Here in the State of Utah there are a number of ministries that reach out to the LDS. Utah Lighthouse ministry is like the original gangster and everyone else sort of followed in thereafter, including our own which moved into the State in 2006.

At that time there were several street ministries of whom I have never really seen eye to eye. One was headed by a man named Aaron Shafaffolov. Aaron is a dedicated soul to the cause of Christ, and while he has some pretty harsh things to say about me, personally (Aaron is a ardent Trinitarian, Calvinist and has a street preacher mentality) I know he means well and think he is probably far more devout than I will ever be.

But this does not mean I believe his views are correct. Aaron ardently postulates the import of being in a local church, submitting to its apparent authority, and that includes its discipline over you for sin.

Interpretation of Matthew 18:20

On a recent exposition on Aaron’s website he wrote the following about Matthew 18:20 where Jesus said:

“Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”
And he adds:
This might mean the exact opposite of how you’ve heard it used. This is not about casual, ad hoc churches that, like vapors, emerge briefly and then disappear. Neither is it about the mere universal church that spans the globe, inclusive of all Christians, expressed in unplanned intersections of believers at a coffee shop.

The context (18:15-20) is more serious. It describes a protocol of increasing escalation of confrontation that eventually arrives, if necessary, at excommunication. Let’s read it:
“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

Aaron says:
It refers to identifiable, regular, governed gatherings that are organized enough to recognize leadership and implement, in a church-wide coordinated way, church discipline.

Church Discipline

The verse is about Jesus putting his divine stamp of approval, as though bodily present, on a properly administered act of church discipline. Paul uses similar language referring to church discipline:
“For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 5:3-5)

It’s the kind of thing that would be exercised on “anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler.” (1 Corinthians 5:11) Or someone who, though having called themselves a brother, has (via persistent bad behavior or undue absence) separated themselves from the local church they were once committed to.

So if you’re inclined to think that the passage means you don’t need a well-regulated church, submission to elders, church discipline (i.e. excommunication), or a regular, identifiable gathering, or some semblance of church membership (at least defined as identifiable, mutually affirmed recognition of Christian faith and belonging), then you’re taking the text in the exact opposite direction. Churches are outpost-embassies of a kingdom that are marked by authority, governance, corporate unity, and regular gatherings. If you find yourself needing restoration from sin, but

Understanding Biblical Texts Today

Refuse the gentle (and then increasingly firm) pleadings of your local church, you just might find your name announced at a church members meeting. And if you have refused to attach yourself to a local church, it’s as though you’ve preemptively excommunicated yourself from God’s people. Sober up and fear God. That act of discipline (Paul favorably called it “judging” and “purging” in 1 Corinthians 5:13), rightly administered, is given as though Jesus sits bodily on his throne at the local church. “Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.” (Matthew 18:20)

Got all of that? Now, here’s the rub which many people of the faith do not really understand – so hear me clearly – Aaron is absolutely right IF the Bible was written as a manual for believers to follow exactly today AND if Jesus has not come back and taken His bride from the earth.

Issues with Modern Application of New Testament Practices

In other words, what Aaron is, more than most, truly dedicated to taking the New Testament – even the very words Jesus shared with His own Jewish disciples about how to govern their gatherings before His return to them – and applying them to now. There are several problems with this approach.

First, nowhere does the scripture Aaron is appropriating to today directed to any audience than whom it was originally written. Therefore Aaron is not anywhere authorized to take that text written almost 2000 years ago and to apply it to the present. Secondly, and hand in hand with this, Aaron conveniently ignores the fact that Jesus chose living apostles to guide that church until He returned to take her – as promised. Those living apostles were around until the end – even though only one remained, John – and they governed the church-bride with authority from above along with a super-abundance of the Holy Spirit.

Once Jesus came and took his pure and unblemished bride, God plainly says (in more ways than one) that the faith was then going to be written on individuals' hearts and minds, and no longer would anyone have to preach to his neighbor know the Lord Know the Lord for all who are His will know Him.

