____________________________________________________ THE GOSPEL OBSERVER "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations...teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19,20). ____________________________________________________ June 25, 2000 ____________________________________________________ The Name of the Church by Andy Diestelkamp When you look in the ``yellow pages'' under ``churches'' it is amazing to see the names that churches use to describe themselves. We're in a fairly conservative rural community, so the names tend to be less bizarre than those I'm sure can be found in the more cosmopolitan areas. We have names like Calvary Baptist Church (GARBC) and Trinity Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod). Don't you just love the parentheses? They tend to accentuate the sectarian spirit. Indeed, if there is nothing in a name, then one is made to wonder why some churches choose the names that they do. It should be our desire to be content with the pattern of sound words that we have in scripture. Thus, when it comes to something as simple as identifying our individual or collective spiritual affiliations, it would seem that God's word would provide us with ample guidance. How, then, should we identify ourselves? Is there a proper name for the church? Which church, universal or local? There are brethren who insist that there is only one specific proper name that God has willed to be used in identifying the church, and it is ``church of Christ.'' This is no ``straw man'' that I am setting up. The argument that I have seen finds its main root in Isaiah 62:2 which reads, ''...You shall be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord will name.'' The assumption is that this new name was something not revealed until the New Testament. It is further assumed that the new name given to God's people as the universal body of all righteous is the same name that each local church must use to identify itself. It is finally assumed that this new name is ``church of Christ'' based on what Paul said in Romans 16:16, ``The churches of Christ greet you.'' Notice that the context of Isaiah 62:2 is talking about the city of Jerusalem. While I certainly believe that the new Jerusalem is Christ's church, it is interesting to note that no proper name is assigned to the bride of Christ in the New Testament in any of the passages that would show the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy. In Isaiah's day God referred to Jerusalem as Azubah and Shemamah and then said that the new Jerusalem would be called Hephzibah (62:4), not ``church of Christ.'' If we are to take Isaiah's prophecy of a new name literally, then it would appear that Hephzibah is it, for nothing in the New Testament says otherwise. Another argument that is made to bolster the idea that God intended the church to have a proper name is ``God is not the author of confusion...'' (1 Cor. 14:33). It is seriously suggested that for churches to use names other than ``church of Christ'' would be confusing. First of all, notice that, instead of talking about the bride of Christ (the new Jerusalem with the new name), the fallacious argument is now applied to local churches. This sloppy movement between a discussion of local churches and the universal church as if they are one and the same is not accurate. Since no new name for local churches was ever prophesied or revealed in the New Testament, how a local group identifies itself is a matter of expediency. Secondly, the irony of using 1 Corinthians 14:33 to support one proper name for the church is seen in that the verse talks about ``the churches of the saints.'' Now there's an idea! Perhaps if we went to identifying ourselves as ``churches of Saints'' we'd start living more like saints than ``church of Christ-ers.'' With respect to the issue of confusion: anybody who thinks that having the universal proper name ``church of Christ'' for local churches avoids confusion has not had much experience in visiting churches that employ that moniker. It is the lock-step overuse of this traditional proper name that is confusing. It has confused people into thinking that it is the only name that is right. In the New Testament we find a local church being referred to as ``the church of God'' (1 Cor. 1:2) or the church of (or in) a geographical location. Never is a single local church referred to as a ``church of Christ''! Yes, there were churches of Christ, so it is reasoned that it is right to call a local group a ``church of Christ.'' That makes sense to me. Will that work with ``churches of God'' (1 Cor. 11:16) and ``churches of the saints'' (1 Cor.14:33)? To demand that brethren use one proper name to describe all local churches is as sectarian as those who call themselves by unscriptural designations. Binding what God has clearly not bound so as to avoid confusion is the trademark of a denomination, especially when it comes to binding a name. The descriptions of churches in the New Testament were not to identify them with any particular men, doctrines or movements. If we use ``church of Christ'' to identify ourselves as a group that came out of the restoration movement, then we are no less sectarian. If we use ``church of Christ'' to identify that we belong to Christ, then we do right, but then so do those who use other designations that convey something equally true and scriptural. Truth is, ``church of God'' is the most often used description of a local church. By what arrogant stretch of our imagination do we insist that our traditional ``church of Christ'' (which is never used in scripture) is the only proper name, and those who use ``church of God'' have an unscriptural name? A parting salvo that is often launched by those with denominational tendencies who are seeking to preserve human tradition goes something like, ``Are you ashamed of the name ``church of Christ?'' Absolutely not! Are you ashamed of the name ``church of God?'' The reason that many would shy away from that proper name is the same reason that others would rightfully shy away from ``church of Christ.'' They don't want to