Chapter 6: The Independent Church

Every New Testament church was an independent church. They were "self-governing", "self-supporting", and "self-propagating". Each was completely free of all ecclesiastical authority outside of it's own local membership.

Organized groups of churches with a central headquarters did not come until much later. This latter structure was intended for the purpose of maintaining moral purity and doctrinal truth. Although it was a noble aim within itself, it was not seen or taught in the context of the New Testament pattern. In fact, this type of church government tends to constitute unscriptural authority for the local church.

The New Testament pattern for the authority of the local assembly is solely "self-governing". There is no pattern of denominational ecclesiastical leadership seen within the context of the New Testament. The leadership of each new Testament church rested within it with them at times looking also to those who founded the work.

Independent churches should not be "lawless" or "divisive". It is of utmost importance that all churches have fellowship and unity with other local bodies of believers. Otherwise we could very easily become stagnant and self-centered in our worship and efforts for the Lord. Although inter-congregational fellowship is necessary, the concept of denominational control for the sake of purity has not proven to be effective. Nearly all-historic denominations have turned to liberalism, modernism, apostasy, and lack spiritual power. This is not only true of the old line denominations but also of many of the more recently formed ones, those formed within the last eighty years or so. These facts show us that the denominational concept has failed to do exactly what it was meant to maintain.

I must confess that some, if not many, "Independents" have also been deficient in these areas. The very fact that they are independent, however, has confined their lack of purity and doctrinal error to a given body or, at worst, to a given locality. The denominational concept allows the error to spread rapidly throughout a particular denomination. The rapid spread of denominational groups within the Pentecostal ranks have accepted divorced and remarried brethren into the ranks of the ministry. This is not only true of doctrinal error such as this but is also seen in the liberal life style among many of the denominational ranks.

There are several "safe-guards" of authority remaining within the local assembly. It retards the misuse of authority by politically ambitious men. In the denominational structure there is ample room for politics to become involved as there comes the need for sectional, district, and national leaders. Thus, men strive for these positions outside of the local assembly. It also hinders false doctrine from spreading beyond the local church. Finally, it keeps groups of churches from forming into denominations.

Error and heresy generally come because of lack of spirituality and sound doctrine--not as a result of the wrong kind of church government. Those found in these errors are usually divisive and lawless or completely spiritually dead. It is very easy to become spiritually dead when the proper mixture of the study of the Word and the anointing of the Holy Ghost is not present in an individual's life. This leaves us open for error. A spiritual person is one who, as he delves into the Word, seeks the anointing to illuminate the Word to his heart and mind. The spiritually dead are those who, though they may as readily study the Word, they look at it from a carnal, natural outlook and in turn, often become very heady and high minded.

It is difficult to establish what New Testament church government was like since the lack of Scriptural information on the subject makes it so that we cannot accumulate a complete blueprint of the construction of the church. However, enough is given in Scripture for us to build a firm foundation of proper New Testament church government. We will find that ALL MAJOR ORDER was given and ALL MAJOR QUESTIONS were answered within the Holy Scriptures. We must accept the New Testament pattern as valid for us today.

As an example we will begin by looking at the church in Jerusalem and glean what we may from her. Though the Apostles and original leaders of the early church located their ministries, for a time, in and from Jerusalem, it was by no means a legislative body for all the local churches then established. By reading the book of Acts very carefully we can find the there are no Scriptures that contradict this view. We will look further into the reality of Acts 15 in Chapter 7 of this book.

The first twelve chapters of the book of Acts deal primarily with the churches at Jerusalem, Samaria, Caesarea, and Antioch. The first church to be set in order was, naturally, the church at Jerusalem, since the first converts worshipped there. This can be seen in a review of Acts 1-7. It was in this church that the first Deacons were chosen so that the Elders (Apostles) could be released from their temporal duties to be able to give them fully to the spiritual work. We also see in this church the development of the fivefold ministry as seen in Ephesians 4:11,

""And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;""

The second local church, documented in Acts 8, was established in Samaria. It was founded under the leadership of Philip, who was one of those firstDeacons chosen in Jerusalem. In the interim, he had progressed to the position of Elder since he is spoken of as Philip theEvangelist in Acts 21:8. There is no indication that either the Apostles or the church at Jerusalem sent him to Samaria. His mission to Samaria was not a pre-planned evangelistic mission. We see strong evidence within this very chapter that he was an Elder of the body of Christ who moved under the direction of the head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ. Notice Acts 8:26,29,39, "The Angle of the Lord spake unto Philip," "The Spirit said unto Philip," "The Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip."

