INTRODUCTION

Once again, we must emphasize that the key insofar as the "church" is concerned in these "latter days" MUST be found in the word, "COMMUNITY;" the "church" is NOT a place we go to on Sundays; nor is it merely those people who "assemble themselves together" to worship God. THE CHURCH IS MUCH MORE THAN THAT: IT IS THE "COMMUNITY OF GOD" MADE UP BY "COMMUNITARIANS" WHO ARE MEMBERS OF A COLLECTIVIST OR COOPERATIVE SOCIETY.  It is precisely what Acts 4:32 describes the church to be:

"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common." (Acts 4:32)

Pretty heavy, isn't it? A community of believers who were so united that the Bible could speak of the people possessing "one heart" and "one soul;" a community where the members cared for each other not only spiritually and psychologically, but physically - and so much so that the Bible could say that they "had all things in common," and where the Bible could go on to say:

"For neither was there among them any that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,

"And laid them at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto each, according as any one had need." (Acts 4:34-35)

Eee gads! - What would Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity have to say about that: "And distribution was made unto each, according as any one had need." They would cry "SOCIALISM" at the top of their lungs, and condemn these "Basic Church Communities" as instruments of the devil.

NOTE: Of course, this is not to say that members of a church are required to "sell all they have" and to "have all things in common." There is no such requirement laid upon the saints of God. What the disciples did in the church in Jerusalem, they did of a willing spirit and because of the exigencies of the time. This is made plain in the account of Ananias and Sapphira:

"But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,

"And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it, at the apostles' feet.

"But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

"Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. (Acts 5:1-4)

What's important to note here is that the Scriptures recognized the prior claim of Ananias and Sapphira on their property and money. It was theirs. They could dispose of it as they wished. The church as such had no claim on it. What Ananias and Sapphira did that was wrong was not refusing to join in what appeared to be a "general rush" of some to sell their property and give it to the church, but was, instead, pretending to join that "rush" and lying to the church about it. Lying to the church was the sin they committed.

And it occurred in this way: some of the disciples had very evidently been led of the Lord to sell their property and give it to the church. For example, "Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus ..." (Acts 4:36) And, of course, there were many more who had likewise been led of the Lord out of a willing heart to do so (Acts 4:34) - evidently to meet the very great need of the church at the time [which had, in a matter of days, expanded from a few hundred souls to thousands and thousands, many of whom were desperately poor (Acts chapters 2-5)]. That they did so willingly is made apparent by the context.

Obviously, Ananias and Sapphira were not so led, but they saw what appeared to them to be the general thanksgiving of the saints in connection with the generosity of those who had given so much, and they wanted to be "lifted up" (as they saw it) in like manner; hence their intrigue. (Acts 5:1-2) They wanted the "approval" (again, as they saw it) of the congregation minus the sacrifice that was necessary to obtain that "approval" (i.e., appreciation, thankfulness). They wanted recognition! - and an undeserved recognition at that. This was the problem" This was the sin!

FAR BEYOND WHAT WE TODAY
UNDERSTAND AS "CHURCH"

Quite obviously, the view of the church as portrayed in Acts 4:32 and 34-35 is far beyond anything that we today understand as "church." But it's what the Bible sees as the church; and it's exactly what Gustavo Gutierrez envisioned as the church: A "multiplicity of small Christian communities [Comunidades Eclesiaia de Base (CEBs)] of -

"... the faithful poor where they could minister to their own needs without having to rely on the vicissitudes of the rich ... communities ... in the meaning of Acts 2:44 ('And all that believed were together, and had all things common'). These communities must minister to the needs of the whole man: body and soul."

BASIC CHURCH COMMUNITIES: A PROTECTION
AGAINST THE COMING HOLOCAUST

The breakup of the church into small "Basic Church Communities" will undoubtedly pose a great problem to those powers which in the "latter days" will seek to persecute and destroy it.

Why? - because it's one thing to have to deal with a few hundred (even thousand) mega-churches - especially given the technology of today - but it's quite another to have to deal with countless numbers of small "basic church communities" scattered informally across the country - and this point is easy to substantiate by comparing the experience of the Church in Germany (where the same forms of formal church structure which now predominate in the United States existed when Hitler's persecution against the church broke out) with the Church in China (where informal house-church structures predominated when a similar persecution broke out after the communists gained control in 1949).

The Church in Germany collapsed after four short years (1933-1937), while the Church in China has not only survived for over fifty years, but has grown and prospered.

NOTE:  In this connection, it's important to remember that the unity which Christ has in mind concerning the church is not something for which we - as individual Christians - must strive; and most importantly, it is not something for which we must compromise the Word of God. To say so is to imply that we can have either unity or "sound doctrine," but not both. But that's an absurdity - an absurdity which, nonetheless, many well-meaning evangelicals (evangelicals such as Chuck Colson, J.I. Packer, Chuck Swindall, Pat Robertson, Tim LaHaye, etc. - seem willing to embrace; but the whole thing is preposterous - about as preposterous as saying that God can be either loving or righteous, but not both.

