Ooooh… You are going to start some REAL interesting discussions here…

But what a one-sided, agenda-driven, selective-data picture of the modern church.

And what a one sided,agenda-driven, selective-data picture of the early church. For instance, “We don’t have a pastor” even thnough Ephesians tells us that God has GIVEN us some to be pastors. Yes, not necessarily paid professionals. I won’t comment on more, I’ll let everyone else do that.

Some good points about getting the “laity” to lead the church, however. I applaud that and believe it is definitely biblical, and in fact, our church practices that kind of leadership, as many do.

Here’s what a sense from that article…

1.  The author has a lack of scriptural understanding concerning spiritual authority and the function of the body of Christ.  Has he had a bad experience with spiritual authority in the past?

2.  The author has a lack of understanding concerning how the body should function.  We were all meant to be servants as part of the Body of Christ.  Each part has a function...the hand, the foot, the eye, etc. Yes, every part compliments the other and is necessary for the healthy functioning of the body, but they don’t all trade roles from week to week. My hand doesn’t decide to do the talking on Tuesday because it feels like it. 

3.  The author has touched on some very real concerns for the church.  There needs to be accountability concerning leadership and finances.  There also needs to be input from the congregation in regards to major financial decisions.  Furthermore, people need to be edified, encouraged, involved in the life of the church,etc.  My quesion...Has the author ever heard of a small group...a place for mutual fellowship, encouragement, biblical study, open discussion, etc.? That’s what he is doing in his meetings, but the totality of the church and its purpose cannot be expressed/experienced in one small group or a one hour worship service.

Too much to discuss in one post.  I’ll stop for now.  Blessings...I enjoy reading the posts.

Why does it have to be either/or?  The “church” model the author gives sounds alot like my small group.  Their are pros and cons to any group.  The problem lies in thinking you’re the one who has it all figured out and EVERYONE who’s not doing it your way is wrong.

Quote:

“Well bless the little hearts of these ‘I don’t want organized church because I have an issue with authority so I will stay home and we don’t need no stinkin’pastor Christians.’”

My how those who make their living claiming some ficticious “authority” over others howl when their positions are threatened!  Their reaction is very telling.

Art, why do you think we NEED pastors?

Quote:

“Any picture of the church in the NT is descriptive of what they did at the time, not prescriptive of how we MUST conduct worship gatherings today. We don’t live in the same type of culture that they did in the first century. Its a different world, and in my opinion the church has responded beautifully and is continuing to do so. The only thing Jesus instructed the church to do when it comes together is remember Him in Communion. Check! Got that. We must be a NT church!!!”

So, Art, how many times have you attended a service and EVERYONE had the opportunity to share their gifting or experience or revelation?  How often have you seen spontaneity occur among gathered believers where you KNEW that the Holy Spirit, not a man, was in complete control of the gathering?  How can believers exhort, edify and encourage each other (as spoken of in the Scriptures) when one person controls all the facets of the service?

Apparently you’re one of those “evolving,” culturally-sensitive believers who believe that, as the culture changes, the word of God changes as well.  Here’s a newsflash for you: no where in the New Testament will you find any grounds for one man leading a group of others.  Not then, not now.

Finally, Jesus DID NOT leave us with a command to remember Him in what we call “communion.” Read I Corinthians 11 (that’s in the bible) and tell me where you see everyone partaking of a sliver of a cracker and a thimble-sized cup of juice.

You won’t!  Why is that?  Because we have reduced the Lord’s Supper, the love FEAST that the Early Church clearly understood as being representative of both the feasting that will take place in heaven as well as in remembering what Jesus undertook for us to get there.

No, instead people like yourself, the power-hungry self-proclaimed “authorities” have minimized the power of true community.  But it’s not surprising, especially since we’ve been so well taught by those in power (/sarcasm).

Ricky,
What UP Man?  You are Kind of harsh don’t you think?
So what do you make of, some are called to be pastors?  Tell me you thoughts.  When I say tell me I don’t mean put me in my place as you seem to think it is your job to do.
Jade

Quote:

“Well, according to Ephesians 4, they are given to us ‘to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.’

Then why aren’t the other so-called “Five-fold ministers” considered as important or as “authoritative” as pastors?

In addition, where in Ephesians does it say that pastors are to be in authority over a church?

