One of the most neglected truths of the gospel is that life for a Christian should be eminently happy. But the happiness which belongs to Christians is not limited merely to seasons and circumstances which would bring joy even to the unbeliever. Observe that in the following passages, the Christian is enjoined to be happy even in the face of pain and persecution:
2 Corinthians 12:10 -- Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
1 Peter 3:14 -- But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;
1 Peter 4:12-13 -- Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
Whereas happiness for the unbeliever is regulated entirely by "good experiences," this is not true for the Christian. As we see from the above scriptures, Christians can be happy amidst what might be called "bad experiences." This leads us to the conclusion that happiness is not dependent upon externals -- the things that happen to us from day to day.
A little reflection will illustrate the truthfulness of that statement. There are numerous people in this world who are afflicted with some crippling, blinding, or otherwise disabling disease or injury. Yet, a good many of these victims have been able to achieve a high degree of happiness. The converse of this is also true: We all know people who have health, wealth and friends. Yet some of these are miserably unhappy! This should prove beyond any doubt that happiness does not necessarily depend upon external circumstances.
This brings us to a search for the real definition of happiness. Dr. John A. Schindler, of the famous Monroe Clinic, Monroe, Wisconsin, has come up with one of the most “workable” definitions I have seen. He says happiness is -- "A state of mind in which our thinking is pleasant a good share of the time." Did you get that? Happiness is a state of mind! It does not depend upon external circumstances. Another famous psychologist, Dr. Matthew N. Chappell, wrote, "Happiness is purely internal. It is produced, not by objects, but by ideas, thoughts, and attitudes which can be developed and constructed by the individual’s own activities, irrespective of the environment." The interesting thing about these definition by psychologists is that they appear to be consistent with what the Bible has taught all along!
People of the world try to find happiness in sensual pleasure, riches, fame, possessions. It is true, of course, that such things may cause a “pleasant state of mind.” But its duration is short-lived. When happiness depends upon such changeable things, it is going to be a rare occurrence in the lives of those who so seek it. For the least financial reverse, the slightest loss of approval and the vaguest feeling of ill-health will plunge them into pits of despair. The unfortunate thing is that this description is not limited to unbelievers. Many Christians are plagued with unhappiness because we have been misled to believe that happiness is the result of external events. We, too, become miserable when the worldly foundation of our happiness cracks and crumbles. But Christians, above all other people, ought to and can be happy, in spite of the circumstances of our lives.
Let us now draw some practical conclusions based upon the foregoing truths:
The sum of all we have been trying to say is: Christians, let us Rejoice – Be happy in the Lord. Whether we are rich or poor – Rejoice! Whether we walk in peace or persecution – count it all joy! Whatever our circumstances, let us be happy! Let our thoughts be regulated by the word of God.
“Rejoice in the Lord always: and again I say Rejoice” – Philippians 4:4. -- Bob West, The Milpitas Messenger, September, 1996
Return To Messenger Menu
In order to answer this question accurately, we must be absolutely clear about the definition of "denomination."
Webster's Dictionary defines "Denomination" as "The name of a class of things; a class or kind (especially of units) having a specific name or value." This definition is applied to such things as monetary currency which is divided into 1-dollar, 5-dollar or other denominations. So you see, for something to be a "denomination," it has to be a unit or part of other parts. It is never a single unit by itself. (A dollar bill is a denomination of U.S. Currency – a part of many other acceptable units which comprise the whole of U.S. Currency.)
A religious denomination would, therefore, be, by definition, "a class or kind of [religious] units, having a specific name or value." "Units" here would be local congregations. This conclusion is confirmed in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, where Dr. Donald G. Tender wrote: "Denominations are associations of congregations - though sometimes it might be said that congregations are localized subdivisions of denominations - that have a common heritage."
Now, to the main question: "Is The Church of Christ A Denomination?" Again, to accurately answer this question we need to be sure how we are using the term, "Church of Christ." If the questioner means "an association of congregations that have a common heritage, and are generally known as Churches of Christ," then the answer would have to be YES. Shocked by that answer? I would think so! But IF we accept the definition of "denomination," as seen above, then that answer would be unavoidable! (Please keep reading – don't give up on me yet!)