be confused with the denomination of the same name and its traditions. -- Via Think on These Things, January-February- March 1998 ___________________________________________ Building Relationships in the Home by Steve Klein The foundation of a house is that upon which all else depends for support. If the foundation is not solid, the house is unstable (cf. Matthew 7:24-27). Likewise, the stability of the family depends upon a well-laid foundation. Christ is the Foundation and Chief Cornerstone The Bible certainly teaches that Jesus Christ is the foundation and chief cornerstone of our relationships with God and each other within His church (Ephesians 2:19-20; 1 Corinthians 3:10). But Jesus is also the One who can best solidify and stabilize relationships in other places as well. While the relationships you and I have with family, friends, and co-workers or with institutions such as the government, may exist outside of Christ, they are never what they ought to be until Christ becomes a part of them. When a person becomes a Christian, every human relationship should change. The Christian is a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17). His associations and dealings with others now have their basis in his relationship with Christ, and in a sense Christ is to become the foundation and chief cornerstone of every relationship the Christian has. If this is true when it comes to the relationships with government (Romans 13:1-6) and employers (Colossians 3:22-25; 4:1; 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12), it is vitally true when it comes to relationships within the home. Notice Paul's instructions concerning the duties of young wives in Titus 2:4-5. They need to ``love their husbands, to love their children...that the word of God may not be blasphemed!'' Their relationships within the home reflect directly upon their relationship with God and His word. Similarly, husbands must dwell with their wives ``with understanding... that your prayers may not be hindered!'' (1 Peter 3:7). And, if the husband does not provide for his family ``he has denied the faith'' (1 Timothy 5:8). Do you see it? All of these passages are implying that proper dealings with one another in the home have a direct connection to our affiliation with Jesus Christ. For Christians, THE KEY to building a solid home life is in realizing that every relationship within that home must be governed by Jesus Christ. When that is the case, husbands will love their wives ``as Christ loved the church'' (Ephesians 5:25), wives will submit to their ``own husbands as is fitting in the Lord'' (Colossians 3:18), and children will obey their parents ``in the Lord, for this is right'' (Ephesians 6:1). When Christ is the foundation of our homes, there will be no corrupt communication, but only words that are good for building one another up (Ephesians 4:29). There will be no spiteful behavior, bitterness, or grudge-holding, but only patience and forgiveness (Ephesians 4:31-32). Christians sometimes complain about their home lives and the way that they are treated or mistreated by other members of the household. However, many times the complainer must come to realize that little can be done to change others in the home until they themselves decide to put Christ first in their own lives. Is Christ the foundation of your home? -- Via The Exhorter, October 3, 1999 ___________________________________________ Zacchaeus ``Sought To See Jesus'' by Keith Greer ``And he sought to see who Jesus was, but could not because of the crowd, for he was of short stature'' (Luke 19:4). Let us consider some lessons from this story you learned as children in Bible class. The Rich Can Seek Christ In Luke 18, Jesus had just explained how difficult it was for the rich to gain heaven. Zacchaeus had wealth, but he knew something that his wealth could not buy--a Savior! ``For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out'' (1 Timothy 6:7). So many in the world cannot find Jesus because they are too busy seeking materialism! Money cannot buy everything! Positions Don't Matter to God This man was a publican--a tax collector. He worked for the Roman government and was hated by the Jews. In the world's way of thinking--he was nobody. Yet, to our Lord he was another lost soul. Many times men never can find Christ because they are too busy trying to gain a ``higher'' position among men. God will not be impressed by your status among men--but your spiritual status with Him! For which are you eagerly pursuing? The Crowd Will Hide Jesus Zacchaeus could not see Jesus over the crowd because he was short of stature. How did he overcome his problem? He ran ahead of them and climbed in a sycamore tree! Did he care what others thought of a Roman tax collector climbing up in a tree? Crowds can still keep people from seeing Jesus today. So many young people desire to run with the crowd. Why? If they stand out alone their friends may make fun at them. It's easier to just go along. Depends on what you're looking for. Challenges Must Be Met--and Overcome! Why didn't this small publican just give up instead of trying to see Jesus? All the obstacles that he could have used for excuses, he instead diligently sought to overcome to reach his goal. Too many people do not see Jesus today because they let the ``challenges'' get in their way. Sometimes it may be our families, our friends, our jobs, our failures, our fatigue, and problems from the past. What we must remember is that whatever the ``challenges''--the reward of overcoming is worth the effort! Zacchaeus found Jesus and responded. What about you? Are you looking for Jesus or looking for a way around Him? --Via The Knollwood Reminder, February 20, 2000 ________________________________________ Avondale CHURCH OF CHRIST P.O. Box 421 1606 Glen Willow Rd., Avondale, PA 19311 (610) 268-2088 Sunday: 10:00 A.M. Bible class 11:00 A.M. Worship 6:00 P.M. Worship Wednesday: 7:00 P.M. Bible study evangelist/editor: Tom Edwards (610) 925-3567 e-mail: tedwards@zoomnet.net web site: http://www.zoomnet.net/~tedwards/avondale ________________________________________