Making A Difference Through Holiness

I have prayed and considered what to say as we open this fellowship meeting. I felt like it would be good to address some issues that relate to us as the body of Christ, as we stand distinct from everything else in religion, even modern Pentecostal religion.

But first, let me issue a warning about a big problem in the world today. We all need to be made aware of the risk of identity theft. Every three seconds in this country, someone’s identity is stolen. Identity theft is more than a nuisance; it is a real problem. But I want to warn you of one specific identity theft. Everyone needs to be aware of identity theft that is occurring on a massive level. In fact, this crime is occurring now; and the government is doing nothing about it. This particular identity theft is targeting a minority group and is stealing their most precious possession. Yet nobody is doing anything about this massive crime.

The identity theft I am concerned about is the vast number of people and groups who stole our identity and now claim to be the body of Christ. They preach another Jesus. They are not operating under the headship of Jesus Christ. One day He will profess to them: Depart from me, ye workers of iniquity, I never knew you. But for today, they claim to be us. They claim to be the body of Christ, and they are not. They think the body of Christ is mystical, composed of true believers in every denomination. It is not. We are. But as bad as it is to have someone steal your identity; it is even worse when you give it away.

The modern expression of the body of Christ emerged from the Pentecostal and Holiness movements. We are, and have always been, a holiness people. The readily-identifiable holiness movement is fading, dying out. Its few groups are regarded as anachronistic relics of a bygone era. The feel-good, universal love doctrine of the modern church has gained general acceptance. For the most part, modern churchianity has abandoned any teaching on living modestly, any eloquent railing against sin, or any demand for true discipleship. Psycho-babble has replaced the preaching of the cross. It is rare to find a church that is demanding that people overcome sin, and asking Christians to live a separated, sanctified life.

Yet as the holiness movement wanes, the Pentecostal movement is waxing greater. We, as a holiness Pentecostal people, have to feel the effects of these two great currents of religion. We feel the weakening of the holiness movement, and the strengthening of the non-holiness Pentecostal movement. The weakening of the holiness movement means it is getting harder to stand for the truth that without holiness, no man shall see the Lord. We are perceived as more and more out of step with the religious world because there are fewer and fewer people who look and act like us.

We also feel the strengthening of Pentecostalism. Like an increasing gravitational field, we are being pulled toward the growing Pentecostal-Charismatic-Evangelical world. Make no mistake: Pentecostalism is growing on a worldwide basis. While Roman Catholicism is struggling to retain members, at least faithful members who attend Mass regularly; and while Protestantism is losing members from most denominations; Pentecostalism is growing.

The world has changed. Pentecostals are now part of mainstream Christianity. It is now socially-acceptable to be a Pentecostal. For most of the last century, Pentecostals were looked down upon. Early Pentecostal preachers and people were ridiculed, mocked, and sometimes even run out of town. They were rejected from polite society as strange, weird, possibly mentally-deranged, and generally unacceptable. But the worldwide growth in the Pentecostal movement has radically changed that.

The world now has 600 million Pentecostals – the largest group of Christians after Roman Catholics. In Asia, the number of Pentecostals has grown from 10 million in 1970 to 166 million today, according to the Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. In Latin America, Pentecostals have grown from 13 million to 151 million. In Africa, from 18 million to 156 million. By 2050 most of Africa will be Christian, and most of those Christians will be Pentecostals. And from North America, the growth has been from 19 million to 77 million. Today, almost 90% of the Pentecostals in the world are outside the United States. But even here, it is now acceptable to be a nondenominational Pentecostal. The number of U.S. Christians who claim to be “nondenominational” grew from less that 200,000 in 1990 to more than 8 million today.

Isn’t that wonderful! Or is it? The deception of the end-times is a religious deception. II Thessalonians 2:11 warns that in the end times, there will be a strong delusion. And Revelation 13:13 says that the 8th head of the beast makes fire come down from heaven – like Acts 2. Maybe the amazing growth of Pentecostalism is a mixed blessing. We can hope that the acceptability of Pentecostalism will make it easier for us to preach the Gospel. People won’t immediately reject us as some type of weirdos. Right? Or is there a risk to us in this?

Being acceptable carries a grave danger! We risk being assimilated into the religious world. There is no danger of being embraced and assimilated when you are rejected as unacceptable. But when you only have to modify your positions a little bit to be acceptable, the temptation to do so intensifies. “If we would just ease up on this standard, or modify our position on that, we wouldn’t be rejected as some strange cult.” So what? Is that the goal? Do we want our unique message and order to be acceptable to man, or to God?