If only the leadership of the churches of today would be under the same leadership and direction. How much better than man's leadership or that of some headquarter doing the directing. There were no superiors, or mission boards directing the New Testament church but, rather, the Holy Ghost directed it. How much better off our churches would be today if they would rely wholly and completely upon His direction.

The next church, documented in Acts 10, was established at Cornelius' house at Caesarea. Here, again, we see that it was completely and altogether under divine direction and not under man's direction. God used a series of supernatural means to bring about the establishment of this church, even against Peter's better judgement, who was the instrument used to be the founder of this church. For we see that Peter, a Jew would not enter into tho home of a Gentile, which Cornelius was. However, God, through a vision, convinced Peter that it was completely God's will for him to go into Cornelius' house and preach to them.

Finally, we see the church of Antioch being set in order in Acts 11:19-30. This church was not established by the original Apostles but by other able men called and chosen of God for this purpose. Never, never, never, in Scripture do we see one church put in a place of authority over another church. This is an important principle of church government for us to keep in mind. Authority over the local church is, only and always, the responsibility of the local church leadership, under the direction of the "ONE HEAD," the Lord Jesus Christ, by the anointing of His Spirit.

While on this thought, I would like to mention that the principle of local independence is the patter for the ministry of the Elders. Pastors have no authority over other Pastors, nor do Apostles have authority over Pastors, etc. The authority of each individual within the five-fold ministry lies within each ones own sphere of ministry, "For we are laborers together with God," (I Corinthians 3:9). An Elder is not under the direction of other ministries, yet we do see that the Elders of the local assembly do release other Elders to the clear leading of the Holy Ghost for that individual's life and ministry.

Notice in Acts 13:2-4 that Paul and Barnabas were released, not sent, by the remaining Elders at Antioch that they might follow the clear leading of the Holy Ghost, who in reality is the one doing the sending. If there is a need for disciplining an erring Elder, it is the responsibility of the responsibility of other Elders within the given local assembly to administer the discipline.

This is a good place to stress the necessity of all Elders being part of a local assembly yet free to work out of the local assembly. However, some may choose not to be part of a local body to their own detriment. It could be that they would rather not be in the position where discipline could be administered when needed.

Each Elder is responsible to minister the Word with, "power and demonstration of the Spirit," (I Corinthians 2:4). Only then will our ministry be effective. It is alwasy well to remember that our ministry is not to have dominion over the souls of men, but to be "HELPERS," in building their faith according to the power that works in us (II Corinthians 1:24; Ephesians 3:20b).

Though one church, or one Elder, does not have dominion over another there is a New Testament pattern for "mothering" churches. Keep in mind, however, that it is for the purpose of sheltering the new body in its infancy. When "mothering" a new church we are to help provide scriptural ministry, to help establish and protect her in her early stages. It should be solely, not an administrative relationship. Also it should be a completely voluntary relationship on both ends of the ministry--the mother church and the mothered church.

All leaders of both assemblies must qualify for leadership as per I Timothy 3. It should be the call of the Elder or Elders establishing the new assembly to do so. It is not to be the decision of the mother church to establish the new work. She is simply there for support and protection in the early period of the new church's life.

In concluding our thoughts concerning the first churches to be established in Acts 1-12 we must recognize the special call of the Apostles. Jesus called the twelve, "And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named Apostles," (Luke 6:12,13). This was in the divine plan and design for the church.

The number twelve represents divine government and administration. A brief look at some Bible twelve's will bear this out. Jacob had twelve sons who became the twelve tribes of Israel. At Elim we see twelve wells of water and seventy palm trees (Exodus 15:27). Could this be typical of these twelve sons and the seventy elders of Israel in the Old Testament and the twelve Apostles along with the seventy Jesus send out in Luke 9:1; 10:1?

