Ne Plus Ultra - Nothing Beyond

by J.L. Ferguson, Barrhead | Category: General | Jan 1978

On the old coins of Spain were the two pillars of Hercules, depicting the western limit of the habitable earth. On the coins was the Latin motto, "Ne plus ultra" - nothing beyond. Today Spain's motto might well be, "Plus ultra" - for Columbus showed her that there was something more beyond.

Certain believers are of the view that there is nothing in the New Testament beyond the local assembly. In "The Church, a symposium of principles and practice", edited by J. B. Watson, one writer says, "The idea of national churches, such as ... is quite foreign to Scripture. Further, it is needful to bear in mind that an assembly is not described in Scripture as joined to other assemblies so as to form, with these, a larger body. Thus, when you became a member of the assembly in which you are, you did not thereby become a member of any larger body of which it might possibly be thought to form a part" (p.29). And later, "An assembly is not represented in Scripture as part of any larger body" (p.37).

Again, G. H. Lang in his book "The Churches of God" writes, "Of any scheme or form of interlocking of assemblies we see no trace... there was no church of Galatia or Judea or Macedonia, no combination of churches in a given area into the church of that area, and thus by organization and locality a body corporate, distinct from the church universal, only a part thereof" (pp.13,14).

From its inception and until now, this magazine has joined issue with beloved brethren in Christ who hold these views. We readily agree that in the teaching of the New Testament there is nothing to encourage the system of national churches, however sincerely these may have developed over the centuries. For the express word of the risen Lord was that the gospel should be taken to all the nations, that within these, disciples should be made, and one common teaching should be observed by them all universally.

It is clear that in this new arrangement of things, disciples were to be gathered together locally in what were termed churches of God. But is it not equally clear that these churches formed also a widespread fellowship? That they were regarded as grouped together in the mind of the Lord is evident from such scriptures as the following, in the context in which they occur:

The churches of Galatia (1 Cor. 16:1; Gal. 1:2)

The churches of Macedonia (2 Cor. 8:1)

The churches of Judea (Gal. 1:22)

The saints which are in the whole of Achaia (2 Cor. 1:1)

The seven churches which are in Asia (Rev. 1:4).

As a consequence, when the problem in Antioch was settled in Jerusalem by the apostles and elders in consultation with the representatives from Antioch, the united mind was delivered by Paul and Silas to all the churches throughout Syria, Cilicia and Galatia, as "decrees for to keep... So the churches were strengthened in the faith". These decrees were to be just as binding throughout the holy nation, as "the decrees of Caesar" were throughout the Roman Empire (Acts 16:4,5 and 17:7).

Again, when the Word of God came to Thessalonica and a church of God was established there, the saints "became imitators of the churches of God which were in Judea in Christ Jesus". From Thessalonica the word spread throughout the province of Macedonia and in due course the churches in Achaia were encouraged to emulate the grace of God seen in the churches of Macedonia. Judea, Macedonia, Achaia - hundreds of miles might separate these Roman provinces, but as the work of God progressed through them, a visible unity of churches was established among them.

It seems idle to hold, as many do, that in those early days each church of God was autonomous and solely responsible for its own functioning, and was not consciously linked together in a. fellowship of assemblies wider even than those throughout the province. How can we accept that in all the churches there was a universality of teaching (e.g. 1 Cor. 4:17) and of practice (e.g. 1 Cor. 11:16) and then logically maintain that "an assembly is not represented in Scripture as part of any larger body"?

Would Peter write to the churches in the five Roman provinces throughout Asia Minor, counselling the elders to tend the flock of God which was among them, if these churches were not integrated in a wider unity? In the light of 1 Cor. 5, the church in Corinth was not autonomous. It was part of the kingdom of God, and, wrote Paul, "the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power" (4:20). The law-of the kingdom was to apply effectively everywhere in all the churches. If there was failure in Corinth, Paul by reason of his apostolic authority would see to it that such failure was put right. Thus the Lord laid down the principle that where an assembly is in default of the revealed will of God, an authority in the kingdom but outside the assembly should see to it that the wrong is put right. It required apostolic authority to initiate the principle, but once established the principle became part of the apostles' teaching, the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ. When therefore a church fails today in discipline the rule of the kingdom of God must be brought to bear on it, and in accordance with the general tenor of New Testament teaching this can best be done by the elders of the contiguous churches.

Our understanding of Scripture is that a "larger body" of testimony is presented in the New Testament, embracing all the churches of God. When Israel ceased to be God's people, He began again on a spiritual plane with a new holy nation (1 Pet. 2:9); a new "Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16); a new kingdom of God (Matt. 21:43; Acts 14:22); a new house of God (Heb. 3:6). This formation was something quite distinct from the building of the Church the Body. That Church was, and ever will be, far out of Satan's reach. Its members were invited to participate also in a unity which the world would be able to see, but a unity which would be vulnerable to Satan's attacks. This was the unity of the churches of God, forming together the new people, house and kingdom of God, having no national boundaries, under the rule and care of a united elderhood, and

existing in the counsels of God so long as it maintained allegiance to the Faith of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The present-day churches of God who publish this magazine (and have no connexion with the Pentecostal movement in its various expressions) seceded from brethren generally on this and kindred issues around 1892-94. They love all God's children, fellow-members of the Body. Vast numbers of these believers are associated with the national churches of various countries. Others meet as local companies of Christians, not indifferent to the welfare of other such companies but not acknowledging any scriptural authority for a wider grouping. Our question then to all such is simply this - is there not something in Scripture beyond the local assembly, something beyond also a national grouping of churches? Is not the clear New Testament teaching for our day that believers in the Lord Jesus should be baptized by immersion and added to a local church of God, all such churches to be in a world-wide fellowship, which by means of its Spirit-led elderhood maintains the unity of the Faith throughout all the churches? Letters from readers who have difficulty in accepting this understanding will be welcomed and answered.

J.L. Ferguson, Barrhead | Jan 1978
General