Every movement, even those that are of God, eventually drifts off the foundation into worldliness and apostasy. A man with a vision builds a movement, but that movement becomes a mechanism and eventually just a monument. That is what happened to the early church, and what happened to Israel many times in the Old Testament. It happened to the movement that Martin Luther spearheaded. It happened to the Wesleyan movement. We cannot arrogantly assume it will never happen to us.

I pray it doesn’t. If it does; we won’t even know it. But I believe we can be the last move of God in the church age. But that means we must remain diligent, alert, watchful, prayerful, meaningful, mindful, merciful, graceful, and closely following our wonderful Lord.

As Pentecostalism becomes more acceptable and mainstream, we face an increasing risk of assimilation. We can compromise just a bit, and make it easier for people to accept us – all with the best intentions. If we lower our holiness standards, people will feel more comfortable in our churches and we might get the chance to preach our message to them. If we show we aren’t that much different from other Pentecostal churches in town, people won’t think we are some strange cult. Maybe if we act more like other churches, people will quit attacking us on the internet.

But should we really be seeking acceptability? Are we willing to run the risk of assimilation? When my uncle went to Africa the first time in 1978, he stepped into a conference room full of preachers and seminary students and he told them he was the first man of God to come to Africa in 2000 years. In three days, he covered all the major doctrines: the godhead, hell, the limited Bride company, the first resurrection, the body of Christ, and Mystery Babylon.

He didn’t try to be acceptable. He didn’t present this body as just another Pentecostal group. He told these preachers they were in Babylon, and they could either stay in Babylon or come out of Babylon into the body of Christ. He did not employ Dale Carnegie. He did not mollycoddle these preachers. He presented a stark contrast between who we are and what they were in.

Is that what we should do? What is wrong with being more like the other Pentecostals? What should be our focus? Will we lose our focus if we become more acceptable? Where will we drift if we lose our distinctiveness? Do we need to look and act more like the world so the unchurched will feel comfortable around us, and perhaps listen to our message? Should our services be more like other Pentecostal church services so their members are more free to fellowship us, and accept us? Or will we make the most impact when we are the most different from the sinful world and the religious world? We cannot make a difference by being the same as everyone else.

Sure, some people will reject who we are before they know us, just because we are different. But shouldn’t we be different? Or should we be like others, except preach a message that is different? I’m asking a lot of questions. I pray you have the answers. How far does our difference go? Is it limited to a different message, or is our entire lifestyle to be different in the body of Christ? Where should we compromise with the spirit of the age? So should we be different? Why? How?

I’ve been taught that this group is different, gloriously different, than anything else in religion. There are threescore queens, fourscore concubines, and virgins without number, but my beloved is but one.” Song of Solomon 6:8. Babylon sits as a queen. Great Protestant and Pentecostal organizations are queens and concubines. There are virgin movements without number, but we are not one of them. We are different. Yet my warning to the ministry and saints, to our overseas brethren, and to anyone who will listen to me, is that we can lose our distinctiveness. We can compromise our standards for the sake of acceptability, we can compromise our doctrines because they might be offensive, we can reach out the right hand of fellowship to other Pentecostal churches and groups, but we will lose our focus.

Let me be clear: I am not preaching against other Pentecostal groups. I am not against them. They are doing what the Lord has asked them to do. God bless them in that. But we must do what God has asked us to do. We must be what God has asked us to be. We will lose our standing with God as the body of Christ if we lose our focus, our mission, our uniqueness.

We cannot afford to take the risk of adopting Babylon’s ways, methods, message, mission, standards, or order. Nor can we adopt the ways of the world. Yet some may say, we’ll never attract the unchurched, and especially today’s young people, unless we act and look more “cool.” They need to feel comfortable in here.

I disagree. I believe many people in our society are looking for a higher power. They are seeking something that transcends ordinary, normal life. You can tell what interests society by looking at the popular themes of the world. I don’t watch these, but there are an amazing number of TV shows about the supernatural, the paranormal and mystical powers. “Ghost whisperers,” “Touched by an Angel,” and many others are what stirs the interest.

Also, demographers and social scientists are detecting a trend in society that we should be aware of. This is a desire to connect with a past that is perceived as more stable and less shallow than this present generation. You see this in retro-clothing styles, in classic architecture, in historic preservation, and such things. A recent article in Christianity Today magazine pointed out the growing trend for church buildings that look like church buildings instead of warehouses or theaters. People are looking for something that transcends the world: something different than what they already have or can easily get. In one survey of unchurched people, Thom Ranier found that more than 85% said a church’s theology and doctrine would be the primary consideration in choosing a church if they ever decided to join one.