In the Tabernacle we see the twelve stones in the Breastplate (Exodus 28:21), twelve loaves of shewbread (Leviticus 24:5). In the Temple twelve oxen bore the molten sea (I Kings 7:25). These are similar to the twelve Apostles who bore the Gospel of cleansing, with the washing of water by the Word (Ephesians 5:26).

In Revelation we see twelve stars (12:1), twelve gates, twelve angels, twelve tribes, twelve foundations, names of twelve Apostles of the Lamb, twelve pearls (21:12-21), and the tree of life bearing twelve manner of fruit (22:2)

In the light of all of this we must say that the twelve Apostles had a unique place in the building of the church. First, we must recognize that they were personally chosen, trained and commissioned by the Lord Jesus Himself. Thus, their word and doctrine was final and authoritative, "And they continued steadfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship," (Acts 2:42). Paul also wrote that the Church was, "…built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets," (Ephesians 2:20).

In this aspect of their work and ministry, the Twelve had no successors. This part of their ministry was "PERFECT" and "PERMANENT". However, their ministry of church planting and caring is a continuing ministry. The ministry of the Apostles has not ceased in this respect, "And God hath set some in the church, first Apostles," (I Corinthians 12:28).

No one man or specific group of men is essential in our day for Christ is the builder of his church (Matthew 16:18). He is building by HIs Spirit. His Spirit will call, direct, lead, empower every worker to accomplish his work in His way.

The last sixteen chapters of Acts cover the expansion of the church outside Judea. We see churches being established throughout the Roman Empire. Roughly seven years was spent on ministry solely within Judea, before this expansion began. The church, the body of believers, not just the local assembly, was well established both numerically and spiritually. Those that were scattered were not babes in Christ. This may possible provide a good clue as to why, when the church began to establish local churches, throughout the Roman Empire, they grew rapidly both numerically and spiritually.

Next, I would like us to take a brief look at the church in Antioch, the third largest city in the Empire. While the church remained at Jerusalem, the bud of Christianity opened, but when it reached Antioch it burst forth into full bloom. The congregation at Antioch was, naturally, a strong Gentile congregation while the one at Jerusalem was strongly Jewish. The Gentile church was vividly portrayed in Ephesians 2:11-22. This church was not established by the twelve Apostles, yet it was built upon their foundation (Ephesians 2:20) since the church was built upon their doctrine, even though their bodily presence was absent.

We see the five-fold ministry spring forth in its fullness at Antioch, "Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain Prophets and Teachers," (Acts 13:1). The Church at Antioch did not "Ordain" or "send" the laborers, they simply "released" them to the clear direction of the Holy Ghost (Acts 13:2-4).

The Scriptures make us wonder who it is that is directing many of the ministries of today, "the Church," "the Overseer," or the Holy Ghost". Is it "Thus saith the Lord" or "Thus saith the board"? We should not intend to destroy sound Scriptural church government, but neither do we want to do away with Holy Ghost government and replace it with human government. Human government has destroyed many a man's ministry, and weakened many a local church's ministry by missing God's direction and anointing. To have God's best for our ministry and for His church; we must always be under the direction of the Holy Ghost, both individually and collectively.

This brings us to ask how does one know he leading of the Holy Ghost for our own specific ministry? In considering the five-fold ministry the Holy Ghost will burn His call into your inner being. God will, in some way, speak to you personally about you own calling. It may be through Scripture, to your inner consciousness, by the witness of the Spirit to your hear, through that still small voice, or even by a strong compulsion to fill a need. Thereafter it may be confirmed by outside ministries, such as the prophetic ministry.

All to often, individuals tend to rely of the confirmation of an outside ministry to direct them and it plays havoc with both their ministry and the local church. For those of us who are presently functioning in our ministry, let us not violate the "priesthood of the believer", and try to direct everyone into the ministry we think they should be called to. Yet, as the Spirit leads us, let us permit Him to use us to confirm the young seeker in the direction the Lord is leading him into.