"I Love Jesus but Don't Need the Church"
We've all heard comments like the one in the title of this article. Sometimes it's expressed a little differently, as in "I read the Bible, and I've accepted Jesus as my Savior, but I don't need the church. In fact, I'm happier without it." The most succinct expression conveying this attitude comes from the 1960s: "Jesus, yes; the church, no."
Others have concluded: "The church is not relevant." So, some religious groups have gone door to door to see what would entice non-churchgoers to come to "worship." It turns out they wanted entertainment, and that's the reason so many megachurches feature bands and dramas.
Thus, society has created two ways of minimizing the church: 1) Remaining aloof from it ("I don't need it"); or 2) Changing it into what pleases those present instead of what pleases God. In other words, did God authorize dramas to communicate spiritual truths, or did it please Him by the foolishness of preaching to reach folks (1 Cor. 1:21)? And where in the Roman Empire did any of the apostles tour with a rock band?
But let's examine the first option: Is the church necessary? A series of questions ought to bring to light the truth of the matter.
1. If the church is not important, why did Jesus build it? He promised that, upon the fact of His Deity, He would build His church (Matt. 16:13-18). Jesus asked His disciples who He was; Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God" (v. 16). Jesus told him that "on this rock I will build My church" (v. 18). The truth of the matter is that Jesus is the Son of God. The miracles and the resurrection proved all of Jesus' claims (John 20:30-31).
Therefore, why would Jesus build something that was not important or essential? Was that just a hobby He had—building things of no consequence? No, constructing the church did not involve some frivolous action on His part. Since Jesus built it, it must be important to Him, and it should not be shrugged off. If the church were optional, why would it be built upon the most solid rock there is—that He is God in the flesh (John 1:1, 14)? Men may desire to overlook the church, but Jesus nourishes and cherishes it (Eph. 5:29).
2. If the church is not important, then why did Jesus purchase it with His own blood (Acts 20:28)? We all purchase things. We buy groceries which, depending on one's family size, may cost between $100 and $200 a week. Obtaining a new car will put us in the $20,000 plus range, and a new house will probably begin at a quarter of a million dollars, which may or may not include the roof. But who would give his life's blood just to have a new television?
People give their lives for freedom. They may die in the place of a husband, wife, children, or someone very dear to them. But if they are in their right minds, they will not give their blood for something of no value. Since Jesus, therefore, purchased the church with His own blood, it must be something necessary for us to be a part of.
3. If the church is not important, why does He love her, care for her, and save her (Eph. 5:22-29)? Jesus gave Himself for her (v. 25); He sanctifies her with the washing of water by the word, and that cleansing makes her without blemish (vv. 26-27); He nourishes her and cherishes her (v. 29). And He saves her (V. 23)! How thoughtless of anyone to say, "I don't need her." Where's the promise that Jesus will save anyone who is outside His body?
Why make it a point to save those in the church (body) if He is going to save those on the outside, also? Is that how it worked with the ark Noah built? Those who believed and were obedient entered the ark, where safety awaited, but did God also save the ungodly from the rain and floods outside the ark? No! The church is our refuge from the storms of life and the temptations of Satan. We encourage one another to be faithful. God designed the church to function in love and unity. Salvation can only be found in the church.
4. If the church is not important, then why does Jesus personally place those who are saved into it? In Betty Burton Choate's fictional account of a young couple's Search for Truth (republished again in 2021), the husband and wife speak to a Baptist preacher who tells them (contrary to Ephesians 5:23): "You do know that you are saved by your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, not by being a member of a church, don't you?" (39). He repeats, "You can be saved without being in any church" (40).
But what do the Scriptures teach? Before reading the answer, bear in mind one more quote from the fictional Baptist "preacher": "Baptism is not involved in salvation" (41). Acts 2:41, however says: "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized, and that day about three thousand souls were added to them." Despite Baptist theology, 3,000 were baptized for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:38) and added to the body. They were not voted on by members. The Lord made the decision to add them when they obeyed the gospel.
In fact, Acts 2:47 tells us that "the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved." How can the church, therefore, be said to be unimportant to Jesus? He built it, gave His blood for it, nourishes it and cherishes it, and will someday save her permanently. The saved are in the church!
Shouldn't a Christian want to be where other Christians are (where the saved are) in the body of Christ—the church of Christ? Most people who shun the church have had a bad experience that they do not wish to repeat. It is not the Lord's fault that imperfect people are sometimes in His church, and they have refused to grow. Or maybe, like Diotrephes, they think the church belongs to them (3 John 9-10). The church in Corinth had multiple problems, also, but they were able to correct and overcome them.
Relationships
Furthermore, Jesus has special relationships with His people. Jesus is the head, and His people comprise His body (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18). In human terms, who has a relationship with an individual and asks him to divest himself of his body? Can you imagine someone saying, "Hello. It's nice to see your head again, but keep everything from your shoulders to your feet out of my house"? Isn't it a package deal? But that is precisely what the "Jesus, yes; church, no" folks are trying to do. They claim they want Him in their lives—but only His head. "I don't want the rest of your body near me, Lord." Does anyone really want to tell Jesus that?
A second relationship Jesus has with His people is that He is the bridegroom, and the church is the bride. John was issued an invitation: "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife" (Rev. 21:9). He then saw a great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God (v. 10). Would anyone dare to say, "I don't want to see that holy city; I don't want to see your bride; don't speak to me of her; I only want you"? To ask the question is to answer it. Why, then, do some think they can assume such an attitude now?
A third connection Jesus has with His people is that He is the King, and they are the kingdom. This relationship was prophesied in the Old Testament. Isaiah and Daniel both saw it. In the days of the Roman kings a new kingdom was to be established. This kingdom was spiritual in nature and would break in pieces and consume all others, since it would last forever (Dan. 2:44). Now what kind of subject would a person be to say, "O, king, I love you so much, but I refuse to be a part of your kingdom"?
Moses prophesied that one like him would arise. Jesus is that future Lawgiver (Deut. 18:18-19), which includes these words: "And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him." Who would say to Jesus, "You are the most wonderful Lawgiver ever, and I love you, but I will not be among those who keep your laws"? Such a sentiment is illogical.
But it is no more preposterous than saying, "Jesus, yes; but the church, no." Surely, no one who has studied the matter carefully could say such a thing. In the church are all the benefits God wants His people to have, including salvation.