Saturday, December 19, 2020

Is the Planetary Conjunction Really the Star of Bethlehem?

This December there is going to be a conjunction of the planets that will create a very bright “star” in the evening sky. It has been called the Star of Bethlehem, as people want to believe that it was this phenomena that was the star that led the Wisemen to the Christ child. They even date Christ's birth by the conjunction around that era. This is a nice tradition, and many scholars are willing to stand behind this idea, but is it true? Is there anything in Scripture that would point to this? Let’s take a look and see.

The first question is, what time of year was Christ born? Was it December 25? Does this conjunction at this time of year point to the year of Christ's birth? Or this date? Why do we celebrate Christ’s birth on that day if it wasn’t then? To find the answer to this question, we must go to the book of Luke.

The story is told of Zacharias and Elizabeth. They were childless. While Zacharias was carrying out his duties of priest in the temple an angel appeared to him and informed him that he and Elizabeth would have a child. Luke 1:8-9,11, 13, 23-24 “And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course, According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord…...And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense…….But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John…..And it came to pass, that, as soon as the days of his ministration were accomplished, he departed to his own house. And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived..”

Now when one studies the priesthood, one finds that there were twenty-four courses of priests. (1 Chronicles 24). It seems historically that the custom was that each course would take a week in the first half of the year, and a week in the second half of the year to work. That is forty-eight weeks. During the week long spring Feast of Unleavened Bread  and the week long fall Feast of Tabernacles, due to the great increase in sacrifices, all of the priests would work.That would cover the fifty weeks of the Jewish year, which is several weeks shorter than a normal year. As the religious year began in Nissan, the courses would begin with the beginning of the year, but as their calendar year moved in relation to the Gregorian calendar, the year would start anywhere from March to April. As Passover begins on Nissan 14, the third week in the year, there would be a week when the courses would be interrupted for all to work, then continue in order after that until they started with the first course again. Six months later the pattern would be repeated with the third week of the series of courses again being the feast week.

Zacharias was said to be in the course of Abia or Abijah. “There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia:” We find from the Old Testament that Abijah’s course was the eighth course of the year. 1 Chron. 24:10 “The seventh to Hakkoz, the eighth to Abijah,” As the courses would start with the year in the spring, and the third week of the year was a feast week, the eighth course would be the ninth week of the year and could be as early as the second week in May or as late as the second week in June depending on the year. If it were the fall when the angel appeared, it would have been six months later at either the beginning of November to the beginning of December when he made his appearance. So when Zacharias’ week was over, he would have gone home and Elizabeth would have conceived (probably immediately) anywhere from the third week in May to the third week in June or the early part of November to the early part of December, depending on which part of the year the angel appeared.

We know that Elizabeth was in her sixth month when Mary became pregnant. Luke 1:26-28, 31, 36 “And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women…..And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS…..And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.” So John the Baptist was six months older than Christ. That means that if John was conceived in the spring between May and June, then Christ was conceived sometime in early November to early December. And vice-versa. If John was conceived in the fall, Christ was conceived in the spring. That would put the due dates from February to March, or the end of August to the end of September.

So according to Scripture, Christ was not born in December, nor was he conceived at Christmas. It would have been early December, if that were the later fall conception time, and that is as close as it would come to December 25. The one clue as to which season it might have been has to do with the shepherds being in the field with their flocks. When Christ was born, would they have been more likely to have been in the field with their flocks during the winter from February to March, or in the summer from August through September? I will leave that for the reader to decide. It certainly wasn’t December 25.

Now as to the star itself, the idea that it was a conjunction of the planet in the sky holds a problem with what we are told in Scripture.

Matt. 2:1-10 “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel. Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, inquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also. When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.”

The first thing is that it tells us that the wise men were not basing their knowledge of Jesus on astrology or even astronomy, as most assume, but says that they were basing it on the prophecies of Scripture. There is a Scripture that foretells that a star will come that heralds the Messiah. Numbers 24:17 “I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.” They also knew that the King would be born in Bethlehem according to the Scriptures. It is assumed that these men were pagan magi, but many Jews had remained in Babylon after the captivity, and it is quite possible these were Jewish scholars from that area. At the very least, they were studying the Hebrew Scriptures. These men came to worship Him. Would pagan magicians worship the Jewish God? It is doubtful.

The next thing has to do with the star itself. This star had just suddenly appeared out of nowhere. It wasn’t that they were following the process of planets coming to a conjunction as astronomers or astrologers were. This star just suddenly appeared, for Herod asked for the specific time that it appeared. The next part of this is that which people have trouble wrapping their heads around. It says that the star went before them, until it came and stood over where the child was living. A star that is millions of miles away in outer space does not move in such a way that we can literally follow it. We can go in the general direction of north, south, east, or west, but that is the extent that the stars can guide our direction. It does not lead us to a town a few miles away, for Bethlehem was only about six miles away from Jerusalem. Nor does a star place itself directly above a single house, which this star did. It pointed the Wisemen to the exact domicile where Jesus was and hovered over it. This star was not a star in the sense that we think of stars.

