day 866-868

“But He was speaking of the temple of His body.” (John 2:21, NKJV)

We are currently examining the manifestation of the spirit of perversion in the contemporary church. In previous teachings we clearly pointed out how certain practices originate in traditions, and that in participating in these we render the commandments of God powerless (Matt. 15:6). Last week we continued our discussion of countering the first Myth of Tradition – the building as temple in the new covenant. This week we are concluding this issue, by offering a few last observations based on various valid historical sources to secure our argument.

 

  • It is man’s nature to want to try and secure his spiritual experiences with brick and mortar. Since the tower of Babel people have inspired one another to build towers that reach to the heavens, thus making a name for themselves (Gen. 11:4). Take note – the building of this construct is not about the glory of God, but is instead glorifying the people who are building it. In Joshua 22:19 it is made explicit: “but do not rebel against the Lord, nor rebel against us, by building yourselves an altar besides the altar of the Lord our God”. Even when Peter saw Moses and Elijah manifesting in the cloud on the Mountain of Transfiguration, he wanted to make the moment eternal: “Then Peter answered and said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’” (Matt. 17:4). God immediately reacts to this carnal suggestion, and responds: “While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!’” His presence does not lie in buildings; it is nestled within Him.
  • The following quote by Philip Schaff, in his book, History of the Christian Church, neatly summarises the truth about this myth of tradition: “That the Christians in the apostolic age erected special houses of worship is out of the question … As the Saviour of the world was born in a stable, and ascended to heaven from a mountain, so his apostles and their successors down to the third century, preached in the streets, the markets, on mountains, in ships, sepulchres, eaves, and deserts, and in the homes of their converts. But how many thousands of costly churches and chapels have since been built and are constantly being built in all parts of the world to the honor of the crucified Redeemer, who in the days of his humiliation had no place of his own to rest his head!” One tends to see this propensity in Israel, too – any piece of land where something of spiritual significance occurred, has a church or cathedral built on top of it!
  • The Old Covenant’s liturgy (a faith community’s order of spiritual functioning) was based and dependant on three primary elements: a building (the temple/tabernacle/synagogue), the priesthood (that had to mediate the relationship between man and God), and continuous sacrifices (to secure their relationship to God, and the forgiving of their sin). With the coming of Jesus all three primary aspects of their spiritual functioning was thus rendered moot. We will later discuss the last two aspects, but it is firstly important to know that Jesus, in his own time, suggested that the second temple will be destroyed. The so-called prophetic statement takes place in a discussion about the destruction of the temple: “Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said to them, ‘Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.’” (Matt. 24:1-2). Within this framework all the things occur that one expects before the world can end: wars and rumours of wars, the clashing of nations, famines, pestilences, earthquakes, oppression, persecution, the destruction of all things holy, the appearance of the so-called Antichrist and the coming of the so-called rapture. But everything is placed in context if you care to read to verse 34: “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.” In Biblical terms a generation spans 40 years, and according to our calendar these words were spoken in 30 AC, which means that forty years later it was 70 AC, the year in which the Romans destroyed the temple! The coming of the new dispensation in Jesus Christ had to occur by doing away with the external temple of religion, and it had to be replaced by the temple of his Body. Remember John 2:19-21: “Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ Then the Jews said, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?’ But He was speaking of the temple of His body.”
  • This “house of God, which is the church of the living God” (1 Tim. 3:15) is the new temple that needs to be erected in the new dispensation, literally a living home with living stones (1 Pet. 2:5), “the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation … For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true …” (Heb. 9:11 & 24).
  • This was the exact message of the first Christian martyr, Stephen, and to the Jews it was the straw that broke the camel’s back: “When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth.” (Acts 7:54). Stephen’s message was clear: “However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says: ‘Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What house will you build for Me? says the Lord, or what is the place of My rest?’” (Acts 7:48-49). It is interesting that both Jesus and Stephen were accused of the same thing, namely of speaking against the temple (Mark 14:58 and Acts 6:13-14). Given Stephen’s death as an extremely important moment in the history of Daniel’s timeline (as we’ve extensively explained in earlier teachings), it is an important correlation, and thus a very important matter.
