My Letter to Rick Hein
Dear Rick,
I write this letter to you with what I believe to be a
humble heart relying upon God's grace. I pray that the
pride which has come to blind me most of my life is absent
as I compose this letter. Please bear with me as I try and
describe what beliefs I have come to after a year of
intense Biblical studies. Also, I ask that you don't
perceive this letter as a "gripe sheet", or just a means
for me to make my complaints known. I am still searching,
and recognize the need for guidance (particularly yours) on
these issues.
I view myself primarily as a child of God, one adopted into
His great Kingdom; and ultimately, I want to be known as a
Christian a.k.a. a follower of Christ. However, due to vast
number of differences found within the Body today, I also
recognize the need to identify myself with certain Biblical
interpretations. You are already aware of my soteriological
stance. I am a Calvinist. It's really a nickname, as
Charles Spurgeon wisely wrote, "I have my own private
opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and
Him crucified, unless we preach what is nowadays called
Calvinism." Just as it is of high importance that you and I
agree with the doctrines of grace, I also believe it is
important for us to be in agreement with regard to
ecclesiastical practice.
I believe it is very important for a church to imitate
apostolic tradition. I also believe that Scripture alone is
the standard in which we should determine proper church
practice. I'm not one that is against extra-Biblical
traditions like Christmas or even wearing blue jeans.
However, I believe a church must be very careful to prevent
modern church tradition from becoming more important than
apostolic tradition. I'm reminded of Jesus' words to the
Pharisees, "You nullify the word of God for the sake of
your tradition, Mat. 15:6".
Now, I don't claim to be an expert on apostolic church
tradition. However, what I do claim is a basic
understanding of how a church should operate. The patterns
that have been revealed to me from Scripture do not line up
with the traditions of which I observe today. And because
of these discrepancies, I am alarmed.
You've heard me state before that I see the cell group I
participate weekly in as my "church." I don't believe God
has "called" me to this church, but in fact, He has
sovereignly placed me in it. I don't believe there is such
a thing as a perfect church either. However, I believe
there are several apostolic patterns that Jubilee Church is
breaking in favor of the traditions found in the majority
of churches today. I've mildly elaborated on these things
before, but I hope to touch on them a bit more in this
letter.
Ok, so now that I've laid down the foundation for the
purpose of this letter, it's probably a good idea to lay
out the main problems I have with Jubilee Church.
1. The Lord's Supper: From what I can gather from
Scripture, I see the Lord's supper as a full meal rather
than a token ritual. Instead of celebrating the Lord's
Supper, at Jubilee Church, I think of it as the "Lord's
appetizer" or the "Lord's Snack." Also, I find no evidence
for celebrating this event
monthly/bi-monthly/quarterly/whatever, but see evidence for
celebrating the Lord's Supper weekly. Paul's first letter
to the Corinthians was written some twenty years after
Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, and I don't see
evidence for celebrating it as a token memorial, but as a
full meal. I believe it is clear from 1Co. 11:21 that it
was understood to be a full meal.
2. Tithing: Jubilee Church's stance on tithing really
bothers me. I have listened to your argument that it is a
form of worship; but I actually believe this argument is a
way to candy coat the issue which is really at hand.
Jubilee Church needs money to pay for its various expenses.
Why don't you just come forward and state that? Why do you
feel the need to preach about "giving back to God" every
Sunday? These things trouble me deeply, and I seriously
question the Biblical validity of such techniques.
2 Corinthians 9:7, (NASB), Each one must do just as he
has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under
compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
According to the New Covenant, each man should give
"what he has purposed (or decided) in his heart to
give." That's all there is to it! Tithing, as required
by Moses, is not a New Covenant practice.
Now how do you expect me to give if God hasn't worked in my
heart the necessity to give? Rick, you've come out and
asked me to start giving regularly again, but because of
the things that I believe God has opened my eyes to, I feel
compelled not to. The last time I gave money to Jubilee
Church, I was almost sick to my stomach because I betrayed
my conscience. I cannot do this anymore, and I feel
compelled to obey God (that is, His command through the
Holy Spirit) rather than men.
Mat. 6:1-4, (NASB), "Beware of practicing your
righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise
you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven.
So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before
you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the
streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to
you, they have their reward in full.
But when you give to the poor, do not let your
left hand know what your right hand is doing, so
that your giving will be in secret; and your Father who
sees what is done in secret will reward you."
I also believe the common teaching on setting aside 10% (of
income) or any amount for that matter for a weekly tithe is
unbiblical. How can you prevent your right hand from
knowing what your left hand is doing if you are careful to
give exactly a certain amount every week?
Secondly, I don't view Jubilee Church as the New Covenant
equivalent of a storehouse. Shouldn't giving in the church
be directly from giver to recipient? I see no problem in
taking a collection in times of need, but really this whole
business of a ritualistic worship practice every week is
unbiblical in my opinion.
Also, from what I read in the New Testament, there are only
two reasons that warrant a collection from the church. They
are to help believers in need (Act. 11:27-30; 24:17; Rom.
15:25-28; 1Co. 16:1-4; 2Co. 8:1-15; 9:12) and to support
apostles in their work (Act. 15:3; Rom. 15:23-24; 1Co.
9:1-14; 16:5-6,10-11; 2Co. 1:16; Phi. 4:14-18; Tit.
3:13-14; 3 John 5-8).
Whenever believers in another place were undergoing severe
hardship, the other churches were called upon to supply
financial resources. I find no evidence to believe these
collections were ongoing, but in fact ceased after the need
was met (Act 11:27-30; 12:25; 1Co. 16:1-4).
