The distinction between a form of worship that is acceptable to God, and a form of worship that is not, is found right through the Scriptures. The principle behind the distinction is laid down in Genesis 4, as interpreted for us by the inspired writer of the letter to the Hebrews. Abel offered “of the firstlings of his flock”, and his worship was acceptable to God; Cain offered “of the fruit of the ground”, and his worship was not acceptable to God (Gen. 4:3-5).
Now it was “by faith” that “Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain” (Heb. 11:4). This does not mean that as long as a person believes that what he is doing is right it is acceptable to God, for true faith means believing what God has said and acting upon it, as Hebrews 11 itself amply demonstrates when carefully read. We can be sure, then, that God must have instructed man from the first in the principles of how to worship Him. Abel knew what God had said (for there can be no faith in God’s Word without there being first a knowledge of what it says), believed what God had said, and acted upon it. Cain either did not bother to find out what God had said, or more likely chose to ignore it, and worshipped in a way which he thought appropriate.
The principle is, then, that acceptable worship springs from right beliefs, and wrong beliefs will result in unacceptable worship. In the case of Abel, his offering of an animal of the flock was a recognition of the principle that the shedding of blood was necessary in God’s purpose for the remission of sins. Cain, in offering the fruit of the ground, clearly did not believe in this principle. This illustrates the connection between acceptable worship and right belief.
Two ways
The Lord Jesus Christ spoke of there being two ways: the broad way which leads to destruction, down which many go, and a narrow way that leads to life eternal, which few follow (Mt. 7:13,14). These two ways existed from the time of Cain and Abel; there were those who followed “the way of Cain” (Jude v. 11) and experienced destruction in the Flood, and there were those like Enoch who “walked with God” (Gen. 5:24), following the right way. A small remnant of eight were still following that way when the Flood came, and their lives were preserved in the ark.
After the Flood the same division must have occurred, for eventually it became necessary for God to call Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees and establish a new beginning. The whole context of Abraham’s life is that of separation from those around who were idolatrous and wicked; indeed, he came from a background of idolatry, for we are told that his father Terah “served other gods” (Josh. 24:2). Clearly, between the time when Noah and his family had stepped out of the ark onto an earth cleansed from sin, and the departure of Abraham from the idolatry of Ur, there had occurred a similar division to that which had occurred after the Fall— a division between those who believed what God had said and who worshipped accordingly, and those who chose to follow their own ways.
The point at which this division occurred is not so clear in Scripture as that which occurred with Cain and Abel after the Fall. Clearly the building of the tower of Babel was regarded by God as man exalting himself against Him, and was dealt with accordingly. Nimrod is traditionally the one who instigated many beliefs and practices which were contrary to the Word of God, and, although many things have become attached to his name of which the Bible is silent, the import of the record in Genesis 10:8-10 seems to be that of man’s exaltation of himself against God.
The false doctrines of apostate Christianity can be traced back to these early times. Belief in the immortality of the soul, belief in a supreme Trinity of gods, belief in a god of evil as well as a god of good, belief in a great mother goddess—all these false doctrines and many more have their roots in the beliefs of the early Babylonians and Egyptians. These beliefs developed during the centuries between the Flood and the call of Abraham.
It is appropriate to our theme (that true worship can only come from a belief in the Word of God and by doing what it says) that Abraham was the one chosen for a new beginning, for he stands supreme amongst the Old Testament worthies as a man of faith. We are well aware of his faith in being prepared to leave Ur and live as a pilgrim, looking for an eternal inheritance in the Kingdom. We are well aware of his faith in relation to the promised seed who was to be born of Sarah and himself. Abraham also showed his faith in his obedience to God’s commands regarding worship, for God declared:
“Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws” (Gen. 26:5).
We know that he built altars and offered sacrifices (Gen. 12:7; 15:9), and we can be sure that in doing so he was careful to keep to that which had been commanded by God, commands which are not recorded in our Scriptures but which can be discerned in part by a careful reading of Genesis. Now it is noticeable when we look at the life of Abraham that he kept himself separate from the worship of the people of the land of Canaan, except when he met Melchizedek, who was clearly the representative of a faithful remnant of true believers. There could be no sharing of worship with the idolaters of the land of Canaan, even though they were not as evil as when Israel invaded the land many years later: “the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full” (Gen. 15:16).
