of churches already in this city. Why did you come here? Why don’t you go to a place where there is no church at all and be the unique group there? Why do you come here to trouble us?” In order to answer questions like these, we must know what constitutes a sect, a division, or a denomination.
A division is called a denomination because it has been denominated by a particular name. Hence, the first factor of a denomination is a special name. Neither the sun nor the moon has a particular name. The sun is the sun, and the moon is the moon. I have never heard of anyone giving a name to the sun or the moon. Neither the sun nor the moon needs a name. Wherever I am, in the United States, Europe, or the Far East, the moon is the moon, and the sun is the sun. At most I can speak of the moon in Sydney, the moon in Paris, or the moon in Anaheim. To give a special name to a certain group of Christians is to constitute them a sect, a denomination. It makes them a denominated sect, a divisive sect with a particular name.
Any Christian group that has a particular name is a division, a sect. We should have no name other than the name of the Lord Jesus. We have believed in His name, and we have been baptized into His name, and now we are meeting in His name. Never think that the matter of the name is insignificant. I must use my name in all that I do. To use another name is deceitful. Never think that it makes no difference what you call yourself, whether you say that you are Mr. Jones or Mr. Smith. It is terrible to do this. My name is Witness Lee. You cannot call me Mr. Jones. The name means everything. If an inheritance were granted to me in my name, Witness Lee, but I call myself Mr. Jones, I would lose the right to claim and enjoy this inheritance.
Never neglect this matter of the name. To take any name other than the name of the Lord Jesus is a form of spiritual fornication. How wrong it would be for my wife, Mrs. Witness Lee, to go by the name of another man! For a married woman to take another name is fornication. Never think that this matter is insignificant. The Lord Jesus praised the church in Philadelphia because they did not deny His name (Rev. 3:8). All the denominations have denied the Lord’s name, because in addition to His name, they have taken names such as Baptist, Episcopalian, Lutheran, and Presbyterian. In taking these other names, the denominations have committed spiritual fornication. If we honor the Lord and sincerely mean business with Him, we would certainly forsake every name other than that of the Lord Jesus. We have been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. In addressing the contentious ones in the church at Corinth, Paul said, “Now I mean this, that each of you says, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized into the name of Paul?” (1 Cor. 1:12-13). Here Paul seemed to be saying, “Why do you say that you are of Paul? You must never say this. You were not baptized into my name—you were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. You must not be under any other name.”
We have been baptized into the unique name, the name above every name, and we have also been called into the fellowship of the Son of God (v. 9). This fellowship of the Lord Jesus Christ has become the fellowship of the apostles (Acts 2:42). First John 1:3 says, “That which we have seen and heard we report also to you that you also may have fellowship with us, and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.” The we and the us mentioned in this verse refer to the apostles. The apostle John seemed to be saying, “We, the apostles, have reported to you the divine life. In this life you may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship is with the Father and the Son.” This fellowship is also called communion or participation. The meaning is the same. Whatever term we use, there is something called fellowship, the common participation in Christ, which is common to all believers in Him. Whoever has believed into Him is now in the fellowship of our wonderful Lord. This fellowship is common to you, to me, and to every regenerated one. However, many Christians do not have this unique fellowship. Rather, they have a different so-called fellowship, a special fellowship. Every special fellowship constitutes a division. Some Christians may not be denominated; that is, they may not have a name for their group, but they do have a particular fellowship. Their fellowship is not as large as the common fellowship of the Son of God. Instead, it is small and particular.
Let me give some illustrations from my own experience. When I was young, my mother was a Southern Baptist. The Southern Baptist denomination that she attended had communion only a few times a year. Whenever they had communion, they made a strong, serious, and solemn announcement to the effect that anyone who did not belong to the Southern Baptist denomination could not participate in their communion service. When some who were not members wanted to take communion, the pastor told them that they had to wait, pass an examination, and be immersed by them. One man said that he had already been immersed, but the pastor said, “We don’t care how many times you have been immersed. If you want to take the holy communion with us, then you must be baptized by us. If you are unwilling to do this, then you are not welcome to share holy communion with us.” This illustrates the fact that those Baptists had a particular fellowship. Although the Southern Baptists in the United States make up nearly one fourth of the total number of regenerated ones, they still do not have the common fellowship. Their fellowship is particular, and it constitutes them a division.