In Scripture when one studies the angels, we find there are several places where angels are referred to as stars. Revelation being one of them. We know that the angels appeared to the shepherds in the field, so angels were very actively appearing at the time of the birth of Christ. It is not far-fetched to believe that this was a special angel who, in his glorified body of light (angels are known to be bright at times, hence calling them stars), led the Wisemen on their journey and stood over the place where Jesus lived. That this would be impossible for a star out in the universe to do is just common sense. A star or planetary conjunction does not stand over anything on earth. It is simply way out there in space. Nothing in this passage about the Wisemen indicates that this was an astronomical event or an astrological event, but everything points to it being a supernatural event discerned by the scholars of the Scriptures, who were watching for the sign of the Messiah. Considering they were Bible scholars, it is quite possible that they also understood the prophecy in Daniel which pinpointed the very time Christ would be born, and had been diligently watching for the sign of a special Star coming out of Jacob or appearing over Israel, as the time had come for the Messiah to be born. They would have then seen the angelic manifestation as a star (which no doubt appeared at the time of Christ’s birth) which then propelled them to go to Bethlehem to seek the Christ child.

So while the idea of the planetary conjunction being the Star of Bethlehem and appearing at this Christmas time seems like a fun or even spiritual tradition, it really has nothing to do with the birth of Christ. And Christmas is not the celebration of Christ’s birth. It is in actuality a veneer of Christianity that was applied to the pagan celebration of Sol Invictus around the time of Constantine. Sorry if that offends people. It is merely the factual truth.

Saturday, August 1, 2020

What Is Going On In the World In 2020?

The following are what I am hearing from a lot of people lately. “What is going on?” “Why is this happening?” “This is insane.” “This doesn’t make any sense.” “What is going to happen next?” “Will it ever return to normal?” These seem to be just a few of the things that people are saying as they struggle with trying to understand how all of a sudden in a matter of days, the entire world was turned upside down, and now several months later, it doesn’t look like it will ever end. So the question is, what really is happening, and will it ever end? The Bible can give us some insight into what is presently transpiring in 2020.
If the reader is not familiar with the basic teaching of Bible prophecy with Babylon the Whore riding the beast (aka antichrist) then what I am about to present will probably not make a lot of sense, although I will try to put it in a way that does, even for those unfamiliar with the prophecies. For those familiar with the woman who rides the beast with seven heads, we need to take a closer look at their relationship. The passage I want to speak about is the vision that Nebuchanezzar had that Daniel interpreted for him.

Daniel 2:32-44 “Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.

Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.”

Prophecy teachers have always taught that the identities of these kingdoms were as follows: Babylon is the head of gold. Medo-Persia is the chest and arms of silver, Greece is the belly and thighs of brass, Rome is the legs of iron, and in the end times, a confederacy of ten nations that comes out of what was Rome are represented by the ten toes. I would like to make a change in that theory. I agree with the first three nations of Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. And I do agree that the legs are Rome. At one time I believed that the two legs represented the division of Rome into the eastern and western empires of Rome, but I have come to believe something different.

Based on Scripture and history I want to put forth a new idea. In Revelation we are told that the ten horns which rise to power with the beast destroy Babylon on his behalf. That would seem odd, given that throughout history, they have worked as a team. Since when have they not been on the same side? I believe we can trace it back to sometime during the Roman Empire. After Christ, there didn’t arise another empire to overtake Rome the way all the previous empires had been conquered by the empire that followed them. Babylon and the beast had always just gone from empire to empire before that. Suddenly there was no empire ruled by this couple. What had happened? It appears that Nero, who persecuted the Christians was the sixth head of the beast of Revelation (the others not mentioned in Daniel would have been Egypt and Assyria) and after that, we do not hear about the beast for quite some time, so we can only presume that he possibly was sent to the bottomless pit where he stayed until the time for him to come out (as is the case at the moment) presented itself. However we do have a historical timeline for Babylon. During the early years of Christianity, there was the worship of Diana in Ephesus. Diana was just another name for Babylon, as was Ishtar, or Isis. She went by many names. As Christianity grew, and with the new mandate that Christianity would be the state religion by Constantine, Babylon found her followers becoming fewer and now on the wrong side of the law, so to speak. She took stock of this and seemed to have moved herself into the state created Christian church by finding a new persona that fit her role. The person of Mary, mother of Christ. During this time there seemed to be no sign of the beast.

Just as the pagan worship of the various goddesses had presented themselves as a mother with a child, because that is the story that has followed Babylon worship throughout the ages, she found it easy to become the Madonna, reducing Christ back to a child, instead of the full-grown resurrected God-man who died for our sins. This is where Babylon made herself at home for a while, having the priests of the church continue with worship to her within the church. The head priest of the Mysteries became the pope with the Dagon fish god headdress. The vestal virgins became the nuns of the church. The priests of Babylon who wore red robes became the cardinals of the church. The other gods became the various saints of the church. The paraphernalia and rituals of the Babylonian Mysteries, such as the rosary, making the sign of the cross, infant baptism, celibacy by priests and nuns, transubstantiation, and other things were incorporated into the Roman Church. Mary became venerated and over time certain characteristics were assigned to her that were not scriptural, such as perpetual virginity, an immaculate conception, etc.

