Why Do They
REJECT THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH?
Lesson Text: Matthew 16:17, 18.
Devotional Reading-Subject: A Local Church at Thessalonica, 1 Thessalonians 1:1-10.
AIM: To prove that the Scriptures speak of a local church only.
HOME READINGS
Local Church Empowered, Acts 2:1-13.
Local Church Baptizing, Acts 2:41-47.
Local Church Persecuted, Acts 4:1-21.
Local Church Ministering, Acts 4:32-37.
Local Church Missionaries, Acts 13:1-4.
Church Like a Body, 1 Cor. 12:12-27.
1. Because “Universal” and “Church” Are Contradictory Terms.
Basically, there are only two concepts of a New Testament church, universal and local. Some try to hold to both while placing more emphasis on one than the other. The universal theory has two basis approaches, visible and invisible.
Roman Catholics teach the universal visible church would be a combination of all Catholicism.
Protestants generally hold to the universal invisible church idea. That is, all the redeemed of all ages make up the mystical body of Christ.
However, “universal” and “church” are contradictory terms, which should never be used together. “Universal” mean “whole, all, entire, unlimited.” Church has a narrower meaning, “a called-out assembly.” It pertains to a visible congregation of people meeting in a particular locality. “And when he had found him, he brought him into Antioch. And it came to pass, that the whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch” (Acts 11:26).
Universal is an unlimited word, which does not suggested a visible congregation in a particular location. Church is a limited word which speaks of an assembly of people who congregate in a particular place. The two terms have opposite meanings; consequently it makes no sense to use them together.
2. Because the Universal Church Is Not Found in the Bible.
The Greek word for universal is not the New Testament. The Bible never refers to a universal church. By the very nature of the word translated “church” it refers to an assembly in certain location. There is no double meaning for the term; consequently the universal church idea is totally without biblical basis.
One passage which many use to teach the universal church concept is Ephesians 5:23-32. It speaks of Christ as the Head of the church. “The church” is there taken to embrace more than a local congregation. However, since Paul was writing to the church at Ephesus, one may conclude any reference to “the church” was to the Ephesian Church. Otherwise, he would have clarified his reference, lest he confuse those to whom he wrote. By no means, does Paul refer to a universal conglomeration as a church.
The various uses of “the church” by the Lord and the book of Acts causes some to maintain their position on the universal church idea. The Lord referred to “my church” in Matthew 16:18. The book of Acts refers to “the church” (Acts 2:47; 5:11; 8:3). However, there was only one church is existence until the scattering of Acts 8. It was “the church which was at Jerusalem” (Acts 8:1). It was a local, visible assembly. By no means, could one stretch that to refer to a universal church.
In fact, the Bible speaks only of local, visible churches, The plural usage of the word “church” emphasizes this point. Read Acts 9:31 as an example of ore than thirty times “churches” is used in the New Testament. Acts 14:23 carries the same weight by referring to “every church.” If the universal church idea were correct, there would be no need for the plural form of the word “church”.
3. Because It Minimizes the Local Church Concept.
Those who hold to the universal churches idea emphasize the universal church as being the true body of Christ. At the same time, they minimize the local church as being a necessary evil. To them it matters little one belongs to a local church, because they consider it to be a man’s institution. They emphasize it is most important to be a ember of the true body of Christ, the universal church.
However, a universal church cannot do anything God expects of a true church. It cannot meet on earth. That is its greatest shortcoming, which leads to others. Because it never meets, it has no worship services on the Lord’s Day. Therefore, it doesn’t have a preacher to preach, singers to sing, or deacons to serve. It supports no mission work whatever. It never observes the ordinances. It cannot discipline its members. Yet, all these and other matters commanded by the Lord are done by local churches. In other words, a universal church is totally unnecessary. Even the universal church people must rely on local churches to get anything done.
God’s Word preserves the nature of a church as being a local, visible assembly. Read Acts 10:23-41 to see the word “assembly” was used to refer to a local, visible group of people. Ekklesia is translated “assembly” there. By no stretch of the imagination can one take the universal church view from a close study of that passage.
Besides, the universal church view minimizes doctrinal teaching. It encourages a loose vies of every major doctrine of the Bible. A local church should emphasize doctrinal truth. At least that is that Pal taught Timothy to do (2 Tim. 4:1-4).
4. Because It Destroys the Scriptural Figures of a Church.
The universal church idea makes a shambles of the figures use to refer to a New Testament church. First, a building is used as a figure of a church (1 Cor. 3:9; Eph. 2:21, 22). What could be more local and visible than a building?
Second, the Bible refers to a church as the body of Christ (Eph. 1:22, 23; Col. 1:18). He anyone ever known of a universal body? If one’s body is not local and visible, he is in trouble.
Third, each true church is considered by many to be the bride to Christ, out of which He shall select His wife (John 3:29; 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 19:7-9). Perhaps wives should be cautions about husbands who believe the universal church theory. Do they also believe in a universal in a universal wife? Surely not!
Fourth, Acts 20:28 refers to “the church of God” at Ephesus as “the flock.” If a flock is anything but local and visible, the shepherd is in trouble.
Fifth, a candlestick is just about as local and visible as anything can be. The Lord uses seven candlesticks to be figures of seven churches (Rev. 1:20). Why did He use seven, when one could have done as well with the universal church idea?
These and other figures are absurd with the church theory.
Further, the universal church people confuse the church with the family of God. All the saved are in the family of God (Eph. 3:15). In other words, all the redeemed of all ages comprises the family of God, the usual definition given for the universal church.
Another thing to consider is the fact the universal church theory arose after the completion of the Bible. One who checks out his church history will find Catholicism and Protestantism gave birth to the universal idea, and both of them had post-biblical origins.