I believe you, as many others, look at Ephesians 4:11 and see forms instead of the function (gift) as they are meant to be.  You apparently don’t realize also that these functions were crystallized into a form or office by those who were responsible for the rise of the Roman Catholic organization.

So, when you promote the unbiblical point of view that men are to govern or rule over the church, you’re promulgating catholic practice and doctrine.

Quote:

“Please don’t assume that Art is a ‘power-hungry self-proclaimed ‘authorities’” who has ‘minimized the power of true community’ when in reality, he may be doing what is prescribed in the aforementioned passage. I think your statement might go over the edge of what is acceptable in civilized respectful conversation and certainly what is acceptable for this excellent forum.”

I apologize for appearing harsh, although I see you left his remark about those who hold different, more biblical views than his, as suffering “mind-numbing ignorance.” Why is that?  Is it because you agree with his remarks?

So, who is being rude or offensive?

Quote:

“What UP Man? You are Kind of harsh don’t you think?”

Again, I apologize for appearing harsh but I do get upset when those who should know better (i.e., religious professionals) continue to defend what ammounts to “false imprisonment” of God’s people.

Instead of researching the Scriptures with an objective mindset, the professionals only regurgitate what they have been taught by MEN in seminaries who have a stake in keeping the status quo because it assures them a position of prestige and a paycheck.

Quote:

“So what do you make of, some are called to be pastors? Tell me you thoughts. When I say tell me I don’t mean put me in my place as you seem to think it is your job to do.”

Jade, I believe that EACH of us are called and gifted to serve the Body of Christ and that EACH of those gifts and callings are just as important as any other.

Have you ever thought that maybe the verse in question (Ephesians 4:11) is not referring to a select few who are so gifted but rather that those gifts mentioned are found throughout the ENTIRE Body of Christ?

In other words, why is it that someone who may have a strong pastoral gift (shepherd) but is not on the payroll of an organization is seldom recognized as a “pastor?” What about those who are apostolic or evangelistic?  Why should they be neglected or considered inferior to a “pastor” because they don’t have their own religious organization?

Picture a pie cut into five parts.  The pie is the body of Christ and the five “some” parts represent the gifts mentioned in Ephesian 4:11.  The entire pie is “gifted” as the Holy Spirit leads and blesses but the entire Body is the same...no one higher than any other.

The five gifts mentioned in Ephesians 4:11 are just that: FUNCTIONS through which the Spirit ministers.  They are NOT FORMS, such as a physical office.

By the way Jade, what is your definition of “spiritual authority?”

Ricky,

You say ‘Then why aren’t the other so-called “Five-fold ministers” considered as important or as “authoritative” as pastors?” Well, in churches I’ve served in, they often are!

Also, you say, “So, when you promote the unbiblical point of view that men are to govern or rule over the church, you’re promulgating catholic practice and doctrine.” Are you telling me that you honestly do not see any systems of authority in the New Testament? I just don’t see that at all. your view seems somewhat extremist and perhaps reactionary.

Lastly, you say “Instead of researching the Scriptures with an objective mindset, the professionals only regurgitate what they have been taught by MEN in seminaries who have a stake in keeping the status quo because it assures them a position of prestige and a paycheck.” Two comments on this paragraph of yours. 1. I’m really not convinced you are reading any more objectively than those you criticize, and 2. I entered the “ministry” (although I always tell people I’m not a minister, I’m an equipper) as a second career, and took a greater than 30% pay cut to do this. I might add that I was excellent in my field before I made the move to church work, and was in no danger of losing my livelihood. I was, in short, recognized to be among the very best in my field.

Many of my fellow pastors are also making much less than they could in the “secular arena” using their gifts of leadership and administration. Therefore I take exception with the implication that I and those like me are in it for the money, and I hope others might, too.

But thanks for your perspective. I actually do appreciate it even if I don’t agree.

It seems that we all long for the perfect church/group/gathering that will meet all the needs that we may have. I would love to be in the place where ALL parties acted right and holy. Becuase there are countless options in doing “church,” it only magnifies the imperfections of the “church’s” systemic problems.

Many on this blog have been hurt/burned/disappointed by pastors, church function, and/or authority issues. I know that I have. As a pastor, I can see and understand the revelancy of all opinions in this blog. Perhaps we are quick to react and defend the way we have been taught . . . to consider another option might challenge what we have ACCEPTED to be the “whole truth.” If our position(s) is(are) as solid as we hold them to be, then these positions should be able to be tested by other options/ideas. I like what Jan posted, “The problem lies in thinking you’re the one who has it all figured out and EVERYONE who’s not doing it your way is wrong.”