Unity - real unity, the unity which Christ gives - has nothing to do with compromising the Word of God. To think so is to exhibit a superficiality and shallowness of faith that is shocking. The unity which Christ gives is ours as a natural by-product of our "abiding in Christ." Is this not what the Bible says? Indeed, it is! - look at the verses which proceed 1 John 3:2-3 ("... it doth not yet appear what we shall be like ..."):

"And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

"Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not." (I John 1:28;3:1)

What is the Bible saying here? - that by abiding in Him we can have confidence because we will appear as He appears when He comes again (I John 3:2-3).

And there is more: if we appear as Christ appears (i.e., if we look like Christ when He comes in His perfection), then we will be perfect (i.e., perfect through Him). Why? - because if Christ is perfect, we shall be perfect too (though this perfection is never a part of us intrinsically, but only because we are abiding in Him and He is abiding in us). Moreover, we will be one. Why? - because disunity and division imply imperfection, and there can be no imperfection where there is perfection. The one cannot exist in the presence of the other.

Now in all of this, of course, it goes without saying that our perfection (and, as a result, our unity) comes only as we abide in Christ. If we once cease abiding in Him, then we lose that perfection (and hence we lose our unity with our brothers and sisters in Christ). Again, perfection (i.e., our unity with our brothers and sisters in Christ) is not ours intrinsically - it is only ours as we abide in Christ. The Bible says:

"But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass (mirror) the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (2 Cor. 3:18)

That is to say, as we behold the Lord while we are abiding in His presence, we are changed into the image of Christ; that is to say, "we appear as He appears" (1 John 3:2-3) - and because of this, unity with our brothers and sisters in Christ follows as surely as the morning follows the night.

Abiding in Christ is what produces unity! There is no effort required here! There is no need to force unity on the saints as if unity with other believers is something foreign and unnatural to the Christian life - something which must be imposed on the saints "from outside" and as the result of bureaucratic and hierarchical control.

BREAKING UP THE CHURCH INTO SMALL "BASIC
COMMUNITIES" INSURES ITS SURVIVAL IN THESE "LAST DAYS"

The simple and very obvious fact of the matter is that during periods of persecution, mega-churches and churches which depend on formal organizations (and which are located in buildings which can be easily located and "targeted"), can be quickly brought to heel, the pastors compromised (or removed), and the people thereby brought into submission - or failing that, scattered. Once scattered, the flock becomes easy prey, their testimony quickly lost. Why? - because they've never learned how to "think for themselves," to "touch the Lord" for themselves, to hold meetings by themselves, to minister themselves, etc. They've always had others to do it for them - "professionals" to take care of them.

Again, take Germany, for example: Shortly after Hitler took power, he moved to get rid of his most vocal opposition in the church by accusing its leaders of theft, sexual sin and treason, and publishing the lurid details of these trumped up charges in party newspapers throughout the country. The remaining church officials were shocked and cowed into submission by this, and in September 1933 they met in Berlin to adopt the "Aryan Clause," which barred any pastor with Jewish blood from the pulpit and REQUIRED THE CLERGY TO SIGN A STATEMENT OF UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT TO THE NATIONALIST SOCIALIST STATE.

Most pastors, of course, recoiled at this, but they felt they had no other choice but to go along. They were "too much out in the open;" their church structures too influenced by outsiders; their money too closely controlled by the state to put up much of a fight. To do so would mean ostracism, loss of their pastorate and ultimately loss of their incomes.

Even then, a large number of pastors courageously refused to go along, and two weeks later a group of them formed the Pastors' Emergency League to organize opposition against Hitler. By the end of the year (1934), their numbers had grown to six thousand - about a third of all the Protestant churches in Germany - and they had become known as the "Confessing Church;" But in the long run, it all didn't matter much. Despite the undoubted courage of these very dedicated men of God, it was all over by 1936. Why? - because the formal nature of the German Church made it too easy for Hitler to subject the church to pressure and persecution.

In May of that year (1936) the Gestapo rounded up some eight hundred leaders of the Confessing Church and replaced them with "compromised" pastors of their own choosing - and because the congregations of these churches had never been trained to exist outside the "organized church" (i.e., trained to take care of themselves) they (i.e., the congregations) had no choice but to go along - they were lost without their formal structures and their professional staffs. (Please see J.S. Conway, The Nazi Persecution of the Churches).