Isn’t that amazing? The unchurched are more likely to come to church for the teaching of the Word than for the music, for the location, or for the social aspects of feeling comfortable there. If people are looking for anointed preaching of the truth – then we have more of that than any other people I know. Somebody please tell them that we already have what they are looking for. We don’t have to make major changes in who we are; we just need to let them know that we have what they are seeking.

Many, even in the church world, are realizing that young people don’t want slick productions, and music and mannerisms that mimic what they already have in their social world. Attempt by churches to imitate that and become “cool” to the young people are viewed with suspicion by them. It isn’t what they are looking for. They already have that. What young people really want is the truth that will enable them to have meaningful interaction and that transcends their reality. Just when society is laced with a growing number of people who want something different, far too many churches are developing creative ways to be just the same.

The true church is an alternative society. It is counter to the culture of the world around us. We are not to compete with Babylon; we are not to compete with the world; we are to offer a refreshing alternative to both. We must not communicate the message that we have nothing unique to offer. What we can offer is deeply spiritual and profoundly transforming.

With apologies to Rick Warren, the well-known author of such hugely popular books as The Purpose Driven Life, it isn’t a purpose-driven life that we are to seek. Rather, we are seeking a purpose-driven death. Living by God’s standards means taking up the cross, crucifying the flesh, and mortifying the deeds of the body. This death is not meaningless. There is a purpose for it, and it is a choice made on purpose. But it takes a compelling vision to press on in acquiescing in a voluntary death. This is what the Lord has asked us to do. There are huge risks in modifying who we are to please the crowds. What is true and right cannot be adulterated and still used in true worship.

When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, God told him: Be sure you build it according to the pattern I showed you in the mount. Exodus 25:40. God wanted His people to worship Him in a tightly-prescribed manner. The altars, the dimensions of the tabernacle, the materials used, and everything else about the work of the Lord, were controlled by the Word of God. They were not open for modification. No one could substitute their own ideas about how to do things.

In Leviticus 10:1, two priests of the Lord, Nadab and Abihu, offered strange fire on the altar. The Lord refused to accept this worship, and struck them down. We can offer strange fire by offering unacceptable sacrifices, strange worship, new and innovative practices, music, teaching, methods, etc. Perhaps we should be doing a risk/benefit analysis. Do the risks of our changes in order and style outweigh the potential benefits?

There is an important principle in Joshua, chapter 7. This is where the armies of Israel were defeated because Achan hid a Babylonish garment in his tent, displeasing God. Note that the Bible doesn’t say that Achan sinned; it says that Israel sinned. Verse 11. I cannot overemphasize this point. When Achan sinned, Israel sinned. What you do doesn’t just affect you; your actions are imparted to all of us. Its not just you, or just your church. You are compacted in as part of this body. We are connected to one another. Every joint supplies something to the body – for good or for evil.

All Israel bore the judgment of defeat before Ai because of the sin of Achan. We can put the whole body of Christ at risk if we secretly bring in Babylon’s ways. Jeremiah 51:26 says that the Lord will not take a stone out of Babylon to build upon. We cannot afford to pattern our lives, our church services, our ministries, or our operation and methods, after the ways of Babylon.

Another important principle is found in II Kings 16:10-16. Judah’s King Ahaz went to Damascus and saw a new altar, one dedicated to idolatry. He thought it looked good; so he had an identical one built in the temple in Jerusalem. Didn’t he know that you cannot take the instruments of false religion and use them in the house of the Lord? Remember, you cannot take a stone out of Babylon for a foundation. Jeremiah 51:26. And we cannot use Babylon’s methods in the body of Christ.

God, Himself, had given directions about building the brazen altar. Exodus 27:1-8, especially verse 8. Ahaz moved the brazen altar out of the way, to make room for this new, nice altar. We can move the things of God out of the way in our lives, too.

Urijah the priest compromised. He thought there was no harm in a new altar, as long as it was used for the Lord’s sacrifices. But God had made His position clear years before; when He had slain Nadab and Abihu. God doesn’t want us to compromise with false religion in our manner of worship. We are to be true worshippers. As priest, Urijah should have defended God’s institutions to the death. When King Uzziah tried to offer incense on the golden altar in the holy place, the priests of the Lord confronted him. II Chronicles 26:16-20. They refused to compromise, and God stood with them. The ministry today is under tremendous pressure to compromise with the world, and to look like and act like Babylon.

