Stephen Jones — Ecclesiology
b1 — Creation’s Jubilee
Three Churches: Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles
Jones distinguishes three historical phases of the Church on earth, corresponding to the three Israelite feasts:
“Level Two is the corporate fulfillment in the Church, or the Kingdom of God. On this level we see God’s dealings with three Churches, or three stages of the Kingdom on earth.” — Stephen E. Jones, Creation’s Jubilee, ch. 6
First Church — Passover Age:
“The Passover-level Church, or Kingdom, began with Moses at that first Passover, when Israel came out of Egypt. This first Church is called in Acts 7:38, ‘the church in the wilderness.’ This Passover-Age Church ended with Jesus’ death on the Cross at Passover about 1,500 years later. It was an era where the Holy Spirit was WITH the people, but not IN them.” — ch. 6
Second Church — Pentecostal Age:
“The second Church is the Pentecostal-Age Church, which began seven weeks after Jesus’ resurrection, when the Spirit of God was sent on the day of Pentecost. On this day God renewed the Kingdom by giving it greater power and placing the Holy Spirit within the people. No longer was the temple an external house made of wood and stone. Now the people themselves were the temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16).” — ch. 6
Interpretation: The Church as temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16) is for Jones the defining ecclesiological characteristic of the Pentecostal Age — an internalization of the divine presence.
Third Church — Tabernacles Age:
“The third Church is the Tabernacles Age Church. At the beginning of this age God will pour out the fullness of His Spirit upon the overcomers. They will rule with power in the earth and bring all things under the feet of Jesus Christ. Their ministry will bring righteousness and the fullness of truth into the earth.” — ch. 6
The Church as Wheat Harvest: Ecclesiological Position of Ordinary Church Membership
Jones identifies the general Church with the wheat harvest and the second resurrection:
“The Church in general will be raised in the second resurrection. Jesus calls them ‘the just’ who receive Life at the same time ‘the unjust’ are judged at the beginning of that final age in ‘the lake of fire.‘” — ch. 6
“The firstfruits of Pentecost signify the second resurrection, when the Church is raised up to stand before the face of God.” — ch. 6
On the leavened condition of the Church:
“Pentecost was not designed to bring perfection, i.e., an unleavened condition. Pentecost gave us only an ‘earnest’ of the Spirit, a downpayment, rather than the fullness.” — ch. 6
“The Pentecostal Age should have been a time when the Church learned the law of God and how to be led by the voice of the Spirit. Too often, however, the leadership in the various Church factions put away the law and removed from Christians the right to hear God’s voice for themselves.” — ch. 6
Interpretation: Jones views the institutional Church of the Pentecostal Age as structurally deficient — leavened, incomplete, a ‘Saul kingship’ that prepares for but cannot be the Davidic kingdom.
Overcomers (Barley) versus Church (Wheat): Two Ecclesiological Categories
Jones draws a fundamental distinction between the ‘barley company’ (overcomers) and the general Church (wheat):
“The Significance of Wheat in the Bible — A study of wheat in the Bible teaches us about the Church in general and the manner in which the Church is raised and judged briefly in the second resurrection.” — ch. 6
On the barley company (overcomers):
“The barley people are called to rule and reign with Christ. As for the calling of the barley company, we read that Gideon and his army were called ‘a loaf of barley bread’ (Judges 7:13). God is raising an army of overcomers who will rule with Christ to subdue all nations under His feet.” — ch. 6
On the exegetical basis in 1 Cor. 15:23:
“Paul is here referring to Passover and Pentecost, the harvest of the barley and the wheat. The first ‘squadron’ to be raised from the dead are the barley Overcomers; the second is the Church in general, the wheat harvest.” — ch. 6
“The first is the anointed firstfruits; the second is leavened company, the Church in general.” — ch. 6
Church and Kingdom: The Saul Typology
Jones uses the Saul-David typology as the ecclesiological framework for the Church in the Pentecostal Age:
“The kingdom was indeed established at Pentecost in the second chapter of Acts. But it was not the perfected kingdom, typified by the Davidic rule. It was instead an imperfect kingdom, full of leaven, as history has shown, typified by the reign of Saul in the Old Testament.” — ch. 6
“As in the days of Saul and David, the nation must await the end of Saul’s reign before the Davidic reign can begin. It is the age of the Church, the wheat harvest.” — ch. 6
The rejection of Stephen’s message as an ecclesiological turning point:
“Stephen’s kingdom message in Acts 7 was rejected when he urged the high priest to follow Joshua-Jesus across the Jordan. And so we were sentenced to wander in the wilderness—again!” — ch. 6
Church Councils and the Condemnation of Restoration Theology
The Fifth General Council (553 AD)
“Church Councils Condemn Origen — Origen was finally condemned in the Fifth General Council in 553 A.D., attended by only 148 bishops.” — ch. 12
“It was left to the Emperor Justinian (527-565 AD) to condemn Origen’s belief in the restoration of all things. He did so specifically in Anathema IX, ‘If anyone says or thinks that the punishment of demons and of impious men is only temporary, and will one day have an end, and that a restoration will take place of demons and of impious men, let him be anathema.‘” — ch. 12
Interpretation: Jones emphasizes that it was the emperor — not the Church Council itself — who specifically condemned restoration theology.
