“The church should be a spiritual hospital. It should not only be a fellowship of saints but also includes sinners.” How often we hear these words being spoken as an analogy of the church? I recently heard it again last Sunday. After some thought, I begin to see that the phrase has little biblical support, especially the second part of the phrase. (the phrase is not in its exact words but sounds something like that)
“The church should be a spiritual hospital”. I don’t argue that there is some truth in this phrase because it’s the church is supposed to spread the gospel to bring salvation to the unsaved and thus bring life and healing to their spirit. But is it only a hospital? I can’t imagine staying in a hospital the rest of my life. I’ll always be under treatment, can’t move freely and as a result, feel weak and sluggish. Imagining my spiritual life in this state makes me shiver.
Am I denying the sinful condition of myself? Of course not! We need checkups every now and then to asses our condition. If we sin, we should turn to God in repentance. He is the true Physician of the spirit. His Holy Spirit works in our spirit to cut away the tumors in our life.
Often than not, Christians in the bible are called to be soldiers and athletes, not patients. Read Paul’s epistles. We are called to fight the good fight (1Timothy 6:12) and run the race (Hebrews 12:1). We are called to pick up the full armor of God (Ephesians 6:13). We are called to stand firm and resist the evil one (James 4:7). We are called to flee from temptation. I highly doubt a person who spends his whole spiritual life in a hospital can do any of these.
I am particularly against the second part of the phrase stated at the beginning: It should not only be a fellowship of saints but should also include sinners. I was quite alarmed when I heard the speaker speak these words. I don’t know if other speakers pronounce these words but the speaker in my church certainly did last Sunday. If this is the sort of teaching that is being spread, I don’t know what is happening.
The support the speaker gave was that Jesus frequently ate and drank with “sinners” of his day. The “sinners” were the outcast of society, namely tax-collectors. Therefore, the church should not be exclusive for the fellowship of saints but also for sinners. But one thing is being omitted. It should also be noted that Jesus often had session with his disciples
ONLY (Mark 6:31). In addition, he also had intimate fellowship with three of them: Peter, James and John. In light of this, the speaker is giving an incomplete picture of the situation.
Some terms need to be defined here to establish the ground. To my understanding, saints are those who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and repent of his or her sins. Sinners are those who do not or have not accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Note earlier I said that Christians do sin but the difference is that we repent of it. In that sense, yes, Christians are “sinners” but we have become saints through Jesus Christ, our Savior and Lord.
The church IS a fellowship of saints. Throughout Paul’s epistles, he opens with the words “to the saints”. In addition, Christians are often called ‘a royal priesthood’, ‘saints’ and ‘holy nation’ (1 Peter 2:9). When we accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, the old (sinfulness) has gone and the new (pure, holy) has come (2 Corinthians 5:17). In God’s sight, we are made holy through the blood of Christ.
In the church, the saints are to encourage one another, learn from the teachers of the Word and prepare themselves for works of service (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Its something like a barracks or a gym where soldiers and athletes are trained respectively. Would unbelievers understand the deeper stuff we Christians learn in church (if there is any deeper stuff)?
Recently, I hear of some churches going ‘seeker friendly’ whereby the sermons and worship are to attract unbelievers. The sermons should consist of humorous anecdotes and must not deal directly with ‘taboo’ issues like sin. By eliminating true exposition of the Word and replacing it with ‘seeker friendly’ stuff, they are starving the people of true spiritual food. The people are being fed milk everyday and not moving on to eating meat causing them to be weak. When challenges come, they fall almost instantly because they are not grounded on the true Word of God, both in knowledge and practice (Matthew 7:24-27)
But I digress. At this point, I would also like to clarify the meaning of fellowship. Fellowship is more than just casual chit chat or ‘makan-makan’. Fellowship in the Bible is so much more. I heard a pastor explain the Greek/Latin word for that is translated into fellowship in the Bible. It is a deep sharing of one’s life. It implies a close and intimate relationship with one another. So, pray tell me, how can an unbeliever have fellowship with the saints? How can light have fellowship with darkness? The church is the body of Christ, says the Word of God. How can unbelievers fellowship with the church when God, who is holy, can’t stand sin (1 John 1:5)? Therefore, the phrase itself is in contradiction with itself and with the Word of God.
“I believe in the church, those who are united in the living Lord for the purpose of worship and service.” This is a part of the Affirmation of faith for the Korean Methodist Church which is used in the United Methodist Hymnal. It further reinforces my point stated above: if the church is united in the living Lord, how can darkness have fellowship with light? Impossible.
Does that mean we cannot be friends with unbelievers? Obviously not! This verse in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 is self explanatory:
9I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.If the person is an unbeliever and yet is included in the fellowship of the church and according to my definition of ‘fellowship’ above, he would be called a ‘brother’ as well, wouldn’t he?. But this verse says otherwise.
In conclusion, the phrase stated at the beginning is wrong. It contradicts itself and most importantly, contradicts the Word of God. All it is good for is to make the church sound less offensive.
Soli Deo Gloria
PS: Due to the length of this post, the Scripture verses used are posted in the post just below this particluar one.
***********************************************************
Oh my goodness! What the c*ap! So f*eaking long!!! Well...i told you guys that one long one is coming. :P There is another one. I'll put it up soon. Felt that this should be up first. Any comments, please post. Tell me if I made a mistake any where (misquotes, etc). Post counter-arguments also, if you have any. :P I would like to hear your point of view.