Unfortunately, and thirdly, Brother Aaron, while trying his darnedest to implement these rules given to others and to do it with usurped authority from the text, he fails to abide by all of the New Testament directives as a believer today – and that makes him an accomplice to hypocrisy. The last thing is that what Aaron is suggesting here is anathematic to the idea of Romans 2 where Paul plainly teaches that judging someone for something when you are also guilty of breaking laws, is wrong. That is a central tenet of the Christian faith.

Authority in the New Testament Age

In the New Testament age, there was an authority to act out what Aaron suggests should be acted out today. It was given to living apostles and they then gave it to others, allowing them to do such judging without the crime of hypocrisy. That authority is nowhere bestowed or given to any human being on earth today and therefore attempts from men to judge others is an outright, uncontextual, illegitimate fail on the part of anyone who tries to do it.

I called Aaron and asked that we talk together. His modus operandi is, of course, to not communicate with someone he deems is heretical so I got no call back.

As hard and stridently as well-meaning believers try to take the New Testament narrative and apply it literally today in institutionalized religion, it has been, and will continue to be a fail. God knew this. And that is why His church-bride that the gates of hell would not prevail against was taken when she was still (but barely) manageable by living apostles who were able to bring her forward pure and undefiled and ready for pick up by her husband.

Everything thereafter have amounted to unauthorized zealots trying to play church by rules never ever intended for us today.

New Biblical Perspectives

Tonight on our long show we are going to begin a series I am calling, New Biblical Perspectives. And tonight I am going to show/teach you all through a portion of the New Testament how it ought to be considered today. And we are going to begin with one of the three Pastoral Epistles – which are seen as 1st Timothy, 2nd Timothy and Titus. They are called the Pastoral Epistles because they contain words from the Apostle Paul to Timothy and then

Understanding the Role of the New Testament

Titus, on how to govern and run the churches that they were over. So let me take this short discussion about Aaron’s stance, and go deeper through our new series we all calling, New Biblical Perspectives. Do you take the word of God seriously? I freaking do. And so I want to execute my faith and walk with the least amount of hypocrisy as possible. So, let’s talk about something I see no way getting around – with one exception.

Almost every Christian believer on earth accepts the Bible – at least the New Testament – as playing a really important role in the life and walk of believers – but to what extent? We just read how Aaron takes it, and between he and me there are probably a thousand different other approaches. Let’s break the believers view of the Bible in two categories – those who say the New Testament is absolutely applicable in every way to the church of believers (that is Aaron's view) and those who say that it is not. And I would suggest that it is an either/or:

Either you do or you don’t.

The Role of Eschatology in Biblical Interpretation

And I am of the latter group, but my reason is not based on preference of text in the least, its based on sound eschatology. See, IF Jesus has not come back and taken his church (as I maintain), then the Bible is absolutely a direct, literal manual on how to live as God wants us to live as a church of believers. I admit that. And no matter what the New Testament says, if it’s inspired and if it is directing believers on how to live and what to do until Yeshua comes to take his bride.

No exceptions. This would be because Jesus is still coming back in the future to take his church and she would still be under apostolic authority, and she needs, as Paul says in Ephesians 5, to be holy, pure, without spot, unblemished and blameless. You understand that there is no getting around this, right? None. Unless you want to create your own rules and ways – which people obviously do – but I am not one of them.

Apostolic Authority and Modern Church Practices

To me, either the Apostles wrote truth or they didn’t, and if what they wrote is true then what they said should be followed, until the circumstances surrounding that truth are fulfilled and done. For instance, Paul said that Jesus said to eat communion until he returns. When he returned or returns, then taking communion then would not be required because the circumstances would have changed.