Despite Urijah’s attempt to sanctify the new altar for the worship of Jehovah, King Ahaz really was worshipping the false gods of the Assyrians. II Chronicles 28:23. If you bring in Christian rock or rap music to the church, you may try to say it is sanitized and used to worship the true Lord, but in reality it is worship of the god of this world. The true altar was de-emphasized and moved out of the way. The truth of living an overcoming life can be de-emphasized in our churches. We can avoid preaching against sin, focusing on a syrupy gospel of sickly-sweet love. Again, Urijah should have reproved the king’s sin; instead he became an accomplice in that sin. Parents can do that with their self-willed children. Pastors can do that with a self-willed congregation.

In verses 17-18, Ahaz destroyed the brazen sea, which Solomon had put on 12 oxen, with their hinder parts inward. Ahaz destroyed the symbolism. This was for the purifying of the priests. Woe unto them that hinder the purification of God’s ministry. Ahaz also removed the covert for the Sabbath. This was a special entrance into the temple for the Sabbath, so no one would have to work that day – opening the gates. The king despised the Sabbath. But God had said in Exodus 20:8: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Ahaz defiled the holy things. We can do that when we withhold our tithes, when we have more important things to do than go to church, or anytime we ignore God’s commands.

He also demolished the king’s entry into the temple. This had been the route Solomon had used to ascend into the house of the Lord, and which so impressed the Queen of Sheba. But to impress his new friend from Assyria, Ahaz got rid of it. It may be that Ahaz demolished this king’s entrance to show that he was not going to go to the house of the Lord anymore. He was burning his bridges. Don’t ever decide to leave church. If you do leave, however, please don’t burn your bridges – you might need them to get back some day. It is sad when those who have had an easy access to the house of God, perhaps they were raised in the body of Christ, but they turn away.

The king should have kept serving God as his righteous predecessors had. Ministers and leaders of the church can destroy their entrance into the house of God by not respecting God’s house, His work, etc. I believe we should all work to give the work of God our greatest respect. That’s why I dress up to come to church. I would not dress any nicer if I was invited to the White House to meet the President, than I do to go to the church house to meet the Lord.

And, ministers and saints, be careful what you get rid of. The Sabbath entrance and the king’s entrance were not something that the law of God required. Technically, they were not prescribed by the Lord. But their destruction accentuated a trend toward ungodliness. We can destroy standards of holiness and godly traditions that are not technically required by the Word of God, but their abandonment fuels a stampede toward unrighteousness in the people. There is a great risk, to me an unacceptable risk, that they will become lukewarm, when once they burned with zeal and passion. So I believe the church should be the church, and that it should not worry about acceptance or approval from society.

Yet we cannot succeed in this unless the majority of the ministry and the members of the body of Christ stand together to resist the natural tendency to drift into compromise with the spirit of the age, or the spirit of religion. It is not enough to preach against it. It is not enough for the church leadership to be against it. We all must stand together on this!

So I again ask: Are we following anachronistic ways? Is it right to have them, or are we becoming obsolete? Are we really out of date? Is this fellowship a dinosaur? Have we failed by not keeping pace with the trends in religion? What about the culture and customs of society? Should we abandon our teachings against body piercings, against tattoos, against women wearing pants, against public displays of too much flesh, and such holiness positions? Does God want us to stand out? Should our very appearance and attire be a testimony? What if it brings us ridicule and scorn?

If we start abandoning these teachings, where does it end? There is a growing sentiment in emergent and even mainstream churches that the Bible doesn’t condemn alcohol; it only condemns drunkenness. So, beer and Bible study go together. I read about Pastor Darrin Patrick’s church in St. Louis. It grew from 30 to 2000 attendees in just five years. The church meets in a bar. Pastor Patrick sees nothing wrong with drinking beer, and wants the unchurched to feel comfortable coming to his church.

We can take it too far. It is easy to reject Pastor Patrick’s position. I am against drinking. Demon rum has ruined reputations, destroyed marriages and families, shipwrecked promising careers, and turned productive citizens into derelicts. But what about the underlying motivation: making it easier for the unchurched to feel comfortable in our services? Should we abandon our holiness teachings just so the unchurched, or even those from Babylon, will feel comfortable in our services? Are we a counter-culture movement or should we just drift along in the tide of the currents of society?

I am not answering these questions directly. I think my feelings are clear. We are a special people, with a special mission, that is unique and that reaches every aspect of our lives.

