A Correct Interpretation of Hebrews 10:25

Today it will be found that many Christians are not attending church. There are two camps for these people. One is the camp that are people who really are not serious about their faith, and they simply would rather be out doing other things than be in church. They have the name of Christian, but do not have the life of one. The other group are people who are serious about their faith. Very serious in fact, and they too are leaving the church. But unfortunately, all of these people are being lumped together by Christians within the church and being chastised by these Christians via comments, social media posts, etc. that they “should be in church.” They are more or less considered an apostate for not being there. So what is the truth of the matter? Can you not be a church-goer and still have a vital relationship with Christ?

First of all, salvation is by faith alone in Jesus Christ, not through the church. While we must abide with Him in holiness, and keep His commandments to maintain a good relationship with Him (John 14:15, 15:10), attending church every Sunday is not a rule found in the Scriptures. It just isn’t there, regardless of what some want to believe. It is not a requirement for heaven, or even to walk closely with the Lord. There is one verse in particular in the Bible that is thrown at those who have left the church, to try to show them they are in Scriptural error and disobedience. That verse is Hebrews 10:25, which will be addressed shortly.

Now there is nothing wrong with the idea of people going to church. It is beneficial and it is Scriptural to get together with other Christians for study, encouragement, accountability, use of gifts, and corporate worship, and we are encouraged to be with other Christians, for where two or three are gathered, Christ is in their midst. (Matt. 18:20). I am not against gathering at all. I think it is essential in fact, however there is no mandate as to when, where, and how often this should occur, nor a requirement as to the size of the group. There is a totally free license as to how we want to gather with others – our freedom in Christ. We can do so in whatever way we are able or want to. It is left open for a reason. Not everyone in the world is in a situation where they can openly go, or just simply go to a worship service. In some places churches are against the law. For some their occupation prevents it. For some, such as a parent with multiple small children, who might have to go alone, it is often not a spiritually uplifting thing to go, but a trial and tribulation to get there at all, much less keep several little children under control during the course of the service, if there is no children's babysitting or junior church for little ones. They are exhausted rather than refreshed and often will miss the service entirely, because they have to take the little ones out of the service, so as not to disrupt it for others. Some are infirm with illness and disabilities, or merely age. There are all sorts of reasons that might prevent people from attending church. And going to churches that are blatantly teaching sin against God is not a church Christ would want us attending. I’m sure He would far rather that we stay away and worship Him in spirit and truth wherever we are, and preferably on the Sabbath. (This too will be discussed below.)

The churches in the western world, and most specifically America (and probably Canada also) have mainly become venues for a feel good, entertained, worldly type of Christianity. It is one where one names it and claims it as a right from God, it is based on feelings, not a commitment of the will combined with faith, it is self-centered, not God-centered, and it is a pleasure palace for people to feed the fleshly lusts - worldly worship music, concerts, plays, movies, cafés, bookstores, media centers, ministries for self-help for every problem under the sun, and shallow feel good sermons that tell you that you are good and deserving and you shouldn’t judge others or yourself for doing what is right for you, even if it is not approved of by God. It is not taught that you are wretched, sinful, and need to walk in holiness and according to the Word. In the book of Revelation, we find that five of the seven churches have sins that Christ holds against them and warns them that they will be judged, if they don’t repent. These churches can be found in the world today. It is called apostasy.

On the other hand, there are churches that are trying to keep from falling into the worldly model, and as a consequence they have become legalistic, judgmental and condemning, and restrictive to the point where they rival the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. They feel they can keep apostasy at bay by ruling with an iron fist, just as the Pharisees did, adding rules to God’s rules to keep them so far from sin that they have no chance to make the choice themselves to not sin. This is no better than the churches that are worldly in their apostasy, for many of these churches have doctrines that are not Scriptural, but as the Pharisees have done, they have taken what they want out of the Bible to uphold their legalism and restrictive rules.

Neither of these models are pleasing to God. We know this because Israel was guilty of both of these sins, and God divorced Israel and has let her suffer for millennia because of it. Is the church any less worthy of judgment and punishment than Israel? Going back to the first model of the church, where true believers gathered to meet in homes, we see that this model is the one being used in countries of persecution, and we find that this model is the one that has begun to surface in the western world among Christians who are fed up with churches that are self-centered rather than God-centered, or Pharisaical in practice. They are also fed up with the fact that churches these days are not teaching to the growth of Christians. The churches feed their people milk and pablum, not meat as instructed in Hebrews 5:12-6:2. Sometimes they teach outright heresy - doctrines of demons. Christians who seek to know God want more, and the only way they can get it is to gather with like-minded Christians outside of the church to study and worship. Their stand against apostasy and legalism has made them outcasts within the church assemblies, so they leave to worship elsewhere. Because of that, they are accused of not loving Christ, or being bad Christians. Those within the assemblies feel that there is some sort of umbrella protection for them by being good church-goers, and that they present to the world a show of Christianity, when in fact once they leave the building their Christianity is sometimes very hard to see. They have somehow come to equate being part of a “legitimate” assembly as being part of the Church Universal, meaning all those who truly are born again and love the Lord. It is their safe haven to ensure their entrance into heaven. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many who are in churches are not born again, and many who are outside of the church are true followers of Christ. A relationship with Christ is not dependent upon a building, or an organized assembly of believers. A relationship with Christ is personal and independent of any other source.

