If the Devil Wanted to Make a Denomination Out of the Church

by Floyd Chappelear
via Sentry Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 2, June 1994

The church of our Lord was fashioned in the mind of God before earth-time began (Ephesians 1:9-10; 3:9-11). It was made according to His purpose and was built by Him after the earthly sojourn of Jesus Christ (Matthew 16:18). Everything about it was perfect and needed nothing more. All that pertains to its eternal existence as a church in the universal sense and all that relates to its earthly manifestation as each separate local congregation was ordained of God as God wanted it to be. Thus, all it is to do and be is directed by God himself (see I Peter 4:11; II Peter 1:3; et al).

However, there is an imperfection in the church that cannot be denied or avoided. That flaw lies in the fact that the church is composed of individuals. When men and women are added to the church (Acts 2:47), they come in fully whole, absolutely cleansed, and perfect before God; having been washed, sanctified, and justified (I Corinthans 6:11). However, no miracle took place in the new birth which made them wholly spiritual with no carnal attitudes at all. In fact, the "nature" brought to Christ is the one we must refashion into the perfect beings God wants us to be (cf. Romans 12:2; Ephesians 2:2; I Corinthians 3:3-4). The imperfection in the church is found in the defects of its building blocks (I Peter 2:5).

We know that Christ is the head of the church (Ephesians 1:22-23). However, is there anyone who would deny that where Diotrephes lived, there was a pretender to the throne (III John)? In a sense, Diotrephes was refashioning the church into something it should not have been. It was on the road to becoming the denomination we now know as the Roman Catholic Church. This is not to say that the very congregation which was his (Diotrephes’) was the progenitor of Romanism, but the spirit that prevailed there was the spirit that led to the apostasy which resulted in Romanism.
Warnings had been given by Paul and the Spirit of God (I Timothy 4:1). However, was the Spirit speaking exclusively to those in the first century, or was he warning about apostasies in whatever age they might occur? It seems fair to assume that the warning given then has application today. After all, the same fault that lay within the first-century church exists today. It was made up of frail human beings, even as the church of today is so populated. Thus, the effectual workings of Satan are as much to be feared now as they were then. He is still seeking whom he may destroy (I Peter 5:8), and he may find it easier where brethren are not awake to his devices.

The Steps to Apostasy

What would the Devil do to effect a denomination out of the church today? It is here being suggested that the following items would serve as building blocks for a denomination among men. These are not being offered in any particular order but as merely possibilities of what the Devil would do if he wanted to make a denomination out of the blood-bought body of Jesus Christ (Acts 20:28). (Incidentally, the church universal is immune to apostasy in any denominational sense. The Devil has to work on the local churches if he is to have any success at all.)

As we consider these items, let us freely acknowledge that many of them are things we all approve of. In fact, we might consider them expediencies which effectually expedite the very noble work to which we have all laid our hands. Now, having said that, what would the Devil do?