For whatever reason, possibly because she did not want to share the worship with Christ, Babylon apparently decided to take her headquarters and her Babylonian mysteries out of the church. We know this because her mystery headquarters were found elsewhere much later down the road. She didn’t remove all the pagan things she had established there, they still continue unabated to this day, and she still acts as Mary on occasion, making appearances, and she has her “underground” followers within the church, but still she apparently wanted to be separate from Christ, so removed her mysteries to the “underground” where they remained until discovered by the Knights Templar during the Crusades. To make a long story short and skip over a lot of history, her mysteries eventually ended up being fronted by Freemasonry. It was this group that offered her a cover for her religion. During this time, she was without a kingdom. The beast had always provided the political empire in which she could run her religion and control the masses and receive her worship, but without the beast, she had no political empire with which to gain power and take over the world. So in time, when a new country presented itself without a history, the time was right for her to create an empire. She established herself as the Lady Liberty of the United States of America. Her statue (with the seven pointed crown, for the seven heads of the beast) stands in New York Harbor. It also sits atop the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. which acts as her temple.

During World War II, the beast came out temporarily from where he had been, when he possessed the person of Hitler. This was in fulfillment of Revelation when the seventh king that the beast would possess came and only remained a very short time. Hitler had the characteristics that the previous six incarnations of the beast had possessed. He wanted world domination, he ruled by terror, and he persecuted the Jews. That there was a schism between the beast and Babylon became apparent when the United States (Babylon) entered the war against the Third Reich (the beast). And the beast (Hitler) persecuted and killed the followers of Babylon (some orders of Freemasons).

If we look back to the statue of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, we see that there are two legs. There is a division within the partnership that had ruled these empires down until Rome. They appear to split apart during the time of Rome, and that appears to have been what happened. Within the various places where Babylonian worship had settled (the Roman Church, Freemasonry, the United States and other governments) there had occurred a division among her followers. All of Babylonian Mysteries are pagan witchcraft, but witchcraft takes on two different mantles. There is black witchcraft, which overtly worships Satan, believes that the more depraved the better, will abuse and kill children, seeks to rule by terror and enslavement, uses “magic” for evil and works overtly with demons and possession. It is called “The Darkness.” White witchcraft on the other hand believes itself to be “The Light”. It wants to rule through pleasuring all the senses, (abortion is acceptable, but child abuse is not), being one with nature and the universe, using “magic” for good, bringing in a golden age of peace and prosperity. It wants to create an Age of Aquarius, as it is known. The former is the kind of rule that the beast likes. It’s followers have been trying to establish a New World order, so that the antichrist could come back to rule the world. Babylon on the other hand seems to want to present herself as the beautiful lady who entices through sex, money, and the appetites. She wants to rule through what I term “bread and circuses.” Keeping the people happy through materialism, so that they would worship her. The New Age, gnostic Christianity, eastern mysticism, Wicca, and all religions of this nature are what she likes to use to keep people under her control. Somewhere during her history since Rome, a group within her followers decided they preferred the dark side or black witchcraft and two factions developed and have been vying for control since.

Now if one looks back to the statue of Nebuchadnezzar again, we see that there are five toes on each foot. And those toes are a combination of clay with iron. What is interesting is what is said about them. They do not adhere to each other, just as clay does not mix with iron. But it says that “they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men.” The seed of men is men. All men are the seed of men, but if those who mingle with them are not the seed of men, then what are they? I believe the answer comes in the Olivet Discourse when Christ says that as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be again before He returns. Two things in particular characterize that time period of Noah. One was that the thoughts of everyone were wicked continually, and the second was that the fallen angels, giants, and nephilim were a part of the world at that time. The nephilim and giants were the offspring of the fallen angels mating with human women. These strain of hybrids came back after the Flood and were in the land when Israel came out of Egypt. God had removed some of the giants and hybrids, but Israel was told to rid the land of the rest of them. They did not carry out that command to its conclusion, and some of the nephilim escaped to other parts of the world. It is even possible that some had migrated to other parts of the world before that, for there are ancient writings and even writings and stories that are only hundreds of years old that speak of giants and “gods.” These nephilim have hidden themselves away for a long time, but it is becoming clear that they are making their presence known. In fact, both factions of witchcraft tell of how they are both involved with demons and what they believe are aliens (but in fact are nephilim.) There may also be fallen angels involved in this too, but the fact is, these beings are the iron that mix with the clay or seed of men. (As to there being five on each foot, I do not at this time know how to identify what those might be. But it is not essential that I do so at the moment.) It should not be surprising that black witchcraft is heavily involved with demons and demon possession. That is where they get their powers. Likewise white witchcraft leans on spirits, but their spirits have convinced them that they are benevolent “light” creatures.