Someday I may have to get a secular job in order to “live.” Whether I like the idea or not may not determine the inevitable. I can only pray that I will be open to whatever God is doing or wants to do, even if that causes big changes in me. I do know that God is about change within my being.

I try to give people within the congregation, I am priviledged to pastor, opportunities to preach/teach/lead whenever they may “have a word.” I do echo Bernie with this notion of pastors and their ego/authority problems. Why should a pastor feel threatened by a meaningful, God-sent word from someone else- another minister, a “non-professional,” lay person, woman, child, etc. May we all be secure in what the Holy Spirit has gifted us, regardless of “position.” May God lead us all, individually, to His special place of service!

Quote:

“Explain authority thing to me. We have three full-time pastors in our church. None of us have any authority which is not given to us by the leadership committee.”

Ah, this is my point exactly.  You seem to believe that authority is derived from a position, as on staff of an organization.

Frankly, it is...if you’re talking about a heirarchical, top-bottom ORGANIZATION.  Your position, then, is no different than a person working for Wal-Mart or a Fortune 500 company, where you are placed on an organizational flowchart with others above you and others below you.

Is this wrong?  No...not if you’re talking about a man-made ORGANIZATION, the practices and structures of which are borrowed from the secular structures of the world.  And, to be honest, there’s nothing wrong with structure and chains of command...IF you’re talking about an organization.  And I would also say that an organization needs a clear “chain of command” because of the fallen state of our nature.

But is that your understanding of the ORGANISM that the Body of Christ is supposed to be? 

Within any organism there is no heirarchical structure placing one part of the organism over the other.  The only distinctive “authority” is the head, which, in the case of the Church is Christ.

If someone would ask a Christian, “Who’s ‘church’ is that?” Most would answer, “It’s pastor so-in-so’s church.” Sadly, they’d be telling the truth because that which is passed off as “church” today is nothing more than an ORGANIZATION and not the ORGANISM it is described as in Scripture.

So, Jade, authority within the Body of Christ is not delegated based upon an office or position (the likes of which are created by man) but rather is predicated upon that person(s) who represents the character of Christ, the Truth, at any given moment.

In other words, when Peter was in the throes of hypocrisy, as mentioned in Galatians, Paul confronted and rebuked him.  Was he correct in doing so?  Yes!  But wasn’t Peter “senior” to Paul in both the time spent as Christians?  Wasn’t Peter one of Jesus’ closest disciples?  Yes.

But that didn’t and doesn’t matter today.  Whoever stands upon the truth and represents the character of Christ IS in authority.

We must remember, Jade, that while there are elders (mature believers whose passion is guarding the flock from false teaching and heresy and whose role is to confront it as well as encourage the maturation of younger believers) within the Body of Christ, they are not to rule or govern the church, only to make sure that it is safe from false teaching/heresy. 

However, before the Lord, there is no heirarchical structure, no chain of command.  Why?  Because only the Head (Christ) decides the direction of the Body or what parts He wishes to showcase.

In other words, leadership within the Body of Christ is flat...we’re all the same (i.e., mutually submitted to the other), with only Christ as our Leader.

Quote:

“So in short we have no real authority expect that which is given to us...”

Again, this is what I mean by having a positional authority, which originates and is copied from the world (i.e., Roman-Greco).  Is that representative of the Body of Christ as expressed in Scripture?  No way!

If you want to have an ORGANIZATION and name it “ABC Church,” then go ahead.  But that doesn’t mean that it IS Church.  All I’m doing is calling a spade a spade, not calling a spade a basketball.

Remember, that any authority given by men can be taken away by men.  Is that the Church of Jesus Christ?  No way.

But, as we are ALL priests before the Lord, with only ONE High Priest (no, not the pastor), how can a believer be “over” or “under” another, if we’re all the same?

Quote:

“The reason our Senior Pastor Speaks the majority of the Sunday’s is our church expects him to and it is part of the job description upon which he was brought on.
Should more people speak on Sunday morning? Perhaps, but why the focus in on Sunday morning. Is Sunday really the most important day in the church week? I am a small group person myself. However I do think it is good to meet altogether one a week to say worship God. But is the most important thing we as a church does? Hmm.
By the way anyone in our church can interrupt and give a testimony anytime they like. We never want to stop what God has called someone to say.”