Some years ago, when a minister separated from us, and began to allow much worldliness in his church, he called us “Rechabites.” He meant it as an insult, saying that we were out-of-step with the times. Should we react to mocking insults? Should we change who we are to try to stop those insults?

In the 35th chapter of Jeremiah, the prophet is introduced to these people that we have been mockingly compared to. The Rechabites refused to dwell in cities, choosing to live in tents. They also refused to drink alcohol. Obedience is one of the dominant themes in the messages of all of the Old Testament prophets. God sent men to call on Israel to obey Him. Is the mission of the ministry any different today? I Samuel 15:22 tells us that obedience is better than sacrifice. And Isaiah 1:19-20 stands for the proposition that obedience brings blessings, rebellion brings judgment.

Virtually every prophet called on the people to obey God. To see an example of obedience, God sent Jeremiah to the Rechabites. By this time in Jeremiah’s life, the reforms of King Josiah were forgotten. As a young man, Jeremiah had seen Josiah cleanse and rededicate the temple. He had seen that king call on Judah to serve the true God. But by chapter 35, a new king was reigning, and iniquity was abounding. The people were so steeped in sin and idolatry under King Jehoiakim, that they paid little heed to the commandments of God. How quickly they forgot the covenant they made with Josiah at the house of the Lord. See II Chronicles 34:31-32.

Some people think of “Rechabites” as some weirdos, out of step with the times. And they think that holding to holiness standards makes us modern-day Rechabites. But never forget, God loved the Rechabites. And God blessed them when His curses were falling on the Israelites.

Who are the Rechabites, and why would God send Jeremiah to them? Well, the answer to the first question is that these people were not even Israelites. But they were consistently faithful, and refused to conform to the worldliness of society around them. The Rechabites were not Israelites; but they were one of the very few good neighbors Israel ever had. The children of Israel first bumped into them as they were wandering in the Wilderness under Moses’ leadership. The descendants of Rechab belonged to the Kenites, who accompanied the children of Israel into Palestine, and dwelt among them.

I Chronicles 2:55 tells us that the Rechabites were Kenites. The Kenites were related to the Midianites, but had been allies to Israel – a rare thing in the hostile Middle East. Judges 1:16 says that Moses married a Kenite wife. In Judges 4:17, the heroine, Jael, who drove a tent peg through the skull of Sisera, was the wife of “Heber the Kenite.” In I Samuel 15:6, King Saul showed kindness to the Kenites, warning them to separate themselves from the Amalekites before he moved to destroy them.

I Samuel 30:29 says that the main body of the Kenites dwelt in cities, and adopted settled habits of life. Then, when the iniquity of Ahab and Jezebel reached its peak in the northern kingdom of Israel, Jehonadab, the son of Rechab, stood with Jehu when he cleansed Israel. This is found in II Kings 10:15-17. Jehu asked Jehonadab: Is thy heart right? In verse 23, Jehonadab assisted in cleansing idolatry out of the land.

For some reason, Jehonadab forbade his descendants to drink wine or to live in cities. They were commanded to lead always a nomadic life, leaving behind the life in the cities. Perhaps he saw that alcoholism and the easy urbane life contributed to the worship of false gods. His reasoning was simple: If you don’t want to fall into sin, then don’t surround yourself with the things that will cause you to sin. The family adhered to the rule laid down by Jonadab, and were noted for their fidelity to the old-established custom of their family in the days of Jeremiah. So in chapter 35 of the book of Jeremiah, the prophet is sent by God to these Rechabites.

In Jeremiah 35:1-5, the prophet offered them wine to drink. And in verses 6-11, these Rechabites remained faithful to their father’s vow. Note that this is several generations later. Jehu slew Jezebel around 842 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion of Judah, referred to in Jeremiah 35:11, occurred about 604 B.C. – nearly 240 years later. It would be as if a great grandparent in the late 1700s, during the American Revolutionary War, had told his family never to live in cities, and his descendants felt bound by that command today. Many people today cannot keep a vow they made themselves, even for a few days or weeks. But here is a large family, keeping the vow of an ancestor for generations.

Did the Bible require them to make this vow? No. Would the Rechabites be sinning if they had lived in cities? No. Has anyone ever asked us to refrain from something that is not necessarily sin? Are there things in this world that we might partake of, which aren’t inherently sinful, but which would weaken our zeal, sap our spiritual strength, and diminish our faithfulness? Yes. Are we willing to keep the vows our spiritual fathers imposed on us? I wonder.