“The Church Council itself spelled out fifteen Anathemas against Origen, but none of them condemned his teaching that all men would be saved. In fact, they also said nothing about Origen’s belief that even demons would ultimately be restored.” — ch. 12
Internal Contradiction of the Church Council
“Ironically, the same Church Council, in Session 1, claimed to follow ‘in every way’ the writings of the two Gregorys, who taught that all men would be saved.” — ch. 12
The Council’s own declaration: “We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyassa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo, and their writings on the true faith.”
Interpretation: Jones identifies a fundamental contradiction: the Council condemns Origen while simultaneously endorsing the Gregorii who held the same restorationist teaching. [TENSION: internal inconsistency in the official church position]
The Seventh Church Council (692 AD)
“In Canon 1 of the Seventh Church Council in 692 AD, held in the city of Trullo, the Council upheld the decision of the Fifth Church Council (above) against Origen.” — ch. 12
Jones quotes Aristenus: “The fifth [Council] was held in the time of Justinian the Great at Constantinople against the crazy Origen, Evagrius, and Didymus, who remodeled the Greek figments, and stupidly said … that there would be an end of punishments, and a restitution of the devils to their pristine state.”
Church-Historical Analysis: Sheep and Wolves in the Church
Jones describes the opposition between restorationist and eternal-torment theologians as an ecclesiological dividing line:
“It would be naive to claim that all who were restorationists were godly, while all eternal tormentists were scoundrels. Yet in reading Church history it is surprisingly easy to pick out the wolves among the sheep just by the testimony of their lives.” — ch. 12
Restorationist theologians (Jones identifies as ‘sheep’): Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, Theodore of Mopsuestia.
Eternal-torment theologians (Jones identifies as ‘wolves’): Tertullian, Jerome, Theophilus of Alexandria.
On Theophilus as a church-political actor:
“Theophilus called together a synod of a few loyal bishops, condemned Origen as a heretic, and forbade anyone henceforth to read his works. When a group of 300 Nitrian monks refused to acquiesce in denouncing Origen, he then sent armed men to attack and kill them.” — ch. 12
Interpretation: For Jones, the condemnation of restoration theology was not primarily theologically motivated but ecclesiastically political — driven by power, revenge, and fear.
Ecclesiological Implications of the Apokatastasis
Jones draws terminological distinctions with direct ecclesiological relevance:
“Justification is a legal term relevant to sinners. Sinners need justification before the law. Reconciliation is a term that applies to enemies. Enemies need to be reconciled to each other. Salvation is a broad term often translated ‘deliverance’… Resurrection is something that the dead need.” — ch. 12
On the scope of reconciliation:
“When Paul wrote about ta panta, ‘THE ALL’ being reconciled to God, whether they were beings in heaven or in earth, it seems self-evident that he spoke of both heavenly beings and earthly beings.” — ch. 12
Interpretation: The ecclesiological implication is that the restoration of all things (apokatastasis) does not position the Church as the final goal of God’s plan, but as an intermediate stage — one of three ‘harvests’ that together lead to ‘God all in all’ (1 Cor. 15:28).