State of the "Ministry"

[editor]

One problem that I found with looking for the pattern (and I know that this has been said before) is that whatever else I saw was "not the right way".
The thing that I have appreciated the most about the church that we are most likely going to attend regularly, is that the worship is different every week.  Not in a weird way, though.  Each week there is a different "worship team" leading the worship time.  There is a band, but it is very complementary (well, actually, I could hear the bass drum this last Sunday, and I felt something rise up in my baptist, assembly mind like "ooh, can I handle the jammin' here?"   )  But usually it is a little more subtle.  It changes every week.  Sometimes there has been time for open prayer, a few times there has been a small skit to complement the ministry, but everything so far I have felt has really glorified the Lord (not that I'm setting myself up as judge, that is just how I perceive it!)

Anyway, it has been liberating to see that there isn't a "perfect pattern" to follow, but principle.

Andrea

Ahh...Principles, not Pattern.   That could be a wonderful title for something.

I couldn't agree more.

Brent

[Arthur]

Please permit some questions and further exploration on this, as I wonder aloud.  

Wouldn't you agree that everyone has something to share?  Every believer can encourage one another.  

Now, I assume we are referring specifically to a time when we are gathered together.  I would say that if someone has something worthwhile to share he should be able to share it, in an orderly manner of course.  I don't think it just be one guy every time.  Wouldn't you agree?

Let's say it's just two or three gathered together.  Could'nt we each take turns telling each other some nifty tid-bit we learned from reading the Bible the other day?  
Well, how bout 4 or 5, could we then still take turns?  But if we get 20, 30, 50, 100 or more 1000+, do we then need to designate one man to do the preaching?
(Personally, I think a gathering over 100 is kinda large and does not lend itself to personal relationships.  Small groups meeting separately from the larger group are a really good idea that I've seen in practise.)

Explain I Cor 14:26, Eph 5:19, Heb 3:13, Heb 10:25 and I Thes 5:11.

And on a similar note, isn't it God's intention for everyone to be a prophet, priest and king?  One of the things fought for in the Reformation--the priesthood of all believers.
Exo 19:3-6, I Pet 2:9, Matt 12:1-8, I Sam 19:23-24, Mark 12:36, Acts 2:16-20, and many Psalms record King David's prophesies.

[Arthur]

Hey, I just thought of something after thinking about principles vs pattern.

What principles do we hold for a time of worship?
I'm thinking:

1.  We're there to worship God and Christ. i.e. He gets the glory (thoughts, adoration, focus, heart's desire love and affection) and not man.
2.  We love, respect and encourage one another.
3.  There is some order to the meeting.

Anything else?


Oh, and by "order to the meeting" (it shouldn't have to be said, but given the assembly twist), I don't mean that the order is the focus (obviously, for that would violate principle number 1) or that any particular way of ordering the meeting is divinely inspired.  Order is a necessary behind-the-scenes kinda thing that allows for what we really want to have happen, happen. i.e. God being worshipped. You shouldn't even notice that it's there.  Really, it seems almost awkward for me to write this because it's such a "gimme", a "no duh", a "of course, silly".  In other words, DO YOU THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE SOOOOO THANKFUL TO GOD FOR SAVING THEIR LIVES FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION WOULD GIVE A HOOT ABOUT THE PARTICULARS OF HOW THEY SAY THANK YOU?!?  The man cleansed and healed from the deadly, flesh-eatin' disease of leprousy threw himself at Jesus feet.  I think that about sums it up.  

"And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks."

[Joe Sperling]

Arthur---

That's very true!! Good thoughts.


---Joe

[Arthur]

Thanx bro

[MGov]

What you have described in your post is 'assembly system' attitudes. I agree with you that those attitudes are harmful.

My question is: do you agree that the ideal would be an 'assembly-like' gathering without the 'assembly system' attitudes?
M

Mgov, I would like to take a little liberty with your question above, and assume that what you mean by "assembly-like, without assembly-system attitudes," means that you appreciate the freedom of being able to vocally pray, and have truly open ministry, while losing all of the politics, corruption, elitism, etc.  This assumption is based on what many people have expressed over the years, but if it is not what you meant, please clarify.