We have long affirmed (and I believe accurately) that the church of which we are members is NOT a denomination. The problem here is not with the definition of "denomination;" rather, it is the erroneous concept and definition of the "Church of Christ" which prevails in the religious world at large and even among members of the church. It is right at this juncture that, in my opinion, we have confused everyone, including ourselves, and created an atmosphere which has produced division.
We have been bold in asserting that we are members of the "church we read about in Matthew 16:18 ("...upon this rock I will build my church..."). And this is indeed the case if we have responded to the gospel as illustrated in Acts 2:37-47. But the church to which the Lord has added us is NOT "an association of congregations." In other words, it is NOT a denomination. It is, rather, an association or fellowship of the saved. This is what we have sometimes referred to as the "universal church." If this is not the case, then we have been added to a denomination and we'd better quit affirming that we are "non-denominational!" Instead of talking about the "One True Church," we'd be more accurate to talk about the "One True Denomination!" Remember that for something to be a "denomination," it has to be a unit or part of other parts. The church I'm trying to direct people to is not a part of other parts. It is the ONE body of Christ (Ephesians 4:4).
What is the "unit" of the church in Matthew 16:18 or the body of Christ in Ephesians 1:22-23? It is the individual Christian – not a congregation (see 1 Corinthians 12:12, 27). The "one true church" I am interested in getting people to be added to is an association of Christians – not congregations! I do not belong to an association of congregations. Another way of saying that is, I do not belong to a religious denomination. Nor does the congregation of which I am a member belong to an association of congregations. I can accurately and truthfully affirm that we are "non-denominational."
What difference does any of this make? Simply this: If we are going to be credible to a skeptical world, we need to be accurate and honest in the claims we are making. In future articles we shall show where this pervasive denominational concept of the church originated and how it has been perpetuated. -- Bob West, The Milpitas Messenger, September, 1996
Return To Messenger Menu
(Editor's Note: The beloved commentator Paul Harvey has been holding forth on the airways and newspapers for decades. He has truly become a legend in his own lifetime. The article was written in 1974! But it as timely and true today as then. The statistics he cites have increased even more than then. – RHW)
"They" told us that, if we'd relax about sex, take our clothes off and not get all up-tight about it, there would be no more sex crimes. So we let it all hang out – and the incidence of rape has increased 10% in one year! Maybe we'd better question some of the other advice "they" gave us.
"They" told us we'd been too tough with criminals, that we should go easy on them. So we went easy on them – and the rate of violent crime has increased 47% since 1968; increased 6% last year, is increasing 15% this year.
"They" told us that, if we'd be more generous with poor folks, there'd be no motive for stealing anymore. So we gave everybody a guaranteed income, and robbery, burglary, larceny, and auto theft are running 15% ahead of one year ago.
"They" said churches are "old-fashioned," that they must modernize liberalize, rationalize, compromise. And those that compromised most are shrinking fastest. If it is appearing up to her that "they" gave us some awfully bad advice - they did!
"They" insisted that our schools must boot God out and rely on enhancing junior's intelligence. So we graduated a generation of juniors with refined intellects and undisciplined emotions, and school-age suicides have soared 92% in two years.
"They" told us alcoholism and drug addiction were sicknesses, not crimes. Now we're gagging, choking, strangling, on forbidden fruit.
"They" said informal marriage was enough, so now the odds are 5 to 4 your rapture will be ruptured and 2 in 7 that the next baby will be born illegitimate.
Who are these "they" who've been thus misleading us?
"They" are the materialists who deify the finite sciences.
"They" meant well, but their intentions are paving the road to hell. Now, I've quit commentating and gone to preachin'. I don't mean to. But I can't separate goodness and badness from today's news and explain it. Every ugly headline in today's newspaper – and yesterday's and tomorrow's is somebody's emotions gone out of whack. He might be smart as all get-out; but if he's emotionally colorblind, he is an unguided missile destined inevitably to self-destruct.
Spaceship Earth came with a book of instructions; let's see what it says. It says we should not be slothful in business. In fact, it says he who does not work – let him not eat. It says women should wear modest apparel. It says don't steal anything – anything! It says don't get drunk – period! It says sleep only with your own wife! It says you don't do what you "want," you do what you "ought," and for those whose consciences are anesthetized, it specifies which is which. In other words, if that rule book were not divinely inspired, it would still be the best blueprint for an orderly existence! If it did not promise life hereafter, it would still contain the best formula for a good life here.-- The Milpitas Messenger, September, 1996
Return To Messenger Menu