So having established what these two factions are, now it is easier to explain what is going on in the world. The Dark Side otherwise known as the New World Order or Deep State has been taking over the world, and in particular has been trying to conquer America. America almost fell to it, but Babylon suddenly seemed to say, “Not my country, you don’t,” and has decided to not only take back her country, but is attempting to rid the entire world of the black witchcraft and replace it with white witchcraft, so that she can establish a golden age of peace and prosperity with her at the helm. It was the upset victory of Donald Trump in 2016 that set off a war. Actually I believe she started before that when she created Brexit and broke up the EU. America was the last holdout of freedom in this world, and it had to be brought down for the New World Order to bring in the antichrist. The loss of the election was not expected and it set off a firestorm.

The side of “Light” or White Hats as they call themselves have been planning for quite some time to bring down the NWO and rid the world of their grotesque evil, especially the child trafficking and pedophilia, blood drinking, etc. The time was right, and God agreed, for I believe there have been several delays when the NWO has tried to take total control and God has sidelined their plans. We are now seeing the fulfilling of prophecy when Babylon will become the queen she so desires to be, as described in Revelation 17. “How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, …….for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.” She has made the world rich by her wares, both importing every luxurious thing and exporting all her filth. She is drunk on the blood of the saints, having persecuted God’s people throughout history. She is proud and arrogant and rich. And she must become this again, to the fullest, so that this is who she is when she is finally destroyed.

The Deep State has created a scenario to try to control the people through fear and terror. I am not going to go into all the medical information about Covid 19 that I have researched, but let’s just say it has a proven recovery rate of 99.9% which is a very high rate of recovery. The death rate has been manipulated to scare people by deliberating creating situations so that the elderly and compromised would die, and for the rest to manufacture false data to scare people. The mask situation is merely a medically useless occult ritual (again this has been scientifically researched as to the effectiveness of these masks) that is being enacted to control the people by erasing identities and individuality, promoting fear, creating suspicion of our fellow man and antisocial behavior, and preparing them to accept a new “normal” which is how one is programmed by the occult to accept a new reality within the occult which will control and use them. Groups are terrorizing and killing people and burning cites to the ground and destroying people’s business and livelihoods. The economy has been destroyed to make people desperate, churches have been closed to erase God and Christ as much as possible (a lot of people who go to church do not have a real relationship with Christ, so it removes what little Christianity they have in their lives from their lives) in the hopes that people will never go back. Schools are closed to traumatize children who can no longer socialize, but now live in fear. Trauma is the stock in trade for black witchcraft.

The White Hats are seeking to rid the world of this, and behind the scenes, much is going on. Child trafficking has been coming down, as one can see if one follows the news (in places other than the controlled media). Children are being rescued and people are being arrested for pedophilia. Laws are being passed through executive orders. There is much going on to try to reverse this evil that has been years in the making, enslaving people. According to Bible prophecy, Babylon must become a prosperous nation again, before she is destroyed by the antichrist and his cronies later on, closer to the Lord’s return. That requires that the White Hats win this battle, but as we can already see, that doesn’t mean it will be a bloodless one. Cities are burning, people have died of illness and have been killed by domestic terrorists. Law and order are being dismantled in the last death throes of the Deep State and they still have more plans to destroy us. When one thing doesn’t work to kill the hope in people, they bring on something new, to try to get back the control they once had. It will no doubt get much worse in many ways before it gets better, but “better” is a relative word. Satan is going to deceive for a while with white witchcraft, but according to the Bible this can only continue until the beast returns. He rules through terror. If Satan can’t conquer with one lie, he will present himself as an angel of light and use another. This is what we are seeing happen. I cannot say how long this will go on (definitely until after the elections), nor can I say how bad it will get (probably very bad), but it will come to an end and the country will recover and become more prosperous than ever. But it will be much different. We will have a new kind of economy (cashless) and I imagine people will be expected to embrace the New Age religion that controls all this. However I believe that this “golden age” will be short-lived, for I believe we are on the cusp of entering Daniel’s 70th week. And true Christians will be no better off under Babylon than under the beast, for the new religion has no room for the real Christ, only the “Christ consciousness”, the New Age ascended master. Christianity, as those who are true Christians know it, is a religion of the old age, which is has passed its time and has no place in the new age of enlightenment according to the White Hats. It must be left behind and people must “ascend” to the new dimensional consciousness where they are one with the universe. If you cannot “ascend” then you must be eliminated, so as to not bring disharmony to the vibrational matrix that will constitute the new world paradigm. It will be a “quantum” world.