The final blow came in the summer of 1938 when the remaining pastors of the Confessing Church were given the choice of signing an oath of allegiance to Hitler or being excommunicated. Those who refused to sign were rounded up and thrown into concentration camps. Hitler knew that if he could replace the leadership, he could control the church. His plan was simple:

"The pastors will dig their own graves. They will betray their God to us. They will betray anything for the sake of their miserable jobs and incomes." (Robert Waite, Adolf Hitler: The Psychopathic God , N.Y.: Basic Books, 1977, p. 16.).

IS A HOUSE-CHURCH A REAL CHURCH?

The church's standing before God has nothing to do with where it meets; whether in a small building or an ordinary house, it doesn't matter. Nonetheless, and without a doubt, breaking down the church into a multiplicity of small "house-churches" is the easiest way to establish "basic church communities." The very real fact of the matter is, the early church consisted precisely and only of small "house-churches." Indeed, for the first 300 years of the church's existence, that's where the church habitually met; that "house-churches" were the "norm" for the early church is undeniable. The Scriptures are very clear on this matter; the letters of Paul substantiate this fact over and over again. For example, Paul says in:

• Rom. 16:5 - "... also {greet} the church that is in their house. Greet Epaenetus, my beloved, who is the first convert to Christ from Asia."

• 1 Cor. 16:19 - "The churches of Asia greet you. Aquila and Prisca greet you heartily in the Lord, with the church that is in their house."

• Col. 4:15 - "Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church that is in her house."

• Philem. 1:2 - "... and to Apphia our sister, and to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in your house ..."

• Acts 2:2 - "And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting."

• Acts 2:46 - "And day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart ..."

• Acts 12:12 - "And when he realized {this,} he went to the house of Mary, the mother of John who was also called Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying."

• Acts 16:34 - "And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household."

• Acts 16:40 - "... And they went out of the prison and entered {the house of} Lydia, and when they saw the brethren, they encouraged them and departed."

• Acts 20:20 - "... how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house ..."

BUILDINGS vs. HOUSES; FORMAILITY vs. INFORMAILITY:
IS THE ONE MORE "SPIRITUAL" THAN THE OTHER?

In all of this, one thing should be clearly understood; we are not saying that it is unscriptural to meet in buildings; neither are we saying that to meet in homes is more "spiritual." We are just saying that to meet in homes is NOT unscriptural! nor does it necessarily lead to less of a spiritual result than meeting in large meeting halls.

While theologians have gone to great lengths to define the church, to model it in a particular fashion, and to impose their concepts on other people (and other cultures), it's interesting to note that the Bible itself is rather vague on the subject of how the church should meet - whether in buildings or in homes, whether formally or informally.

This vagueness stands in stark contrast to the detailed and sometimes even ponderous instructions in the Old Testament as to how the Temple service was to be organized. In comparison to what the Old Testament has to say about the Temple service, the New Testament has very little to say about how the church is to meet.

But it's vague on purpose! Why? - because the church is universal and was structured to adapt itself to different cultures, different times, and different situations. Indeed, it's precisely this adaptability that has been one of the great secrets of the church's success through the ages - it's ability to adapt to differing cultures and differing situations!! There is, therefore, no point in arguing which way is right or which way is wrong.

The important thing for the church is to follow the Lord and adapt to the circumstances and time in which it is living. The only question before us now, therefore, is if these are the "end times," which form of "church life" should we adopt to best enable us to get through the coming persecution (which will break out against us not only as the result of state persecution, but also as the result of the persecution of the "Apostate Church"). In other words, which form of "church life" should we embrace which will enhance our ability to be witnesses to the unmerited favor and Grace of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, in a situation characterized by severe, unmitigated and unrelenting persecution?

I believe there is really only one answer - we must adopt the "house-church" model! But, again, the decision as to whether to meet in a building on an informal basis, or to meet in a building on a more formal basis is a decision for each "basic church community" to make by itself. In either case, however, our "basic church communities" must be a place where the saints are mutually committed to one another on a spiritual, psychological and financial basis. Through such a commitment, the early church was able to defy the Roman world - so also with us today as we defy the American New World Order System and the apostate church that justifies that system.

PRESENTING YOURSELF A "LIVING" SACRIFICE

The Bible says:

"... the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ." (1 Cor. 12:12)

The first thing that we need to recognize if we are going to come to any appreciation of how our "basic church communities" should function is to grasp the fact that as Christians we have a corporate identity which supersedes our individual identity; that as Christians, we are first of all members of the church, and only secondarily are we individual Christians. This is why Paul says:

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." (Rom. 12:1)

Present your bodies to what? - to the church!

Note that Paul talks about our bodies - presenting our bodies. Why? - because there is a real-life practicality to what Paul is saying. If he had said, "I beseech you brethren to present your souls a living sacrifice ...", then it might be possible for someone to conceive the idea that what Paul is talking about here is largely a "mental" or "spiritual" procedure which we can accomplish through prayer from the comfort of our homes. But Paul talks about bodies - flesh and blood bodies - which of necessity requires physical contact. To be sure our souls and spirits are also involved, but as Christians, wherever our bodies are, there will our souls and spirits be too. [Please see Chapter I of the New Antipas Papers, "Body, Soul and Spirit."]