• He would form an organization separate from the church. Christ built it (Matthew 16:18), whereas men build the lesser ones (I Corinthians 3:8-15). The independent and autonomous churches do not readily lend themselves to denominationalism, which is why another humanly devised organization has to be fashioned. Something must exist that would allow the unconstrained congregations to be drawn into a yoke of servitude. Another organization or a corrupted local church is a necessary first step.
• Since effective communication is a prerequisite, a means for it is necessary. He would have us start a gospel paper. After all, uninspired literature is spoken of in scripture itself (see; Colossians 4:16; I Kings 14:19; Joshua 10:13; I Kings 11:41; I Chronicles 29:29; II Chronicles 9:29; 12:15). This is not to suggest that a gospel paper is wrong, per se, but that such can be used as the official "mouthpiece" of a denominational structure. As such, the "last word" must always be had by those with whom the editor agrees. In fact, as much as possible, opposition must be stifled if denominational status is to be realized.
• Control can be maintained only where there is no "competition." Thus, other gospel papers must be swallowed up or absorbed. The Judaizers lost their dominance when "both sides" were heard at Jerusalem (Acts 15:4-35). No, they did not cease to exist nor to disturb churches, but they were limited where brethren had access to another point of view.
• The Devil would want locally produced church bulletins discontinued. To successfully control the thinking of a large segment of the brotherhood, it would be best to urge churches to stop producing locally produced bulletins and to send the denominational voice instead. Let churches underwrite the production of the brotherhood gospel paper.
• A single name must be agreed upon if a denomination is to materialize. In the nineteenth century, the brethren were effectively "disorganized" by their failure to adopt a single name. Some called themselves "Disciples," others "the Christian Connection," and other groups were known as "churches of Christ." A single name is necessary. Why not "Church of Christ"? It matters little that the term is never found in scripture; it can become the official name of the church. (The nearest you can come to the term is Romans 16:16, which says, "churches of Christ.") Any other designation, although sanctioned in scripture, such as "church of God," must be held as suspect.
• The distinction between the church local and church universal must be blurred. This is most easily done by ignoring the fact that Jesus built the church universal and men build the church local, "according to the pattern," even as Moses was instructed (Exodus 25:9; Hebrews 8:5). Additionally, what Jesus built cannot be restored, for it never went out of existence. Consider, for instance, we cannot restore the builder, the starting date, the site of its establishment, the conditions of its establishment, etc. The church universal is not subject to restoration. All we can restore is the church, composed of men and women who have been "restored" to God. Additionally, it must be noted that the church universal is composed of saved individuals, not congregations. To fail to do this is to blur the distinction between the two.
• To further the blurring of the distinction, the Devil would urge us to drive out of the church those who are not part of the local church of which we are a part. This would help to obscure the fact that there is no universal church discipline which men may enact. Be sure to ignore that every passage which deals with church discipline (withdrawing) specifies that the party be among you (see I Corinthians 5:1-2; II Thessalonians 3:10-12; Titus 3:10).
• Develop a creed, whether it be in the deed or in an "innocent" questionnaire. Faithfulness will be determined by the answers to the humanly devised document rather than by what the Bible says. To be truly effective and totally deceptive, the "questionnaire creed" must be defended on the basis of "elders have the right to question preachers they support." Who would argue otherwise? Nobody. Thus, the real issue, "will faithfulness be determined by the answers given to the questionaire" must be avoided. By focusing on the wrong thing, a creedal questionnaire may be defended and accepted by brethren willing to make the church into a denomination.
• Positions must be taken because of who says or does it rather than by what is right. "What saith the scripture" will be a question which will become passe (cf. Galatians 4:30). For instance, our "creed" may demand that a given passage has a certain application for some, which it does not have for those who fashion the creed. For example, some who are publicly opposed to Romans 14 having any application to the marriage/divorce/remarriage question will be permitted to apply it to themselves and the problems it creates within their inner circle. Consider the following from a letter by just such a man, "You implied that I had not discussed the issue on which brother-----------and some others on our staff are disagreed with them. We have discussed it.... Both of us are agreed that our difference falls into the area of things discussed in Romans 14 and are trying to do what that chapter teaches about receiving one another (Romans 14:1-3), holding our personal conscience to ourselves (Romans 14:22), and keeping our personal conscience clean (Romans 14:23). You would not advise either of us to do otherwise would you?" It is appalling that Romans 14 cannot be appealed to when some do it, but can be when those within a certain circle of fellowship choose to apply it to themselves. Another example may be that anything the liberals do is wrong, whereas a prominent man among us can seek church contributions for a legal defense fund, and that is altogether acceptable. Politics must reign within the party.
• Think in terms of a monolithic church. By this we mean, speak as if the Universal Church has divided over instrumental music, orphans’ homes, etc., when in fact the universal church has divided over nothing. Division affects only functioning fellowships, of which the only one known of in the New Testament is the local church.
• Seek contributions from the universal church (all individual Christians) to fund a human organization and thus activate the universal church. In New Testament times, contributions were sought at the local level (I Corinthians 16:1-2; II Corinthians 8 and 9) to support the needs of local churches. Works must be enlarged so as to include every living Christian wherever.
• Develop a uniform worship for all saints, to the extent possible. This can be aided by publishing a songbook that eliminates questionable songs (premillennial, etc.). Who can deny that our singing needs to be controlled to some degree (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16)?
• Along those lines, a brotherhood publishing concern should be established. This group could publish books by approved authors whose views align exclusively with those of leadership. In fact, to further control the thinking of younger preachers, the group should eschew existing commentaries and publish an approved commentary with all the proper imprimaturs or editorial control. Only those whose views coincide with the head of the organization will be given free rein to write a volume of the commentary.
• Obviously, a uniform Bible class program will have to be established. The first step will be to raise contributions and publish Bible class material for all ages. Consider that God said, "understand what the will of the Lord is" (Ephesians 5:17), which statement necessitates a uniform teaching curriculum.
• Elevate traditions to a point of law. The term "Church of Christ" may be an authorized expediency, but it must become more than that. One would start by questioning anyone who would use another term to describe a local church! Even if the alternative were found in the word of God (Church of God, for instance, I Corinthians 1:1).
• The Devil would promote fellowship among the churches, or even the withdrawal of the same. Never mind that God always speaks of withdrawing fellowship from individuals (see I Corinthians 5:1-7) and not churches. Also, ignore that the two faithful churches among the seven in Asia were told to do nothing concerning the five apostatizing ones (Revelation 2 and 3).
• Open study among brethren must be discouraged. This can be done in a number of ways, but two of them are: Abuse brethren when a dialogue has been arranged. Engender as much hostility as possible so as to discourage future meetings. Also, have a "closed door policy" regarding the official journal. If not a totally closed door, at least always insist that those with whom the editor agrees always get the last word. An atmosphere of suspicion must be created if possible. One way to do this is to charge those with whom one disagrees of having a "hidden agenda" whenever nothing can be found in their teaching with which one can find fault.
• If a denomination is to result, then a trained clergy must be formed. This can be done by creating a Bible college whose primary mission is to train clergy. If building such a college is impractical, then encourage those with whom the governing body agrees to start "brotherhood" preacher-training facilities within strategic local churches. After all, we must all "speak the same thing" (I Corinthians 1:10), and this can be accomplished only where the official "dogma" is inculcated. The saving of souls will not be a profound part of the curriculum; effective pulpit work will be the "de rigor" concerns of the new clergy.