So let’s get into what I see as the least applicable book (to our day and age) in the New Testament) 1st Timothy. I have covered most New Testament books verse by verse and I see 1st Timothy as the least applicable book of them all. Not saying it doesn’t have some value, but much of it is unapplicable. Paul writes (by the way, the letter is addressed only to Timothy and its purpose is to instruct him on how to govern the church at Ephesus in Paul’s temporary absence in that day) but Paul (in chapter 5 verse 20) writes:

20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

If Jesus has not returned, I agree with this statement, I accept it as of the Holy Spirit, and I would, no matter the fallout, practice it here at CAMPUS. For all the reasons I have given, but to reiterate – I would do this because:

I believe that this advice is vital to a church that has to be pure and undefiled;
I believe that Paul was inspired to write it to help the church sustain its purity
And I believe I do not have the right to change the practice just because it is uncomfortable and creates problems.

I would submit to it, and would support it whole–heartedly – if I believed that the circumstances had not changed and if I could not prove through the Bible that they have. But my question is why churches today who believe Jesus is coming back in the future are not following this directive?

Oh, I know some are. We’ve seen them depicted in films like, The Witch, The Scarlett Letter, The White Ribbon and best of all, in the Crucible, right? But what about the vast majority of modern churches, the megas, and the standard denoms – are they following Paul’s clear command here? How on earth can they justify not doing this, one, – if they

Biblical Teachings on Sin and Rebuke

Claim that the Bible is vital to follow word for word, and two, (and most importantly) if they believe that Jesus is still coming back to take his church/bride to heaven! So again, what does Paul say? He says:

20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

This is probably referring to the Elders called out by two or three witnesses as directed in earlier verses, but Paul takes the subject and applies it generally to everyone – at least that’s the way it reads. So, take “them that sin,” and “rebuke before all,” contextually, “before all the church or congregation,” so that “others may fear.”

We come to something that I believe is truly important in this day and age of understanding the context of scripture –

We either practice what the New Testament depicts (as important in the faith) OR we offer justifiable reasons why we do not practice what the New Testament depicts. But I personally renounce the practice of claiming to follow the Bible and believing that Jesus is coming back, but omitting things like 1st Timothy 5:20.

Practicing and Following New Testament Teachings

You cannot do it without being a hypocrite. You either follow it or give reasonable support as to why you don’t follow it, but you cannot say you follow it and not. Not as a committed believer. Believers either follow the New Testament or we don’t. If we don’t, we better have a solid substantive reason why, supported by the text which validates our failure to comply.

Therefore, if you, or your church or your pastor or elders or deacons boards teach that Jesus is coming back AND you teach that the Bible is your authority – and I really mean this – then you ought to belong to a church that practices what Paul taught as a means to prepare the church for his arrival and to support your claim of following the Bible. This means that you, or your leaders, ought to embrace verse 20 and take:

“Them that sin and rebuke them before all, that others also may fear.”

“Brother Jones, you were seen in a Mexican restaurant drinking wine last week – five glasses! This is sin. Repent or be cast out.” Sister Smith, you told a lie about your husband’s employment to the lady’s group. That is sin. Repent or be cast out.

Brother Michael, you, Sister Fran, you! Little Jimmy, you! Is your church practicing this?

Feasibility in Modern Churches

And then also importantly, Can a church reasonably practice this in this day and age? In the day it was written the believers were few in number and cloistered in very small groups from the same vicinities. How would we know the sins of everyone in the group in the first place when churches today are attended without boundaries?

Then, is anyone worthy enough to condemn others by calling them out before the congregation and not be guilty of hypocrisy? Can a church today feasibly do this? Who? How? What other things need to be in place for calling out the sins of others before the congregation effectively? Can a mega-church do it? Can a church of 200? HOW?

My point is folks, i, as the Bible emphatically states and supports, Jesus came back and took his church/bride as promised, then these practices Paul gives to Timothy are obsolete, unimportant, and not applicable in the least – because all things of the material church have been shaken to nothing, and the only thing that remains is God directly living and leading the lives of all who are Him.

There is no hypocrisy or failure in this view. And it’s biblical. And it gives justification for non-action on things like this passage. But most importantly, it is endorsed by the living God.

Hypocrisy is not.

Write your comments below. We’ll read them tomorrow night, here on Heart of the Matter.

And now, let’s read your comments from last week!

New Bible Perspective, Part 1

Recorded in the Mecca of Mormonism

Outreach to the LDS in Utah