There is much made over Hebrews 10:25 by pastors. And why not? It is the only verse in the Bible which they can find to use to try to lay a guilt trip on Christians, who are not attending church on a regular basis, or at all. It is their ace in the hole, so to speak, for if there were no mandate to attend Sunday church services, and people realized that there were no mandate, these pastors would, in many cases, end up unemployed.

On the face of it, one would think that they are correct in how they are interpreting it, for it says, “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” Obviously forsaking the assembling of ourselves together refers to Sunday morning worship service, right? And "as the manner of some is" is what those who do not attend church are doing, correct? And this directive is all the more valid as we are seeing the Day of the Lord approaching, isn’t it? Well, the last is true. We are in the end times, but that is all that is correct about that interpretation. The accusation is that those not going to Sunday morning services regularly are disobeying a direct order. No. Not really. Just looking at the sentence itself, without getting into the real gist behind it, one can see that putting that interpretation on it is adding to Scripture, which we are warned not to do. If it did mean what pastors want it to mean, it does not indicate when, how, how often or any other parameters about what assembling together means. So technically if one attends a Bible study during the week, that would fulfill the requirement, even if there were only two people at that Bible study. And if that study only happened once a month, still it would meet the requirement of what this way of interpreting this verse says. And one need not even have a Bible study. It simply says assembling. That could be social gatherings. So to make this mean what pastors want it to mean is to simply do a disservice to good exegesis. But it goes even further. That is not how the verse was intended to be interpreted. Here is what the book of Hebrews is about.

First of all, it was written to the Hebrews, Jewish Christians who would have been observing the Sabbath, not Sunday. Sunday would not be observed as a tradition made by man until many years later, and would not become a formal Gentile Christian tradition until the 4^th century when Constantine mandated it as a state law, outlawing Sabbath worship. His reasons for doing so were not spiritual, or in some response to a teaching from God, but political reasons. The reasons being that the Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians were at odds with each other and causing problems over this issue of the Sabbath vs. Sunday, plus the pagans who were being forced into conversion were used to worshiping on Sunday, as that was the pagan worship day. It made the transition much easier.

Now the argument comes that it is the principle that is important, not the literalness of the situation, for times have changed and Sunday is now the proper worship day. Well, no actually it is not, and that information can be found here https://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2011/02/sabbath-or-sunday.html. But regardless of that, whether the Sabbath or Sunday, going to a meeting in a church once a week for an hour is not a directive of God, nor is it necessary for salvation or to be a Christian in good standing with God.

The next argument comes that the early church got together on Sunday to worship together, and so should we. Well, that is taking Scripture and extending it beyond what is warranted. The early Christians met together for many reasons. One, they wanted to learn about this new teaching of Christ, and the only way was to gather with others. Two, they were thrown out of the synagogues and being persecuted, so they tended to congregate to encourage each other and have someone of like-mindedness be their companions for fellowship. Three, because of persecution, many lost material possessions and found themselves without, so they came together to help each other materially. Four, they did not meet in a building with all the bells and whistles that so many have today. They met in homes and the meetings consisted of prayer, study, possibly exhortation, and singing psalms and hymns. For the most part, as most were Jewish and used to synagogue attendance, they continued to meet on the Sabbath, so that the apostles could teach them. They did not meet on Sundays. In time, some chose to start meeting on Sunday as well, with the idea of commemorating the Lord’s resurrection on that day of the week, but it came about more when Gentiles, who were used to worshiping on the pagan holy day of Sunday, were becoming Christians. They easily fell into the tradition of continuing on Sunday with the excuse of commemorating the Lord’s resurrection, rather than adopt the Jewish Sabbath, which was the day God had declared His holy day from the beginning. In the Bible, never does it indicate when, how often, and on what days the people met. If anything, it would have been the Sabbath, because the early Christians tended to mostly be Jews. There was no precedent set for us to have to follow at all. They simply met together as they felt like it. We really don’t know anything else about these meetings as to time, frequency, etc.