I have spent a lot of time investigating the White Hats and what they are saying. They throw around a whole lot of Christian terminology, such as separating the wheat from the chaff, there will be a great awakening (their idea of revival), and an ascension (their idea of a rapture), a Christ consciousness (instead of Christ the person) and they are bringing in the “kingdom of God” or “golden age" (their idea of a millennium).  They keep saying that what is happening is Biblical. Well on the one hand, they are right, for it is prophecy fulfilled, but that is not how they mean it. They interpret the Scriptures in a whole new way, and reader, prepare yourselves spiritually, for they are all saying that the Bible we have is not the true Scriptures, or about the true teachings of Jesus, and does not tell us who He truly was. They are talking of discoveries of “older” manuscripts that teach something entirely different from what the Bible we have teaches and how the Dark Side hid all this truth away from us for all these years, but now we will see that we have misunderstood Christ for all this time. They dismiss the idea of demons, fallen angels and nephilim and talk about the disclosure of aliens. So get ready, for the world you once knew is gone, and a new one is on the horizon. But like all things that are birthed, there are birth pangs, and we are going through them. And then there will be more pains when the antichrist presents himself as who he really is and the great tribulation begins. We have begun the final ride into what will shortly be the beginning of the end. I would say that we should probably expect that within a short time (months to a few years) that the temple will go up in Jerusalem. Then we will know that it will only be a matter of time before the Lord returns. So as Jesus said, “Pray that you are worthy to escape all these things.”


Thursday, February 6, 2020

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 4th 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.

Legitimate Spiritual Reasons For Not Attending Church

We have all heard some of the reasons for not attending church. They range from soup to nuts in the reasoning department, and a great many of them are just excuses for the real reason, which admittedly is they simply don’t want to go. They don’t have a vital relationship with the Lord and church is just a lifestyle choice to which they no longer want to give time. But what about those who do have a vital relationship with the Lord? Are there any legitimate reasons for no longer attending church? Yes, I believe there are. I am going to address them below.

1). Sunday is not the Sabbath. Going to church does not equal keeping the fourth commandment, which is eternal. The Commandments were given to show us our sin, therefore to not keep the Sabbath is a sin. Many people who are getting deeply into the study of God’s Word are coming to the conclusion that God NEVER changed the Sabbath to Sunday. There is nothing in Scripture that indicates that we should do so. The few verses that people try to use to legitimize this change fall flat when they are interpreted correctly. (See the following article for the Sabbath vs. Sunday controversy. https://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2011/02/sabbath-or-sunday.html.) Can two walk together when they are not in agreement? Sabbath worshipers see not observing the Sabbath as breaking one of the Ten Commandments, which it is. Yet the church breaks it weekly without remorse or repentance. How does one worship in a church that denies Scripture and sins continually and unrepentantly defending a pagan practice, just because it is a man-made tradition?

As there are precious few groups that meet on the Sabbath, and the few who do are often considered more cults than not, it is highly unlikely that one can find a Sabbath observing church that is either not apostate (apostasy due to having a “prophet,” who has had extra-biblical revelations, at the helm of the church group - whether still alive or not) or has not gone back to being under the yoke of the law of Moses (this is referring to the laws beyond the 10 commandments – see these articles about that Parts 1 & 2 https://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2012/09/should-christians-keep-entire-law-of.html
https://bibleconundrumsandcontroversy.blogspot.com/2017/03/should-christians-keep-entire-law-of.html.) As a consequence, most of these people are solitary individuals or family units that have no group with which to meet, so they stay at home and worship at home. Since they worship on Saturday, they see no need to go to a church, which they feel meets on a pagan worship day, to worship a second time. And as they do observe the Sabbath, usually the Sunday churches look down their nose with disapproval on these people as being ignorant or cult-like in their beliefs, which does not create a good fellowship situation. This is a big part of why the Sunday church pastors are telling the Sabbath worshipers that they need to be in church. They feel these people are horribly wrong and must be corrected, for their Christianity is greatly in question. Worship and fellowship are much easier when one is in harmony with doctrine and not at odds with the rest of the congregation, who do not take kindly to the “divisive” person in their midst. Divisive being an ironic label, since they are being obedient to the eternal law of God about the Sabbath.

2) Apostasy is rampant in the churches. Trying to find a church that has not completely compromised themselves with the world is a challenge these days, setting aside the Sabbath problem. The worldly music, the entertainment, the New Age and other doctrines of demons that are being taught are anathema to those who value God’s Word. These non-church going people want God’s Word and its truth, not the lies being espoused by so many churches these days. The Laodicean church is alive and well, and these people do not want to be in it, not because they are lukewarm, but because they are not, and it makes them want to spew the church out of their mouths, as much as God wants to.

If apostasy is not the problem, then Pharisaism is. Many churches have, over the years, developed their own denominational list of legalistic man-made rules by which they expect their parishioners to abide, so as to keep them as far from sin as possible (sound familiar?). It matters little to them whether or not these rules are Scriptural. They are their rules and you must play by their rules and adhere to them or accept the consequences. Constant berating from the pulpit and otherwise, chastising/disciplining, and being controlling are the methods used to keep their people in line. Some even resort to threats of differing kinds. Christ would not be proud.