Israel’s separation
When the descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob had become a great nation in fulfilment of the promises, there was again separation. Israel was declared to be “an holy people unto the Lord thy God” (Deut. 7:6), and in the same context they were forbidden to have anything to do with the inhabitants of Canaan, particularly their false worship (vv. 2-5). The Law of Moses of course provided many detailed commands as to how Israel were to worship God. Salvation could not come by keeping the Law, for none could keep it perfectly, but there were those in ancient Israel who were men and women of faith, and for such the same principle that we have outlined above would have applied. They would have read God’s Law, believed it, and sought to obey it, and their obedience would have included the offering of sin offerings, and taking part in the Day of Atonement, to mention only two of the commands of the Law that would in fact have instructed the faithful in the principles of redemption through Christ.
Later on in Israel’s history there were those who sought to mix the worship laid down by God in the Law with the worship of false gods. The prophets roundly condemned those who did this. Jeremiah speaks of those who entered the gates of the temple to worship God and yet followed other gods (Jer. 7:1-7). Zephaniah condemns not only the open idolaters, “them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops”, but also the compromisers, them “that swear by the Lord, and that swear by Malcham” (Zeph. 1:5).
After the captivity, when the Jews returned to the land and commenced rebuilding the temple, the Samaritans, the people from Mesopotamia transported by the Assyrians to Samaria, said: “Let us build with you: for we seek your God, as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto Him since the days of Esar-haddon king of Assur, which brought us up hither” (Ezra 4:2). The response of the leaders of Israel was, “Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God” ( v. 3). The Samaritans “feared the Lord, and served their own gods” (2 Kgs. 17:33), and it was not possible for the Jews to worship with those who mixed idolatry with the worship of God. Here is a Scriptural example to counteract the philosophy of those today who believe it is acceptable to worship with those who hold elements of the Truth but mixed with false beliefs.
New Testament teaching
In the New Testament the same theme of separation between the true and the false is to be found, and passages such as 2 Corinthians 6:1418 and Ephesians 2, which speak clearly of this separation, are used in other articles in this magazine. In the later books of the New Testament (later in order and later in time of writing) it is clear that the false ideas of paganism were making inroads into the ecclesias. The ecclesias are urged to deal firmly with error in their midst, which includes the disfellowshipping of those who teach it, but we do not find in the New Testament that things have got so bad that those who held to the Truth were obliged to separate themselves in their worship because of widespread error. That stage came after New Testament times.
In the Apocalypse there is a clear distinction between two classes: those who are sealed of God in their foreheads, that is, those who held the Truth in their minds; and those who had the mark of the Beast in their foreheads (Rev. 7:3; 13:16; 14:1). The same clear-cut division exists as existed in Old Testament times. The traditional Christadelphian understanding of the book of Revelation is that those who had the mark of the beast represent those who held the beliefs of a Christianity corrupted by pagan doctrines and practices. There are good Scriptural grounds for believing that to be so, but space does not permit these to be mentioned here. It is surely no coincidence that the introduction into the Brotherhood of other views about Revelation which apply it to Israel and/or to events yet future have occurred at a time when there has been a growing acceptance that we should not be so separate from other communities as we traditionally have been.
The reality is that the beliefs of the churches around us are all heavily affected by pagan beliefs. Many believe in the pagan idea of an immortal soul. Most believe in a god of evil—Satan. Invariably there is a belief, in some form, in a pre-existent immortal being who took on a human life which he gave as a substitute for ours. Invariably there is a belief in an influence from heaven which affects the mind and character and which effectively takes precedence over the Word of God. Other sects who have separated themselves from mainstream Christendom still hold these beliefs. These beliefs are now questioned by many in mainstream Christendom, but those who do so have also effectively abandoned the idea of a supernatural Being and adopted humanism with a tinge of Christianity.
The doctrines which we hold as first principles are interconnected, and all are therefore important We cannot compromise any of them for the sake of worshipping with others. The intermingling of the worship of the One True God with paganism was not acceptable in Old Testament times, and it is not acceptable now, for God does not change His ways, and, as we have shown above, the churches and sects of Christianity are semi-pagan in their beliefs.
The basis for acceptable worship from the beginning was that of belief in God’s Word, and endeavouring to obey what it says. Those who worshipped on this basis remained separate from those who introduced the thinking of man into their beliefs. It is regrettable that so many follow the thinking of man, putting the authority of supposedly inspired leaders, or of a supposed individual guidance by the Spirit, over the Word of God. Nevertheless, that is their position, and we must not be blinded to the fact We will not help those in error by fudging vital doctrinal differences so that we can worship with them, but we will do untold harm to the Truth and to ourselves by so doing. There is a need in these days for a return to the robust attitude to these things held by previous generations of Christadelphians, a robustness of faith expressed in the words of Hymn 266:
“Be pure in the doctrine,
Be strong in the Word;
Preserve in its brightness
The two-edged sword.
The things of the kingdom,
The things of the name,
Confessed in Jehovah
Absolve us from shame”.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One