The initial model for the church service came from the synagogues. The oldest evidence of synagogues are from 3 BC. Some scholars believe the synagogues came about after the destruction of the temple in 586 BC when lacking the temple rituals, those few who were still faithful began to meet in their houses. They gathered to study the Torah, pray, and worship, just as the early Christians began by gathering in their houses, and eventually years later were to start building synagogues, just as Christians built churches or cathedrals in which to worship instead of homes. All of this came about merely from men’s traditions, (in the case of the Jews, due to the punishment for their disobedience by losing the temple) not due to God telling them to get together and meet for worship in this manner. What God instituted was the observance of the Sabbath by resting, and the tabernacle which eventually became the temple, for sacrifices. The temple’s purpose was not for people to gather together once a week for an hour to worship in a service overseen by a clergyman. Some people (women, non-Jews) were not even allowed in certain courtyards of the temple. People might gather there for various purposes, but there was no facility for them to sit on a group of benches while someone got up and gave a message, then go home. Never was the church building and the gathering once a week on the pagan worship day for an hour or two a model that God created for us to have to use to worship Him. This was merely a model that evolved from the traditions of men. And in the case of some of the traditions, they arose from paganism, not Judaism or the Bible. Now again, I am not saying that gathering to worship on Sunday is bad and should not be done, for we should worship God every day, and gathering on any day is permissible, so there is nothing wrong with it in that respect. In fact, it is very helpful for some people’s spiritual growth, who need this habitual activity to maintain their walk with God. At least it used to be before apostasy took over, but neither is it mandated by God as an ordinance that has to be observed or be a plumb line by which to measure someone’s spiritual state. Nor is it a replacement for observing the Commandment that says we should keep the Sabbath. God has never rescinded any of His Ten Commandments. They are His eternal laws and to break one, is to break them all and sin against God, for remember, they were given to show man his sin, not save him. And with the apostasy that now consumes the churches, we come to the dilemma that many faithful Christians, who were observing this tradition, are now facing. Is it acceptable to God to not attend church, if it is no longer a place where God is being glorified?

So now we find ourselves back at Hebrews 10:25. Let us take a look at this in context. The book was written to the Hebrews, although we are not sure of whom the author was. Some background on what was going on in the Jewish Christian church might be helpful at this point. Gnosticism, which became a problem right at the beginning in the first century, had its roots (in the Christian faith) in the Jewish Christian groups. Some of them (apparently this group) wandered away from the truth and started adopting gnosticism, which was the belief that within everyone is a divine spark that is released through knowledge and enlightenment. It does not adhere to the ideas of sin and repentance, but to the idea that the material world is an illusion which can be transcended through enlightenment. One of the beliefs held by some gnostics was what the New Agers today call “the Christ spirit,” which in other words is a human being who has become enlightened and tries to pass that on to others. Some saw Christ in this way. Another belief that some held was that Christ was an angel incarnated, which is called angel christology. Yet another of the beliefs that some gnostics adhered to was called Melchizadekianism, in which they worshiped Melchizadek as having been the Messiah. Gnostics were often ascetics, which meant that they led lives depriving themselves (of things such as dietary and sexual pleasures), and they often became hermits. In fact within a few hundred years, the deserts of the Middle East were dotted with thousands of these ascetic gnostic hermits. They did not believe in the resurrection, but might believe in reincarnation. So this was the belief system that was evolving within some of the Jewish Christian groups at the time that this letter was written.

When one looks at the context of what was written, it begins to be easily seen that this was one of those groups, and that the problems and issues which were plaguing this group were being addressed in this letter. The first two chapters are spent in teaching that Jesus was not an angel, but the Son of God and a completely different person from the angels. That addresses the angel christology and “enlightened spirit within a human Jesus” problems that some gnostics were teaching. It then goes on to talk about the rest which we enter into (the hope of the resurrection) which addresses the lack of belief in a resurrection and the idea of reincarnation, and then he chastises how the basic principles of the gospel have to be laid down again for these people, for they are still children in their knowledge and are not growing in the faith. In fact, they are obviously walking away from the faith and substituting this gnosticism in its place. He warns them that once they have actually been enlightened, through accepting the gospel, and have partaken of the Holy Spirit’s indwelling, if they reject Christ and their salvation to opt for another path, it is impossible to ever come back to repentance. That is because in rejecting the gospel and renouncing Christ as Savior, they blaspheme the Holy Spirit who then is obliged to leave them, and that is the one sin that cannot be forgiven. Committing a sin is one thing. Rejecting or renouncing Christ after having once received Him and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is an entirely different matter. It is an unpardonable sin. Twice in this book, this dire warning is given. That means that the issue they were dealing with was very serious, and gnosticism was a serious issue that could deprive people of their salvation. It wasn't like some of the other sins in the other churches, which could be forgiven. This was a spiritual death issue. And it obviously was affecting this group.