3) The teaching is “Scripture light” in the churches. It is hard to find churches that get much beyond the basics of the gospel message to anything deeper. Since the Church (meaning the true the body of believers) has abdicated its responsibility, to preach the gospel and make disciples, in favor of letting the church (organized religious groups that meet in little buildings) do it, the preaching has become little more than the constant telling of how Jesus died for your sins. We are told to move on from these things which are the milk to the meat of Scripture. By that it was meant that we should get into the Old Testament, for that was the only Scripture available to whom the people the original letter in the N.T. was written, and it was what was meant by meat. The gospel message was coming via the apostles and word of mouth. The meat was already written down and in their possession. And a great deal of it has to do with the Second Coming, which for Christians is supposed to be the biggest priority of study after they have been saved. That is why several blessings and curses have been put upon the last book of the Bible - Revelation. Blessings for reading, heeding, and keeping the words contained in it, and curses for those who would add or subtract from what is in it. This is how important studying the end times is to the Lord. It is the only book upon which He has put such terms. They have no need to keep learning about Christ on the cross. They need to learn about Christ’s return, yet few churches preach it. A vast amount of Scripture, Old and New, is devoted to this subject. Few churches even open the Old Testament. And hardly anyone teaches the prophetic passages in the New, much less teach Revelation. Of course since few seem to study and understand prophecy, that might be better than not, for those who teach it do seem to be adding and subtracting from it, much to their peril. These people who are leaving the churches, who are not leaving due to lack of interest, are thirsting for a deeper knowledge of God’s Word and Him, and they are starving to death in the churches. So they are leaving to study on their own. They do it with the hope of finding others who might be like-minded.

4) Churches are poor stewards, using their finances for bigger buildings, better sound systems, multiple self-help programs, radio/TV broadcasts, salaries for multiple leaders, professional musicians, special groups for entertainment for outreach programs, and etc. There are families in these churches that are suffering financially, and get no help from the church, while the church is, in a public show of piety, giving away money to and helping those who are not brethren. Home-churching is preferable for several reasons, one being better stewardship of our finances. They find that their tithes and offerings can be diverted to help those in their group who have material needs, and can also help those outside of their group, where they can be a witness by giving materially, as well as spiritually. There is no public show to gain applause, just a quiet helping out, as we are told to do. There is no building to pay for, no salaries, no media expenses, etc., etc. Money can actually do some real good. And without an organized church, there is no possibility of government interference, which is getting to be a greater concern in this day and age.

5) Fellowship is not what it is cracked up to be in the church. One of the excuses used to try to shame people into attending church is the need for fellowship. Not all church fellowship is profitable and spiritually uplifting. Sometimes it is emotionally and spiritually shattering. It is hard to find a church where cliques do not exist. There is always the “in” group, just as there was in school. People who are not in this group are snubbed or treated as lesser Christians. They are not considered for positions or allowed to do things. They are only allowed to be pew sitters. The “in” group also tends to rule the church and set the standards by which everybody else is expected to tow the line. They want control of people’s private lives. I have personally seen people accused of sin and unexpectedly ambushed publicly before the congregation for discipline, and not only was there no sin by Biblical standards, but the discipline was applied totally unscripturally, for there was no warning the discipline was coming. Had it actually been warranted, the Bible instruction as to how to carry out discipline was completely ignored. It was merely that the people who were running the church did not like what was done, because they had a Pharisaical worry about what people might think about the church’s reputation. What they did not comprehend was the reputation they actually had, was that they were a judgmental self-righteous group, who lived by their own (not God’s) set of rules which they applied to others and expected them to meet or get chastised. And they wondered why nobody wanted to walk over the threshold of the church. Bullying is not liked by people. And it is not contained to merely the adult level.

Here I am going to turn this next passage over to my friend, Rosemary, for she (or rather her children), has experienced this problem. “I would add that children are often bullied in the church. Kids that really do have a heart for the Lord and genuinely want to learn more and to also live in a way pleasing to the Lord, those kids are often bullied by the other kids at church. And often the bullies are children of people either in leadership positions or in positions of high esteem with church leaders, so when parents report the bullying of their children, nothing is done about it, because those who have the power to stop it are not willing to even admit that it's happening. (Also, I do not know this for certain, but I do think that it's very possible that this same mentality is precisely why sexual abuse of children in the church has been virtually completely ignored until very recently.)” I can personally attest to this last comment by Rosemary that it is indeed a certainty, for I have actually seen it transpire in a couple of fundamental, evangelical churches. The cover-up of sexual abuse is not unheard of at all. It is not just the Catholic church with their pedophilia, or the pastors of evangelical churches having illicit sex with parishioners behind closed doors. There is hidden abuse in all the churches.

Home-churching with others or even alone is very preferable in this respect. The early church met in homes, and people knew each other very well and were aware of each other’s needs and struggles. Today a church can be literally thousands of people. They have no idea whom they go to church with, much less their needs materially and spiritually. Nor do they really seem to care. They are in these churches to feed their own needs, not the needs of others. They pick a church because it is entertaining, because it has a youth program, because it appeals to them on some level, not because it is a Bible teaching, holiness encouraging fellowship. Fellowship is more sweet for those outside of the church. They meet other Christians and connect with them in random places. They can’t always meet together on a weekly basis, but the fellowship is always sweeter, for they care, share, and pray for each other without the “in” crowd tsk, tsking them for something. The sharing doesn’t become gossip in the church, which is a prevalent problem in churches.