What did God think of this vow Jonadab had imposed on his followers? In verses 18-19, it seems the vow would end in Babylonian captivity, but there would always be Rechabites standing before the Lord. There are probably Rechabites numbered among the few people who are part of the body of Christ in our day. Their reward was great. Because of faithfulness to a principle that God didn’t technically require, their blessing has endured for thousands of years. Really, how great is it to assure that your children and children’s children will be serving God? Is it worth obeying some requirements that you don’t agree with, and perhaps don’t even understand? I believe it is.

What lesson was Jeremiah to learn from this? Verses 12-14 contain the lesson God wanted Jeremiah to see. These people obeyed their ancestor, when they didn’t have to; but Judah would not obey God, when they had to. Sometimes people are more willing to obey the rules on the job than the requirements of the Word of God. They unquestioningly accept all company policies, while challenging many church policies.

Jeremiah learned that living by the rules wasn’t impossible. Maybe he was tempted to think serving God is too hard. It isn’t. Serving God is easier than following centuries-old family traditions, yet the Rechabites had been able to do that. Now, we are not trying to be modern-day Rechabites. But, we could do worse. And, there is a principle the Rechabites had that was good. Perhaps we should consider if that principle is worth having today. The Rechabites survived the Babylonian captivity, and returned to the land of Israel. They are referred to in Nehemiah 3:14. Surely, their descendants still “stand before” the Lord.

I believe our ministers ought to be very slow about changing our stance on worldliness. We, of all people, want and need the blessings of God. Other people might be able to do things and act in ways that are not technically sinful, but perhaps we should not be like them. We need to focus on God, on overcoming sin, on crucifying the flesh, and on being witnesses in the last days.

And there is a grave danger in making a mistake. Someone may say, what is the risk if we started dressing casually for church? What danger do we face if we dressed modestly, but no suits and ties, no white shirts, maybe just jeans and t-shirts? Well, it just might possibly be a mistake. But once you let something like that go, it is almost impossible to get it back.

The consequences of a mistake are grave. When a leader makes a mistake the people have to bear the consequences. That is why those in leadership positions have to be so careful. There is a dire warning in II Samuel 24. When King David sinned by numbering Israel, God’s resulting judgment cost the lives of 70,000 Israelites. Think of that: it was David’s mistake, but the people paid the cost. That is why we have to be so very careful that we don’t make a mis-step. If we lose God in the changes we allow, if our people lose their vision of the body of Christ, if lukewarmness dampens their fiery zeal, if creeping worldliness predominates over increasing godliness, then the saints have paid for the consequences of our mistake.

We are here today to do the work of Jesus. We are continuing what He started 2000 years ago. When our Lord was on this earth, He rejected established religion. He did not build His church around the temple, the priesthood, the doctors of the law of Moses, and the ceremonies of what had once been the true move of God. Instead, He gathered ignorant and unlearned fishermen and tax collectors. He built a church using extraordinary means. His work was different from what unquestionably had once been the work of God. Because it was different, it was rejected by the religious leaders of His day. Yet His small group of disciples were the cutting edge of what God was doing. It was extraordinary, but it was of God.

We need an extraordinary move of God today. I believe the Lord is ready to bypass regular, routine religion. He is not going to use denominations, professional clergy, preaching without the power of God, membership rather than discipleship, or any of the means and methods of modern churchianity.

Our quest is to go far beyond ordinary religion. We seek the true Christianity of the New Testament. We will be perceived as unorthodox because we follow the biblical pattern, rather than the traditions of men. We are dedicated to going back 2000 years to find the pure message of truth and the manner of operation of the church that Jesus built.

May God help us to restore what the early church lost. Jude said that certain men had crept in unawares. Peter said that there were false teachers among them. Paul called them grievous wolves, and said their word would eat like a canker. These men were resisting a tidal wave of apostasy and worldliness. When they were taken off the scene by martyrdom, true Christianity was engulfed. We are called of God to restore what that pure primitive church lost.

We are fighting against the current. Tidal waves of worldliness and proto-orthodoxy seek to engulf us. The ship of Zion has been battered. But it is still sea-worthy! Some are tempted to head for the harbors of acceptability, where they might be sheltered from the storms of criticism. But those harbors are deceptive. There are hidden rocks that can sink our ship. Our destination is yet ahead. Our Captain knows the way. Our crew needs to unite and re-double our efforts in the face of the storm. I believe the ship of the Gospel will arrive safe at the distant shore.