He follows with an explanation of Christ’s priesthood, specifically relating it to being greater than the Levites', and Melchizadek's. This refutes Melchizadekianism, for Christ is the last Priest in that heavenly order (which is greater than the earthly one of the Levites)  for there is no need for a further intercessor other than Christ. It also refutes the “divine spark within us” teaching, for only Christ is divine and can come before God for us to intercede for our sins. We are not divine ourselves, we are sinners. An explanation follows of the purpose and pattern of the tabernacle/temple which was to teach them these truths that Christ fulfilled, and His priesthood. So now given that he has once more laid the foundation of these beliefs, he then tells them that they should hold fast to faith in these things (the gospel and promise of a rest in the resurrection) and encourage each other to the good works that will keep them in the faith. Then we come to that controversial verse which we are putting under scrutiny, where he addresses the last problem with gnosticism, the fact that they were separating themselves from other believers and becoming hermits to reach enlightenment. He tells them to not do this. To not stop getting together and socializing with other Christians, as was the manner of the ascetics, who obviously were coming out of their group to become hermits, so that by interacting they might, as he said in the previous verses, keep each other encouraged in the faith, and keep each other on the straight path of truth, especially as one sees the Day of the Lord, when God will exact His vengeance on a wicked world, approaching. This is what the meaning of this verse is. NOT – attend church for an hour once a week regularly (in most churches that means to get entertained), because that is your obligation as a Christian.The meaning is clearly to not follow the behavior of the ascetic gnostics by becoming hermits and shunning people.

He follows this again with a second warning about this sin of willfully turning from the gospel of Christ to another doctrine and its consequences. If they willfully sin (reject the gospel and Christ) after having received the knowledge of truth (having accepted Christ), there remains no other sacrifice for their sins. Christ is the ONLY way of salvation. There is no other, but only the wrath of God's judgment awaiting. He asks how much more deserving of God's wrath is one that has trodden underfoot the very blood of the sacrifice of Christ whereby he was sanctified (set apart as holy and justified) at one time, as an unholy thing? That amounts to blasphemy. He then reminds them to recall the former days when they had been illuminated or enlightened (by the gospel) when they had endured afflictions. This reference to and specific use of this word "illumination" also points to gnosticism as being the problem within this group of Christians, for illumination was what they sought. They once understood and believed in the promise of a resurrection and life to come with God. He tells them to not cast away that faith, for it will have great reward in the end.

The rest of the book goes on to list the heros of faith who did not see the promise come to pass in their lifetime, but lived by faith looking forward that one day, even after their death, they would see that promise come. He then tells them to basically keep the faith and not lose hope, but to patiently endure. He tells them that they haven't yet resisted sin to the point where it has cost them their lives, and they should expect that God will chasten them when they do wander and get into sinful ways. He is basically letting them know that this apostasy they have allowed might be the cause for their tribulation, for God chastens His children. If they are not chastened for it, then they are not really God's children. He again issues a warning to them about staying on the path, and then encourages them to walk in love. This is followed with another warning against strange and diverse doctrines, as they apparently had been accepting them. Then he finally exhorts them to walk according to the way we as Christians should walk.

When taken in this context, that the problem besetting this group was gnosticism, all of this book makes complete sense in what subjects are being covered. The various things discussed fit very neatly into the problems gnosticism would cause. The discussion of Jesus versus the angels, the hope of the rest to come, the laying down all the precepts of the gospel and Christ's ministry as our heavenly Priest, the refutation of Melchizadek as the Messiah, the warnings of losing one's salvation by turning from Christ, the warning against separating totally (as a hermit) from other Christians, the warnings against apostate doctrines, and the justification of tribulation when one does accept them. All of this makes complete sense, so that the verse in Chapter 10 is now taken in context, and it clearly does not indicate that someone has to attend Sunday morning worship service or be a bad Christian. It is not a mandate to Sunday morning worship service at all. It is a warning to not become a hermit, thinking that this is a better path to enlightenment and salvation. Notice that the directive is a negative one. It is not "make sure to get together weekly with others to worship", but a negative – "do not forsake other Christians." There is a marked difference between "do not become a hermit and stop socializing and fellowshipping with other Christians whenever, wherever, and however it may occur" and "it is necessary to go to church on Sunday for an hour to be entertained and listen to a pastor preach what are probably apostate doctrines in order to be a good Christian."

