The Error of the Pharisees and the Sadducees

When Jesus walked the Earth, His chief opposition came from the two leading religious parties of the day; the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Pharisees added to the Scriptures.  They obeyed the law of God as it was interpreted and applied by the scribes, the experts in the Law who lived pious and disciplined lives.  As the official interpreters of God's Word, the Pharisees were endowed with the power of creating traditions.  They tacked on to the Word of God reams of human laws that were passed on to subsequent generations.  

       The error of the Sadducees moved in the opposite direction.  They subtracted whole segments of Scripture - deeming only the law of Moses worthy to be observed.  (The Sadducees denied the existence of spirits, angels, the soul, the afterlife, and the resurrection.)        No wonder that when the Lord Jesus entered the drama of human history, His authority was arduously challenged.  He did not fit into the religious mold of either camp.  As a result, Jesus was viewed with suspicion by both the Pharisees and Sadducees.  It did not take long for this suspicion to turn to hostility.  And both the Pharisees and Sadducees took steps to put the Son of God to death.         History is repeating itself today.  Contemporary Christianity as fallen into the errors of both the Pharisees and the Sadducees.  First, contemporary Christianity is guilty of the errors of the Pharisees.  That is, it has added a raft of humanly devised traditions that have suppressed the living, breathing, functional headship of Jesus Christ in His church.        Second, in the traditions of the Sadducees, the great bulk of first-century practices have been removed from the Christian landscape.  Even so, the Pharisees and the Sadducees both teach us this often ignored lesson: it is harmful to dilute the authority of God's Word either by addition or subtraction.  We break the Scripture just as much by burying it under a mountain of human traditions as by ignoring its principles.         God has not been silent when it comes to the principles that govern the practice of His church.  Let me explain by posing a question: where do we find our practices for the Christian life? Where is our model of understanding what a Christian is in the first place? Is it not found in the life of Jesus Christ as portrayed in the New Testament? Or do we borrow it from somewhere else? Perhaps a pagan philosopher?        Few Christians would dispute that Jesus Christ, as He is presented in the New Testament, is the model for the Christian life. Jesus Christ is the Christian life. In the same way, when Christ rose from the dead and ascended, he gave birth to His church. That church was Himself in a different form. This is the meaning of the phrase the "body of Christ".        Consequently, in the New Testament we have the genesis of the church. I believe the first-century church was the church in its purest form, before it was tainted or corrupted. That's not to say the early church didn't have problems - Paul's epistles make it clear that it did. However, the conflicts Paul addresses are inevitable when a fallen people seek be part of the close-knit community.        The church in the first century was an organic entity. It was a living, breathing organism that expressed itself far differently than the institutional church today. And that expression revealed Jesus Christ on this planet through his every-member functioning body.  The practices of the first century church where the natural and spontaneous expression of the divine life that indwelt the early Christians. And those practices were solidly grounded in the timeless principles and teaching in the New Testament. By contrast, a great number of practices in many contemporary churches are in conflict with those biblical principles and teaching. When we dig deeper, we are compelled to ask: where did the practices of the contemporary church come from? The answer is disturbing: most of them were borrowed from pagan culture. Such a statement short-circuits the minds of many Christians when they hear it. But it is immovable, historical fact.        So, I would argue that on theological grounds, historical grounds, and pragmatic grounds, the first century Church best represents the dream of God... the beloved community that he intends to create and recreate in every chapter of human story. The first century church teaches us how the life of God is expressed when a group of people begin to live by it together.        An organic church is simply a church that is born out of spiritual life instead of constructed by human institutions and held together by religious programs. Organic churches are characterized by Spirit-led, open participatory meetings and nonhierarchical leadership. This is a stark contrast to a clergy-lead, institution-driven church.        I would theorize that when a group of Christians begins to follow the life of the Lord who indwells them together, the same outstanding features that marked the first-century church begin to emerge naturally.  This is because the church really is an organism. As such, it has DNA that will always produce these features if it is allowed to grow naturally. Granted, organic churches will have differences depending on the cultures in which they operate. But if the church is following the life of God who indwells it, it will never produce those nonscriptural practices that we see today. Such practices are foreign elements God's people picked up from their pagan neighbors as far back as the fourth century. They were embraced, baptized, and called "Christian". And that is why the church is in the state it is in today, hampered by endless divisions, power struggles, passivity, and lack of transformation among God's people.        That is why I am dedicated to exposing the traditions that have been tacked onto God's will for His church. My reason for writing is simple: I seek to remove a great deal of debris in order to make room for the Lord Jesus Christ to be the fully functioning head of His church.        I am also making an outrageous proposal: that the Church in its contemporary, institutional form has neither a biblical nor historical right to function as it does. This proposal, of course, is my conviction based upon the historical evidence that I shall present to you. You must decide if that proposal is valid or not. 

#reformation #church #jesus #christ #jesuschrist #god #change #revolution #revival #spiritual #masturbation #unity #faith #religion #prayer #sinners #savior #tithing #error #pharisees #hypocrisy #bride #repentance #awakening #fractured #foundations #love #truth #bible #biblical #christian #indulgence #baptism #peace #pray #life #wisdom #hope #grace #compassion #religious