...

The groups that seem to having the most beneficial impact today are not at all like the Assembly in form, neither are they all like one another.  Obviously, God is less concerned about the NT pattern than we are!

Brent

Well e.g. there are Brethren gatherings  that are assembly-like (except that the sisters don't pray out).  I have friends who were involved with the assemblies in India (B.Singh's ministry); those gatherings are also assembly-like.
How do they meet without the 'assembly-system' attitudes?

I am curious about the groups that seem to be having the most beneficial impact today.  Which groups are they?

M

P.S. This discussion is useful for those seeking a new place of fellowship.

[Oscar]

Verne,

I have lived in Fullerton since 1984 and I have never heard of any Church of the Open Door of Fullerton.  I just checked the local phone book...no listing.

So, there might be some mistake in the information you recieved.

Thomas Maddux

[editor]

Wouldn't you agree that everyone has something to share?  Every believer can encourage one another.  

Now, I assume we are referring specifically to a time when we are gathered together.  I would say that if someone has something worthwhile to share he should be able to share it, in an orderly manner of course.  I don't think it just be one guy every time.  Wouldn't you agree?

Yep, that's how it should be, even if the church is like Jerusalem in the book of Acts, with thousands of members, and growing strong.

Also, there should be a time when ONLY one person speaks, and isn't interupted.  There should also be a few recognized teachers, and others who are gifted in specific ways.  We are not all the same, and shouldn't attempt to function the same way.

Each meeting need not be equally divided up to prayer, worship, fellowship, teaching.  Each meeting need not be open to public testimony either, and in the same way, every meeting should not be a one man show.  The Assembly/PB/Sparks pattern is but one way to express this, but it is far from the best way.  

I definitely don't have the gift of mercy!  However, I hear frequently from many people who have never set foot on this BB that I have the gifts of discernment and teaching.  I get a chance to exercise these gifts at various times, but I am NOT the "go-to" guy when someone needs comfort.  I might be of assistance in a private discussion regarding a controversy, but I would be a lousy person to comfort a grieving family.  In the same way, different meetings can have different purposes, and some churches emphasize different things.  There is a spiritual smorgashboard out there so that everyone can find a place where they are able to minister and receive ministry.

Anyhow, I can think of how this kind of freedom can be realized in any number of "patterns," each of them different than the other.

Brent

[Arthur]

Yep, that's how it should be, even if the church is like Jerusalem in the book of Acts, with thousands of members, and growing strong.

I think that would be hard to manage, i.e. everyone have a chance to speak among so many.  

Also, there should be a time when ONLY one person speaks, and isn't interupted.  There should also be a few recognized teachers, and others who are gifted in specific ways.  We are not all the same, and shouldn't attempt to function the same way.

Yes, when one speaker is given the floor is when I learn things most efficiently, and that only when the speaker does a good job and doesn't bore me.  

Each meeting need not be equally divided up to prayer, worship, fellowship, teaching.  Each meeting need not be open to public testimony either, and in the same way, every meeting should not be a one man show.  The Assembly/PB/Sparks pattern is but one way to express this, but it is far from the best way.  

I definitely don't have the gift of mercy!  However, I hear frequently from many people who have never set foot on this BB that I have the gifts of discernment and teaching.  I get a chance to exercise these gifts at various times, but I am NOT the "go-to" guy when someone needs comfort.  I might be of assistance in a private discussion regarding a controversy, but I would be a lousy person to comfort a grieving family.  In the same way, different meetings can have different purposes, and some churches emphasize different things.  There is a spiritual smorgashboard out there so that everyone can find a place where they are able to minister and receive ministry.

Anyhow, I can think of how this kind of freedom can be realized in any number of "patterns," each of them different than the other.