An added detriment to the insistence in church attendance is that those who put their faith in the church, as being the mark of a relationship with Christ, have opted to abdicate their responsibilities as parents in favor of letting the church lead their children to Christ. And what is happening? The children are leaving the churches in droves. If they do remain in church, they want a feel good, entertainment venue that allows all the worldliness they want to embrace. And these parents do not know where they have gone wrong. In fact, the parents are there indulging in the worldliness themselves along with their children. It is just that the tradition of attending Sunday morning service is more ingrained in them, so they feel the need to be there, and so the worldly church services work well for them.

The church is not the only way one can gather with other Christians for study and worship. It is not a replacement for personal study, prayer, individual worship, nor is it a replacement for the responsibility of leading your children to the Lord and doing it by the method the Bible tells us to use. We are to talk to our children when we sit, when we walk, when we lie down, and when we get up. (Deuteronomy 6:4-9, 11:19). We are to constantly be an example, and constantly talk to them and show them how to love God, how God works in our lives, and how we should behave. My experience with the church teaching my children is that they were taught some Bible stories, and told to accept Jesus into their heart, without much explanation as to why they are sinners who need redemption. On the other hand, when we home-churched, they learned a lot more than I ever anticipated two little children could learn. We covered both Old and New Testament and years later when speaking of various things in the history of Israel, my son would talk about some incident and I would be surprised given his extremely young age when we covered these things that he remembered them. He told me that he was listening a lot more than I thought. Little children take in so much more and understand so much more than we give them credit for understanding. It made me so glad we had chosen to teach them ourselves, rather than trust the church. We also home-schooled, so this was normal for us to do something like this, as they were learning the Bible every day. And today they are grown men who have a true relationship with the Lord and have never strayed. One goes to church, because his wife needs it for herself, and the other does not. Yet both have the Lord in charge of their lives.

I am constantly amazed that while Christians will say that you must be born again to get into heaven, the emphasis upon attending church being almost a major requirement, along with being born again, has almost been elevated to the level of idolatry. If you don’t attend church regularly, you can’t possibly be saved. Attending church is all important. It is sacred. The church (local assembly) is the plumb line against which a Christian’s relationship with Christ is measured. There is NO excuse for not attending which is acceptable - including apostasy. Of course those who insist upon this also declare that their church is never apostate or legalistic or unscriptural in their doctrines. It is very true that getting together with other believers is a very important part of our walk with Christ, but that may have no relationship to church attendance. The kind of Christians you assemble with is also very important. It is true that nobody will ever find a perfect church, for people are not perfect and love must overlook a multitude of faults. We all sin and fall short of the glory of God. However I do not think that God wants us to ignore or put our stamp of approval on false doctrines, worldliness, the unrepentant sin within the congregation and leadership that is tolerated, or the reverse – Pharisaism, judgmentalism, condemnation, and church discipline of people who are not sinning according to the Bible, but do not live by the man-made rules some of the people in the church have set. We should not tolerate sin, and it should be judged, and walking in worldliness should be strongly cautioned against when we see someone drifting away, but freedoms in Christ are just that, freedoms. If God says it is okay, who are we to say nay? One extreme is as bad as the other. And a church that teaches against God’s Word should never be tolerated.

The irony here is that these people who insist that attending church on Sunday makes you a good Christian, in ignoring the Sabbath, break the Ten Commandments every week, for if you break one commandment, you break them all. They are all in flagrant unrepentant sin regarding the fourth Commandment, which they deny is a sin to break, as man’s tradition of observing Sunday instead has become the rule rather than God’s eternal law of the Sabbath. This is exactly like Israel. They chose their own rules over God’s. Some who have left the church, on the other hand, have come to the conclusion that the Sabbath must be observed, and so are observing it, often meeting for home church or Bible studies on the Sabbath. If insisting that Hebrews 10:25 talks about church attendance, then they still are not breaking any rules. They don’t forsake the assembling of themselves with other believers, they are simply particular with whom and on what day they worship, and are not dependent upon a particular building to worship in. And yet the church assemblies consider these people apostates, who have walked away from the Lord.

For those who have walked away, not because they are no longer interested in the things of the Lord, but are deeply disturbed by the lack of holiness and adherence to God’s Word, take heart. The remnant is being called out of Babylon. It’s the best place to be, regardless of what the Laodiceans might tell you. Like Christ said to the remnant overcomers of the seven churches, “he that hath an ear to hear, let him hear.”

For a list of legitimate spiritual reasons to not attend church, click on this link.

https://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2020/02/legitimate-spiritual-reasons-for-not.html