People who can find others to meet with find that the small group allows them to really get to know each other and better watch out for and love each other versus big churches where people are numbers rather than individuals. For those who can find like-minded Christians to get together with, the fellowship is so much better. They can share things without the worry of gossip or judgmentalism because of self-righteous piety being the concern of the church for appearances’ sake. They have doctrine in common and strive to keep it as Scriptural as possible, removing the paganism that has crept in, and seeking deeper truths rather than just continuing to regurgitate denominational party lines and pablum. They are concerned about holiness, rather than self-indulgence and entertainment. The relationships tend to be closer than a normal church group might have and the emphasis is on holy living, not on who is doing what, who is in charge, who has been doing what someone else disapproves of, or dissension about what are they going to do about such and such a problem with the building, or what have you.

6) Churches are losing the youth. It has failed them. That is because today they are entertaining our youth, but they are not teaching them. Admittedly, they only have them a couple hours a week, and that is another reason why they should not be relied upon to be the ones who teach our children. These children are leaving the churches in droves and their parents and pastors cannot figure out why. It is because they are not being taught Scriptural truths – what to believe, why they believe what they believe, and how to defend it. It is these very important truths that bind a person to their faith. Without them, they will wander away. Not only is the church not teaching them, their parents are not teaching them at home either, having relegated that responsibility to the church. Between the parents not teaching them, the many hours most children of Christians spend in the pagan school system, and the lack of anything of real spiritual value in most of the churches, what else can you expect?

Another problem with the parents is that they often don’t know what they believe or why and most certainly can’t defend it, so how can they teach their children anyhow. This is a multi-generational problem over more than that last hundred years, where the church has dropped the ball. As a consequence, nobody is teaching the children anything. Nor are the parents living by God’s Word, but are merely living a lifestyle according to the traditions and rules of whatever denomination they follow, which is often a life of hypocrisy. It is spiritually empty. If a parent is not studying, praying, or striving to live holy, why should the child? The rare children who do read their Bibles at all see the discrepancies between all of that, the doctrines they are taught to espouse, and the behavior of the church congregation and their parents. Yes, nobody is perfect, but traditions and legalism, and worldliness and entertainment are evident to even children as being very wrong. Why would I want to subject my precious child’s eternal spiritual state to that?

Home-churching is far better for children, for the parents who will spend the time to do this are committed to their children’s spiritual state. They will take a tremendous amount of time to study and pray and be fully committed, just as homeschoolers are, and will be very serious about teaching their children spiritual truths and living their lives as an example. Aside from this they also do not have to worry about bullying or God forbid, sexual abuse. The excuse is again given by the church, but what about peer socialization? Quite honestly, do you want your child, whom you want to live for Christ, hanging around with the pseudo Christian children, who will leave the church the minute they are out from under mommy and daddy’s thumb? Or do you want to carefully choose whom they socialize with, so that they will be encouraged to live a holy life? One does not have to exclusively socialize with their own age group. A healthy child will be able to socialize with all ages and learn to choose their companions carefully regardless of age. And families who worship together (just as families who homeschool) tend to have close bonds with their children that keep them on the narrow path. These children are far healthier emotionally, and spiritually they are way ahead of the game, for they are not easily led astray by false doctrines, for they are grounded in why they believe what they believe, and can defend their beliefs.

7) “I’m not perfect and that’s why I’m in church.” This is the stock message thrown at non-church-goers. As if those who despise apostasy and entertainment are declaring themselves perfect. The irony being that while they spew this proverb at people, they actually think the opposite in many cases. The self-righteousness is often very apparent in church-goers, who use this phrase the most. Thank you again, Rosemary for bringing this problem to my attention. With the exception of a deletion of a parenthetical note or two, I will present her statements on this particular issue.

“Can I just also say that I am getting super-sick of hearing the ‘I'm not perfect and that's why I'm in church’ comment? For while that sentiment is, in part, true, I have come to see it used now as more of an excuse used by regular church goers. Yes, no one is perfect, but once we make Jesus the Lord of our lives, we are supposed to strive to live each day doing His will, not our own will. So, yes, it's true that you are not perfect because you go to church, but at the same time you should not be shrugging your shoulders at the sin in your life, as if to say that there is nothing you can do about it. It also seems to me that the people who love to say that same slogan are the same people who are proud and self-righteous about attending their church every Sunday. Maybe I'm way off here, but I rarely hear any regular church-goers talking about striving for holiness in their daily lives. Or speaking at all about the holiness of God.