Now, what if it can be shown that some of these things (most of these things? all of these things?) have already been initiated by one man or a group of men, is it being said that there is a conspiracy to remake the Lord’s church into a denomination? No, not at all, for I believe my brethren have nought but the purest motives for what they do. ("To the pure, all things are pure.") This does not mean they might not be shortsighted or misguided; I would deny that they possess evil intent. However, if the machinery is already in place, the Devil will not hesitate to use it when the time is right.

Brethren, when too much power (leverage, control, authority, etc.) is concentrated in a few hands, there is real danger that Satan will take charge. Satan is power-oriented and will use whoever has it. Wasn’t that the case with Diotrophes (III John)? Wasn’t that the case with the developing Roman church (II Thessalonians 2:1-4)?

One of the reasons I will not have a "staff" associated with Sentry Magazine is that I do not want to concentrate power within it. The reason I will not permit this journal to continue after my death under the editorial control of another is that I do not believe the influence and goodwill of one person should be passed on to another. This accumulation of influence and power is what ultimately leads to denominationalism. Let us wake up to that fact and do all we can to avoid it!

Furthermore, let us not be so naive as to believe that the apostasizing influences are working only among the liberals or denominations. They are active among "us." Finally, let us not see "trends toward apostasy" only in those areas where brethren disagree on marriage, mixed swimming, etc., but they are more likely to exist in the field of church organization. This is where Satan is most active, and this is where he is most likely to lead us into apostasy.