  • Throughout the New Testament the same message is given: “And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: ‘I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be My people’” (2 Cor. 6:16); “in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit” (Eph. 2:21-22); “but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end” (Heb. 3:6). As Arthur Willis makes it clear in The Radical Christian: “In the Old Testament, God had a sanctuary for His people; in the New, God has His people as a sanctuary.” See the following Scriptures in this regard: 1 Cor. 3:16; Gal. 6:10; 1 Tim. 3:15; and 1 Pet. 2:5; 4:17. In his Paul’s Idea of Community, Robert Banks writes extensively about how this message influenced Paul’s thoughts about ekklesia.
  • Adolf van Harnack, a church historian, makes the following insightful statement about believers of the first two church-centuries in his book: The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries (vol. 2): “One thing is clear – the idea of a special place for worship had not yet arisen. The Christian idea of God and of Divine service not only failed to promote this, but excluded it, while the practical circumstances of the situation retarded its development.” Already in the third century after Christ the Christian apologist Minucius Felix stated: “We have no temples and no altars.” (Translated from The Octavius of Minucius Felix.) John A.T. Robinson, in his The New Reformation, casts the net wider: “In the first three centuries the church had no buildings.”
  • To gather in houses was thus a conscious decision made by the early Christians. A beautiful example of such a house is the home of Dura-Europos in Syria, which is the earliest identifiable meeting place of Christians that have been archeologically preserved. In this modified lounge as many as 70 people could meet. (Everett Ferguson: Early Christians speak: Faith and Life in the First Three Centuries.)
  • John O Gooch’s research also points out that the early church was very occupied with breaking down the Greek-Roman idolatrous temples. All gatherings were held on neutral ground, so that outsiders could not link them to these temples.
  • Yet despite these attempts of the early church, many aspects of our churches and cathedrals today are still tainted by the symbolism of idolatry, all inherited from pagan traditions. There are a few excellent studies on the matter: Ernest H. Short writes a chapter about this in his History of Religious Architecture. Also see Robin Lane Fox’s book Pagans and Christians.
  • Note – nowhere in the New Testament do we find the word church that refers to a building – not once. The term that is often translated as church, is actually the term ekklesia, which points the relational structure of believers, each of the 114 times it is used.
  • It was only with the coming of the Roman Catholic church in the fourth to the sixth century that the religious customs of Judaism and of the pagans were combined and incorporated in a faith system with a Christian veneer. The formal definition of the church as a spiritual space, in Roman Catholic law, is as follows: “a church is a sacred building dedicated to Divine worship for the use of all the faithful and the public exercise of religion” (Peter F. Anson: Churches: Their Plan and Furnishing.)
  • In 312 AC Constantine obtained his status as Caesar, and from 324 AC he was in control of the mighty Roman Empire. His dramatic conversion led to him commisioning the building of enormous churches and cathedrals. His mother also asked that churches be constructed over certain “holy places”. This architectural legitimising of the Christian faith was gladly grasped by the believers whose faith had been humiliated by the idolatrous religions and their shiny temples. However, M.A. Smith, in his book: From Christ to Constantine, shows how the political leader, despite his conversion, participated in pagan practices, as is also confirmed by his name: Pontifex Maximus. This means “chief of the pagan prophets” (Cross & Livingstone: Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church), a title that is still today used for the Pope! According to Louis Duchesne, in his book: Early History of the Christian Church, Constantine’s focus on buildings of a Christian nature was led by superstition and pagan magic. For this reason Justo L. Gonzalez argues, in his book, The Story of Christianity, that Constantine “still functioned as the high priest of paganism”.

 

Seen within this light the tradition of the church building is clearly very suspect.

 

  • Selah: Are you part of the pagan tradition of the church building?
  • Read: 32-34; Ps. 91; Joshua 1-8.
  • Memorise: Deut 32.:17 (Note the synchronicity!)
  • For a more in-depth understanding: Read any of the sources mentioned in the text, or Viola &

Barna’s Pagan Christianity, from whose research was also drawn during the writing of                                     this teaching, with thanks.