Some groups do not have a name, but they have a particular teaching that produces a particular fellowship. For example, some groups believe that all the saints will be raptured before the great tribulation. Anyone who does not hold this concept must repent of his doctrine before he can fellowship with this group. By this we see that the group insisting on the belief in the pretribulation rapture does not have just the common faith (Titus 1:4). In addition to the common faith, they hold to the belief in the pretribulation rapture. This particular teaching produces a particular fellowship, and this particular fellowship constitutes a division.
Other Christian groups insist upon foot-washing and head covering. When some Christians come to the Lord’s table, they always wash one another’s feet. If you are not willing to participate in this foot-washing, you have no right to join them in their holy communion. Hence, they also are a division. Some Brethren groups insist that all women wear a head covering. For a woman to have her head uncovered indicates that she does not agree with their belief. These Brethren have the common faith plus the belief in head covering. This results in a particular fellowship, a factor that makes them a division. Therefore, a name, a particular fellowship, and a particular teaching are causes of division.
Nearly every Christian group has a particular teaching or doctrine. The Baptists have a strong teaching on immersion; the Seventh-day Adventists, on the Sabbath; and the charismatic groups emphasize the manifestation of gifts, especially speaking in tongues. All these special teachings constitute these groups sects, divisions.
Thus far, we have seen three causes of division—a particular name, a particular fellowship, and a particular teaching. Just one of these items is sufficient to constitute a group a division. As long as you have either a particular name, a particular fellowship, or a particular teaching, you are a division.
We who are standing here as the church do not have a particular name. Do not think that the term local church is our name. This is not our name. It is right to say that we are the local church, but it is wrong to say that the local church is our name. This term describes the nature of the church. Do not give people the impression that our name is the local church. The local church in a city should consist of all the believers in that city. But we say with sadness that many dear saints are far away from their home in the church. We do not have any name. For the sake of communication and for registration with the government, we may say that we are the church in Anaheim. But not even this should be construed as a name. Do your best to avoid using terms that may be misunderstood as being our name. We do not need a name, and we do not want to have one.
In the Lord’s recovery we do not have any particular teaching. Some may say, “Brother Lee, have you not emphasized the matter of the church over the years? Isn’t your teaching about the church particular?” Certainly not. Although I have repeatedly ministered regarding the church, my teaching concerning it is not particular. My speaking about the church is like telling people that they must breathe—it is common and not particular. We only emphasize things that are common, not things that are particular. I could say over and over again that you must believe in the Lord Jesus and that you must live by Him. Although I may tell you a thousand times that you need to live by Christ, this is not a particular teaching. However, if I insist upon immersion and that only our immersion avails, that would be a particular teaching. Also, if I required you to speak in tongues and taught that unless you did so, you did not have the baptism of the Spirit, that would be a particular teaching. To say that we need the church is not to teach a particular doctrine. It is like saying that we all need a home. You cannot wander in the street—you must have a proper life in your home. To tell people that they all should have a home is not a particular teaching. However, to say that you must cut your hair in a certain way is to give a particular teaching. I hope that we all can make this differentiation.
No teaching in the Lord’s recovery is particular. Rather, we say that the Bible is the holy Word verbally inspired by the Holy Spirit. Is this a particular teaching? Of course not. We also say that our God is triune—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit—that the Son of God became flesh to be our Savior, and that He died on the cross for our redemption. I have been preaching these things for more than forty-five years. They absolutely are not particular teachings. Furthermore, we tell people that today the Lord Jesus Christ is our life in our spirit and that we must love Him, live by Him, and walk according to Him. We also say that everyone who has been reborn has the life of the Lord Jesus and is a member of His Body. We teach that God’s intention is to have a proper church life on earth to express His Son for His glory. These are not particular teachings. However, teachings such as foot-washing, head covering, immersion, and pretribulation rapture are particular teachings.
In the church we receive all genuine Christians. We receive those who speak in tongues and those who do not speak in tongues, those who have been immersed and those who have been sprinkled, those who wear a head covering and those who do not wear a head covering, those who practice foot-washing and those who do not practice foot-washing. In fact, we would receive even Catholic nuns and priests who are true believers in the Lord Jesus. We receive all Christians, no matter what kind of Christians they are.