No doubt, the church has a spiritual dimension, but it has a physical dimension also. Paul does not want us to miss this point, because it's here - in the physical realm - that the "rubber meets the road" and we are forced to convert our dreams into reality, the same dreams which are common to men and women everywhere; of having long-lasting, loving relationships with other people - relationships which for most people remain vapors which all too often disappear when we reach out to grasp them.

It's easy for us to dream airily about developing relationships with other Christians - but so long as we avoid dealing with them on a physical level, that's all these relationships will remain - dreams! But the church is not a dream. It's real and alive, and if we are going to involve ourselves with the church, then we must do so on a "flesh and blood" basis. And isn't that what we really want? - genuine, long-lasting, loving relationships with other people. Yes, of course it is!

PUTTING THE NEEDS OF OTHERS FIRST

Paul continues:

"For as we have many (individual) members in one body ...

"So we, being many (individual members), are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." (Rom 12:3-5)

What's Paul saying here? - he's saying essentially that what each and everyone of us needs to do if we are to get involved with the church on a real-life basis - is to get our eyes off ourselves as individuals and to begin taking the needs of others (i.e., the body) into account. It's not that God doesn't prize us as individuals - of course He does (so much so that if you had been the only person on earth, He still would have died for you) - it's just that in the past we have been so used to focusing our thoughts and attention on our own personal needs that we find it difficult now to focus on the needs of others.

Focusing on the needs of others, rather than on our own! - this is, of course, what being a servant is all about - and it's on this basis that we have been called into the church! Unless we are willing to see ourselves as servants, we will never be able to "make it" in the church-life. This is what Paul meant when he wrote:

"Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

"Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God (i.e., thought it not inappropriate to think of himself as equal to the Father):

"But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

"And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." (Phil. 2:4-8)

This is the beginning of the "body-life" and developing living, loving relationships with others: to put away pride and any thought of being "better" than others.

LET LOVE HAVE ITS OWN WAY

Paul continues:

"And be not conformed to this world (where people are used to putting their needs ahead of the needs of others - where self is exalted and everyone else is debased); but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

"For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

"Let love be without dissimulation (i.e., without dishonesty and hypocrisy). Abhor that which is evil (because evil - which in the end is predicated on selfishness - destroys relationships]; cleave to that which is good.

"Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love ..." (Rom. 12:2-3; 9-10)

Let our love for the brothers and sisters be without hypocrisy and dishonesty; in other words, let it be genuine - let it be extended to others without any thought that we will necessarily receive something in return. Jesus said,

"... Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

"That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

"For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

"And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?" (Matt. 5:44-47)

Does He have reference here only to our enemies. No! Of course not. He's making a point - that we need to love others expecting nothing in return. This is the love that Christ gave to us ["But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us ..." (Rom. 5:8) ], and this is the love we need to give to others if we want to build the church. The Bible says,

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

"And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity (love), I am nothing.

"And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity (love), it profiteth me nothing.

"Charity (love) suffereth long, and is kind; charity (love) envieth not; charity (love) vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

"Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

"Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

"Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

"Charity (love) never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away." (I Cor. 13:1-8)

IMPORTANT NOTE: The translators of the King James Version of the Bible translated the Greek word agape (ag-ah'-pay) to "charity" rather than love because - in Old English - agape meant "LOVE IN ACTION;" LOVE THAT MANIFESTS ITSELF IN ACTS OF SOCIAL BENEVOLENCE, WHICH IS PRECISELY WHAT  OUR MODERN WORD "CHARITY" MEANS - LOVE THAT MANIFESTS ITSELF IN ACTS OF SOCIAL BENEVOLENCE. In other words, the "love" (or "charity") that is being discussed in 1 Cor. 13:1-8 is an ACTIVE love, not a PASSIVE love.

This kind of love - the kind referenced above - isn't concerned for itself; it doesn't envy the "gifts" and "callings" of the other brothers and sisters; it isn't selfish and self-centered; it bears all things and is not concerned when its love from time to time isn't returned by the other brothers and sisters in the church; it believes the best of everyone and it doesn't poke into the affairs of others for the purpose of finding fault; it hopes the best for everybody; it endures the slights and rebuffs of others; it doesn't collapse in the face of pressure and hate! This is the basis of the church-life! This is the basis of the body-life!

Love (Gk, agape) is the foundation of the work of God. Without love, our works will fail, our gifts will fail, and the church-life will fail. The Bible says:

"And now abideth faith, hope, charity (love), these three; but the greatest of these is charity (love). (I Cor. 13:13)