Oh, and one more thing, I also associate that ‘I go to church because I'm not perfect’ meme as being a come-back line that regular church-goers use when they are accused of not being any different than non-church-goers. As Christians, we are SUPPOSED to be different- a people set apart-a peculiar people. From what I see around me, in America at least, the average church-goer has no desire to live a life any different than their non-church-going neighbors, co-workers, friends, etc. They want to fit right in with the rest of society - with ‘the world.’ So when a non-church-goer comments on this, that the person going to church does not seem any ‘better’ (aka different) than the person who does not go to church, the church-goer quickly responds with the meme. And they miss the whole point. If someone who does not go to church, who does not know the Lord, who has not heard or understood the gospel and responded to it - if they cannot see any difference between themselves and the person who is telling them that they should be going to church - then as Christians, we're doing it wrong! There should be HUGE differences between the everyday lives of a Christian and the everyday life of a non-believer. The person who does not know Christ should look at the Christian and wonder what is different about them. Why do they do the things they do? Why don't they lie to get out of an uncomfortable situation? Why don't they cheat when they know that no one would find out? Why do they love others the way they do? Why do they handle life's problems and disappointments so differently? When there is no discernible difference, I think that is when the church-goer is scoffed at when they ask someone to go to church with them. It's pretty understandable that the unchurched person would respond with ‘What, you think you're better than me because you go to church?’ If they don't see any other difference, then yes, why should they go to church? Indeed, why?”

Thank you, Rosemary, I couldn’t have said it better myself. Even if you are striving to live a holy life, if you ask someone to accompany you to your church, which might have a less than stellar reputation, it reflects back on you that you associate with that church, and it diminishes your effectiveness in witnessing to the non-believer for we are known by our companions.

The church initially began in people’s homes, and in countries where persecution is rife, that is how Christians meet again today. Is it really so inconceivable that in a time when God Himself told us apostasy would be rampant in Christendom, that the true believers would again leave the government approved, acknowledged, and sometimes controlled churches, to seek out a way of worship that allows them to worship in spirit and in truth? The Pilgrims sacrificed much to be able to do that. As a direct descendant of these courageous Christians, I take my heritage seriously and am a Separatist myself.

8) The one and only Scripture that is used to try to force people into church attendance (because mandatory church attendance is nowhere taught in Scripture) is found in Hebrews 10:25. That this verse has been taken out of context and used in a way that was never intended is shown in an article linked here.

I am also linking another article which gives some bad reasons for going to church that makes one consider why they do go to church.


Just before posting this article, I read an article that a woman had written saying why it was necessary to take your children to church. It was said that even if a mother had to run around like a mad woman and throw pop tarts at the children to eat on the way, that they needed to be at church, because that was where they would meet Jesus. That when they see the teacher, and she gives them juice and crackers to fill their tummies, that they would be meeting Jesus. That when they sat squirming in their seats with her in church, and she showed them where in the Bible the pastor was preaching from, they would be meeting Jesus. That church was the only place where a child could be themselves and not have to worry about peer pressure or performance. There was more than this in the content, but what struck me immediately was not just that the way church was approached was in a obligatory fashion, rushing to get there as if dashing to a doctor's appointment that could not be missed, instead of getting up early to take time to prepare everyone in a peaceful way, so that they would approach worship with a right heart and attitude, but that the reason for going was because they were going to "meet Jesus" there. As if church were the only place they could and would meet Him.

If the only place the children are meeting Jesus is at church, then that home has a lot more problems than having a harried morning on Sunday. They should be meeting Jesus every single day in their home. Church should only be a blip on the screen in that journey. They should be receiving their learning about Him at home. They should be establishing their relationship with Him at home. They should not even need church, if it is missed for some reason, because He lives in their home. No wonder children are leaving the churches in droves. Jesus is somebody they do not even know, because they are not meeting Him in the apostate churches, and they apparently are not meeting Him at home either. Juice and crackers filling their tummies is not meeting Jesus, just because it is in the church's nursery.

And as shown in one of the reasons above, it is not necessarily a place, and certainly not the only place, a child can be themselves. Children get bullied and sometimes abused in churches as well as elsewhere. The place they should be able to be themselves should be everywhere and anywhere, because they should be learning that at home. The parents should be building their self-esteem to enable them to stand against the world, because they have put their trust in Christ. That is why I am also an advocate of home-schooling. We are given eternal souls over which to be stewards and are held responsible by God for our children's lives, both mortal and eternal. Their physical, mental, emotional, and especially their spiritual lives are our responsibility, until they are old enough to make their own decisions. We cannot do that if they are in Satan's institutions most of the day for fives day a week, and apostate churches on the weekends. And then there are the extra-curricular activities that take up hours more of their time. How much time do most Christian parents actually spend with their children teaching them about the Lord and just life in general? For most, it is very little. We cannot choose God for them, every person must choose for themselves, but we must make every effort to show them that this is the choice they should want to make. Both by example and by spending every moment teaching them. Deuteronomy 6:7 "And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up."

The Jews were required (at least the men) to go to the temple by God's laws. The church is no longer under that obligation. We are the temple of God. We do not need a building, yet Christianity has elevated that "mandatory by tradition" element to a place of idolatry, as if we were still under the Mosaic Laws and the church is the temple, and we MUST be there every Sunday, or we are in terrible trouble. Christians say we are under grace, but they do not act as if they believe it. They seem to trust in the church, not the body of believers, but the building and the worship service to gain them entrance into heaven, as if it is a sacrifice on the altar that they are under obligation to present to be in good standing. Worship of God should be ongoing everywhere you are, not reserved for one hour a week in a designated building. If that is the only place it is happening, then there are far more serious problems in a person's relationship with Christ than worrying about whether or not they have to miss church.