It seems that no two Christians are the same in opinion. They all have different opinions about various matters. Praise the Lord that in the church we do not touch these differing opinions. We all have locked our opinions away, knowing that if we bring them into the church, they will cause division. We only care that people believe in the Lord Jesus, are saved, and love Him. We would encourage them all to go on by loving the Lord, by growing in His life, and by realizing the proper church life to satisfy the desire of God’s heart.
There may be some Christian groups who claim to have no particular name, fellowship, or teaching. They declare that they hate any name other than the name of the Lord Jesus and that they do not hold any particular fellowship or teaching. Rather, they receive all kinds of genuine Christians. If this is the case, then we must check three other matters, none of which is simple. First, we must see what kind of fellowship they have. Although they may not have a particular fellowship, their fellowship may be isolated, not universal. Although they receive all true Christians, they do not fellowship with any other churches. Their fellowship is very limited and isolated in their own realm. It is not universal or even fully local. This makes them a sect. Such a group is not a local church—it is a local sect. This matter is very delicate, and few are able to perceive it. It is easy to see that those with a particular name, a particular fellowship, and a particular teaching are sects. But it is difficult to see that a group without these things may still be a sect if its fellowship is isolated. Although such a group claims to be the church in its locality, it is actually a local sect.
There may be a group that has no particular name, teaching, or fellowship, and whose fellowship is not isolated. Nevertheless, they may insist on having a separate administration, a separate eldership. This separate eldership constitutes them a division. No matter how many believers there may be in a particular church, the church in that locality must be under one eldership with one administration. The city of Anaheim has one mayor and one city hall. The city of New York, which is vastly greater than Anaheim, still has just one mayor and one city hall. If the city of New York had more than one mayor, it would be a sign that the city had been divided. Although there were tens of thousands of believers in Jerusalem (Acts 21:20) and although they met in various homes, they had only one set of elders. There was still just one eldership, one administration.
Suppose there is in Anaheim a group of Christians whose practice closely resembles ours. They have no particular name, fellowship, or teaching, and their fellowship is open to all, to the whole church throughout the world. Nevertheless, they insist on keeping a separate eldership with a separate administration. Because that separate administration is a cause of division, this group is also a sect. If there are two administrations in a city, then there are two “churches” in the city. It is like having two mayors and two administrations in one city. If this is the case, then that city must be divided. From all these points we can see that it is not a simple matter to know the church.
One other factor is a test of a genuine local church. There may be a Christian group that has no particular name, no particular fellowship, and no particular teaching. Their fellowship is universal, not isolated, and they do not have a separate administration. Although they pass all these tests, do not be quick to say that they are a true local church. It is still possible that this group has a hidden connection with another organization. They are like a kite in the air: someone on the ground is holding the string. How high the kite flies does not depend upon the kite; it depends upon the one holding the string. In the past we were cheated by people like this, and we suffered as a result. One group said, “We are exactly the same as you. We have no particular name, particular teaching, or particular fellowship. Our fellowship is universal, and we do not insist upon having a separate administration.” When we heard this, we thought it was wonderful. However, we eventually learned that this group was connected to an organization in England. The kite was flying in China, but the one who held the string was in England.
The church is a pure golden lampstand, but any group that has a hidden connection with another organization is not pure. Rather, it is cloudy, opaque. The church, on the contrary, must be transparent and crystal clear. The New Jerusalem is a transparent city. Even the gold in the New Jerusalem is clear as glass (Rev. 21:18). In this city there is nothing opaque.
Whenever you meet a Christian group, you must check whether it has a particular name, a particular fellowship, a particular teaching, a fellowship that is not universal, a separate administration, or a hidden connection with another organization. If any group can pass all six tests, then the group must be all right. But if you apply these tests to today’s Christian groups, every one of them would be exposed and fall short.