3. Your salary: Rick, as much as I hate to discuss your
means of income, I honestly believe it is an unscriptural
means of earning a living. I find no evidence in Scripture
which justifies the common practice of paying salaries to
church elders today. Even Paul stated that he had coveted
no one's silver or gold and that he had paid his own way by
"working hard" (Acts 20:34-35) with his hands. In
Acts 20, Paul is giving the Ephesian elders specific
instructions on their duty as elders. From Acts 20:32-35 it
is clear to me that elders are to be in the financial
position of giving to the church (just as Paul was), and
not receiving from it. I think if all the elders were
self-supporting, it would free large sums of money to be
used for missionaries or to help the poor. I also believe
it would place your motives above reproach in a time period
where televangelists fleece the flock to support their
excessive lifestyles. Also don't you think by paying elders
full time salaries, you unintentionally foster an
artificial clergy/laity distinction? I do. If the church
hires a full time elder, I believe it puts that person
(particularly you) and God's sheep which they tend to (me
in this case) in an unbiblical salesman/customer
relationship. And try as you might to avoid this
misconception, it's difficult for me (and probably others)
to overlook.
4. Church buildings/edifices: I find no evidence in
Scripture for meeting in large "church buildings." Romans
16:5 and 1Co. 16:19 refer to meeting in the house of
Aquilla and Priscilla. Even when Paul wrote to Philemon, he
also addressed the letter to Archippus and to the church in
his house (v. 2) Paul also addresses the church which met
in the house of Nympha (Col. 4:15). Even when Paul was
teaching the newly formed churches, he did so from
"house to house" (Act. 20:20). There are even more
examples that support the apostolic pattern of house
churches found throughout Scripture. Yet, I cannot seem to
find one passage of Scripture that states the early church
met in large buildings with pews for their weekly meetings.
I see that the early church occasionally met in the temple
(Act. 1:13, 2:46, 5:42) and Solomon's Porch (5:12), but
this was at a time before normative church practice had
been developed. Also I see these events as early Jewish
Christians attempting to hold on to much of their Jewish
heritage (Act. 21:20-26). In effect, I do not see Jubilee
Church as a product of the first century church, but a
product of the fourth century church which moved into more
permanent "church" dwellings and cathedrals. I have read of
a survey that indicates as much as 82% of church revenues
on average go towards buildings, staff, programs, and
equipment, while only 18% is appropriated towards missions.
If this is true, I find it deplorable. What resources the
church would save if we only followed the apostolic model
of meeting exclusively in homes!
Another problem I see with the Sunday "worship service", is
the pew structure. How can we follow the command of 1Co.
14:26 if all eyes are centered on the platform? Should one
man be the dominant focal point of a church service (not
that your monologues are bad; I actually love them)? How
can you mutually edify one another if you're staring at the
back of everyone's head? Wouldn't these problems be solved
if we met in many individual homes on Sunday instead of a
large building?
5. Recently I told you that I agreed with the doctrine of
particular redemption. You also stated that if you allowed
me to teach, you would prevent me from teaching this
doctrine. I thought about this for two weeks, and I must
say I have to disagree with your conclusion. Not only is
this doctrine true, but it is a most beautiful doctrine
indeed. To teach that God died for many (the elect) is a
Biblical statement. Also, why would you prevent me from
teaching what I believe, and then allow others to believe
as they are led? Is there anything wrong in sharing with
God's people the variety of viewpoints that exist? We don't
want a group of mindless Christians that need to be
spoon-fed every doctrine, do we?
"For there must also be differences among you, in order
that those who are approved may have become evident among
you." (1Co. 11:19)
Aren't we supposed to "test the spirits to see whether they
are from God, 1Jo. 4:1" And "examine everything carefully
and to hold fast to that which is good, 1Th. 5:21"
I believe it is important the people we teach are
discerning people, and not spoon fed babies.
6. Theological Study Program: Since my application for the
year long theological study program was rejected, God has
given me plenty of time to think about these things. I have
been shown that it was a good thing that my application was
rejected. I don't necessarily believe it was for the
reasons you gave me (I'm "too independent"); but because I
think it is wrong to pay for such training. And a
revelation came to me this week that shows me why this is
true. As I was reading 1 Timothy, I noticed Paul warned
against men who require money to teach the Scriptures
("who think that godliness is a means to financial
gain", 1Ti. 6:5). And he made a clear distinction
between what they do and what Christians are supposed to
do, "unlike so many, we do not peddle the Word of God
for profit, 2Co. 2:17."
What does it mean to "peddle the Word of God for profit" if
not to require payment for teaching it? Yet this is
precisely what Jubilee Church is doing when they require
payment (over $1000.00) for the Theological Study Program.
I can easily see how you might justify the expense (which
you did), but didn't Jesus instruct the disciples that,
"freely you have received, freely give, Mat. 10:8"?
The list above details shortly the things I feel fairly
strong about. Albeit, a lot of them are new concepts to me;
but I am one who grasps a hold of the truth when presented
with it. I certainly am open to varying interpretations and
to your suggestions. However, I believe I have a different
vision for God's Church than you do. Certainly our goals
are the same, "Go therefore and make disciples of all
the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and
the Son and the Holy Spirit, Mat. 28:19". It's just our
interpretation of the means for accomplishing this great
commission differ quite significantly.
With all of this being clearly stated, I am curious as to
what you think of my interpretations. I am open to your
suggestions, and respectfully request your response. Also,
please do not take my criticism negatively, as my
intentions are not designed as a means to tear down. But I
willfully, and even reluctantly, make my beliefs known in
an attempt to build each other up. I am not seeking a
debate. I am not seeking controversy. However, I do seek
your friendship, wisdom and guidance.
Sincerely Yours in Christ,
Brandan Kraft