And who wrote that “job description?” Certainly it wasn’t the Scriptures!  Again, this sounds more like a corporation than it does the biblical understanding of the Church.

Jade, while there were different types of meetings that involved the Church in the New Testament (i.e., apostolic [teaching], ministry, prayer, etc.), the one that was of the greatest importance was when the church gathered for the purpose of MUTUAL edification, exhortation and encouragement, and which involved the open participation of ALL present (i.e., “when you come together EACH one has a psalm, hymn, spiritual song"). 

This gathering is the one that became “incarnational,” manifesting the presence of Jesus through the selfless serving of the believers present and is responsible for the magnificent growth of the Church, as unbelievers beheld what the world could not provide them: LOVE.

But today, when the church gathers, it’s not for MUTUAL edification but rather information and instruction...it being ONE WAY and controlled by one man or format.

Where is the spontaneity that was the hallmark of the Early Church gatherings?  Where is the opportunity for believers to minister to each other as the Spirit leads?

Again, while gatherings of believers may involve the Church, it doesn’t mean that the biblical representation of the Church is the result.  If that were the case, then two or more believers meeting at a urinal in a men’s restroom would be deemed “church.”

You say “small groups” are the answer, but even in small groups, which are more relational, there’s usually still someone “in charge,” as if we can’t fully trust the Holy Spirit to guide the meeting.  Additionally, small groups are generally nothing more than extensions of the sponsoring organization, where the leaders can know what’s going on and controlling the topic through disseminated lessons.

If that is “church” to you, fine.  But that’s not Church according to Scripture.

Finally, I base what I have written upon the growing knowledge that I receive from studying the word of God and comparing what it says to what I’ve been taught and experienced as one who has served on the staff of two large “mega-complexes” and presently as one who is privileged to work with a group of believers who are more interested in learning and experiencing BEING the Church than attending a programmed show of entertainment.

So, please don’t think that I’m some novice at this.  I’ve been doing it for years and have seen the damage that “church” today has done to the reputation of the Church of the Scriptures and which, thankfully, is alive and well today (no thanks to the “professionals").

Just a comment to the original interview, it is clearly manipulated to emphasize the author’s point, it is a joke no matter what positon you take. Are there problems and issues that traditional churches need to overcome and address - yes, are they all unbiblical - no.  There are so many things I would like to say but I really don’t where to begin. I will say this, if you want to teach and preach in your local church whatever it looks like you need to be trained in Bible study/interpretation.  Without training in hermenutics most if not all will not have an abilty to correctly understand the scriptures.  It is silly think that you can interpret ancient literature without intense study.  Yes we have the Holy Spirit to guide us but He has given us an intellect and expects us to use it.

“I think the reason people leave our churches is because they are bored out of their minds...the weekend services don’t fill the spiritual void that so many people are living with.”

MountainGirl, you are right on.  But too many pastors don’t receive this and take it in; they blame the pew sitter, saying they don’t have the right (worship) mindset.  Hence, the new kind of ‘church’ is developing, see:

http://www.mmiblog.com/monday_morning_insight_we/2005/10/barna_revolutio.html

...Brrnie

Ricky,

You say “You say “small groups” are the answer, but even in small groups, which are more relational, there’s usually still someone “in charge,” as if we can’t fully trust the Holy Spirit to guide the meeting.”

But have you ever been in a meeting or group that had “no one” in charge? Eventually, in my experience, someone steps forward and leads, either because they are a situational leader or a habitual leader. And yet STILL they may each have a gift to give, or something to add, even if there is a leader. Groups with NO leadership simply don’t continue. Either someone takes over because it’s their giftig (or ambition) or nothing happens and it falls apart. There is CLEARLY leadership described, expounded, and prescribed in the New Testament. Pastor Dan already quoted enought scriptures to make that point. (Thanks, Dan!)

Meddling mode on… I don’t think the issue with Ricky & Peter/Jade is “should we have authority and leaders?” I think both agree it is needed.  The question, really, is how you do it.

For example, in leadership, there’s two opposite spectrums: “dictator” and “servant leader.” I think Ricky is railing against the common “church” leadership, that is too authoritarian.

For those who study “Christian” leadership principles (I took a seminary course in it), this is a common text to be used as a role-model:

Matthew 20:25-28
25Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— 28just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”