The church in Jerusalem had no particular name, no particular teaching, and no particular fellowship. The flow of the church eventually spread to Antioch. The church in Antioch also had no particular name, fellowship, or teaching. Their fellowship was open to all the churches universally, they had one set of elders, and they had no hidden connections. The church in Ephesus was the same in these matters as the church in Jerusalem and the church in Antioch. Eventually, the flow of the church went to Corinth. We have seen that in 1 Corinthians Paul dealt with the contentions in this church. Paul caught this matter in time, the Corinthians were helped, and the divisions did not actually take place. Let us suppose, however, that four divisions actually occurred. Thus, in addition to those standing as the church in Corinth, there would be the church of Paul, the church of Apollos, the church of Cephas, and the church of Christ. If you were a brother visiting the city of Corinth, to which of these “churches” would you go? Suppose the total number of Christians in Corinth was a thousand, with two hundred fifty in the church of Paul, three hundred fifty in the church of Apollos, one hundred twenty-five in the church of Cephas, one hundred in the church of Christ, and the remainder, seventy-five, in the church in Corinth. Of these five groups, four are divisions and one, composed of the seventy-five standing as the church in Corinth, is the church. Suppose one of the seventy-five in the church at Corinth would say that they are the church and that the others are not the church, and that the pastor of the “Pauline” church would say, “Don’t you think that we believe in the Bible? We believe in the church just as much as you do. Why do you say that you are the church and that we are not the church?” A good answer would be this: “Brother, if you want to be the church, simply drop your title, and you will immediately become the church. If you find it impossible to drop the title, then leave your divisive circle and return to the proper standing. As soon as you do this, you will be in the church.”
Due to the division and scattering among today’s Christians, not all Christians are the church. All Christians are the members of the church, but not all of them are the church. The nation of Israel is an excellent illustration. Although there are thirteen or fourteen million Jews on earth today, less than three million of them are the nation of Israel. Although the number of Jews in the city of New York is greater than the number in the nation of Israel, the Jews in New York are not the nation of Israel.
Recently, a brother told us about a newspaper article written by a group of orthodox Jews. In this article they declared that they would not recognize the nation of Israel. Claiming to be bona fide Jews, those in this group say that if any were to be considered the nation of Israel, they should be considered as that nation. The United Nations, however, does not recognize this group as the nation of Israel. The United Nations will recognize as the nation of Israel only those who are a proper people, who are on proper ground, and who have a proper government to be a proper nation. Those orthodox Jews who are still in New York City cannot say that they are the nation of Israel. Perhaps they are members of the nation of Israel, but they are not the nation of Israel because they are not on the right ground or under the proper government.
Likewise, not all bona fide Christians can say that they are the church. They must consider where they are. Are they on the proper ground? They need to consider the example of the Jewish people. There are millions of genuine Jews who are not the nation of Israel. Only those Jews who have returned to the land of their forefathers and who stand on the proper ground and under the proper government are the nation of Israel. Yes, you may be a genuine Christian, and as a true Christian you are a member of the Body of Christ. Nevertheless, you are not on the proper ground. You may be in the Catholic Church, in a denomination, or in a free group. Do not argue with us—check where you are. If you are a member of the family, then why are you not at home with the family?
Some may argue with us, saying, “The church in Anaheim includes all the believers in Anaheim. Since you are such a small number, obviously not including all the believers in this city, why do you still say that you are the church in Anaheim and that the other believers are not?” Consider again the example of the divisions in Corinth. Although less than a tenth of the total number of believers in the city of Corinth had the standing of the church in Corinth, they were still the church, and the majority of the other believers, those in the four divisions, were not. The majority were in the “Pauline church,” the “Petrine church,” the “Apollonian church,” or “the church of Christ.” But the small minority of seventy-five still remained on the ground of the church in Corinth. If they were not the church, then what were they? To be the church is not a matter of numbers—it is a matter of the standing, the ground. It is just like the nation of Israel, which has fewer Jews than New York. But the smaller number of Jews standing on the proper ground are the nation of Israel, and the greater number of Jews, having lost the ground of their nation, are not the nation of Israel. As long as you are in a division, you lose the standing of the local church. Thank the Lord that by remaining on the proper standing and by not being in a division, we may be part of the church in our locality.
Let us consider another aspect of the church as revealed in this example of the divisions at Corinth. Suppose the believers in the “Pauline church” were very good, spiritual, heavenly, and lovely, but the seventy-five remaining in the church in Corinth were rather sloppy. If you were a believer visiting that city, to which group would you go? Perhaps you would say, “I love the holy, heavenly, spiritual saints in the ‘Pauline church.’ I don’t care about their ground or standing—I only care about their spiritual condition. Their standing is not right, but they, like Daniel, are very spiritual.” We need to make a clear distinction between the condition of the church and the ground of the church. The church may be correct in its ground, but poor in its condition. Of course, we look to the Lord that we may be right in both ground and condition. However, the decision concerning recognizing a church must not be made according to condition but according to the ground. This is the way to discern what the proper church is.