Brent

     Yes, that's how I see it also--a smorgashboard of various ways of meeting together, each with merit.  God loves variety, doesn't he?  Giraffe's, elephants, dogs, cats, etc.  
     Would you say that men decide how to govern themselves, not only in civil government but also in church government--there being no difference, or would you say that the Holy Spirit has some role in setting it up, or some combination of the two?

     Did you catch the same thing that I did from the assembly--that what was spoken was, "We are doing what the Lord showed us.  We know it is not the perfect way, but it's the best way we know, so that's what we do.  If you have a suggestion as to how we can do it better, let us know."  
What was unspoken most of the time and sometimes verbaly hinted at, at least what by my observations I think was implied, was, "This is the best way; this is the most holy way--anything else is inferior both spiritually and in regards to common sense."  
Of course, such a notion is childish and immature, and out of place for people claiming to be humble seekers and worshipers of Jesus.

OK, but what of Moses?  Obviously what God told him was a God-given pattern by which he wanted to be worshipped.  What--15 chapters in Exodus plus almost all of Leviticus. Ah, but that's the point, isn't it.  That was an earthly type of the heavenly reality.  That was for temporary purposes only.  Now that Jesus has come, we worship in spirit and in truth, no longer by animal sacrifices, no longer by any earthly pattern(such as priest garments and tabernacle curtain rods being just so, etc.)  
     There are some basic guidelines given--most importantly to eat the bread and drink the cup to shew the Lord's death 'till he comes, and also to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs making melody in your heart to the Lord (and maybe others?).   But that leaves it wide open as far as how to apply those two things, and indeed it is not limited.  Whatever is lovely, noble, etc. will please him--the point is that in our hearts we love him and give him thanks.  And even both of those things I mentioned obviously are not "rules" but loving responses from our grateful hearts.

This is fun thinking about these things and getting it straight.  Thanks

Arthur

[editor]

I think that would be hard to manage, i.e. everyone have a chance to speak among so many.  

That's why large churches really push small group meetings.  However, my experience is that getting more than 5 NORMAL people to speak in public, one after the other is like pulling teeth.  In a group of 3000, I doubt if more than 10 or 12 would feel comfortable getting up in front of the whole congregation.

Brent

[Arthur]

Do you think that extrovertism is a gift of the spirit?  Maybe there are far more capable preachers in the group than are apparent for the mere fact that people are too cowardly or lazy to find out.  Maybe that could be seen as being disobedient to the command to preach the Word?  I think of Moses at the burning bush.  

I'm thinking that most people could do a good job at preaching or teaching if they would only try and if they could get some good training.  Kinda like most people could do at least algebra, but I'm thinking everyone could do Calculus too if it was an expectation and requirement at an earlier age in school.

[editor]

Do you think that extrovertism is a gift of the spirit?  Maybe there are far more capable preachers in the group than are apparent for the mere fact that people are too cowardly or lazy to find out.  Maybe that could be seen as being disobedient to the command to preach the Word?  I think of Moses at the burning bush.  

I'm thinking that most people could do a good job at preaching or teaching if they would only try and if they could get some good training.  Kinda like most people could do at least algebra, but I'm thinking everyone could do Calculus too if it was an expectation and requirement at an earlier age in school.

James 3:1  My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.

I don't think a push to develop many teachers or prophets in a church is a good idea.  I am reminded by some of the "prophecy" conferences that were popular not long ago.  I spoke with people who thought they were a good place to develop the gift of prophecy.   The more prophets the better.

Elders and Deacons should not be the majority of the church membership, in my opinion.  However, Elders and Deacons should be able to teach.

Brent

[Arthur]

James 3:1  My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.

I don't think a push to develop many teachers or prophets in a church is a good idea.  I am reminded by some of the "prophecy" conferences that were popular not long ago.  I spoke with people who thought they were a good place to develop the gift of prophecy.   The more prophets the better.

Elders and Deacons should not be the majority of the church membership, in my opinion.  However, Elders and Deacons should be able to teach.

Brent

Agreed, but that wasn't what I was referring to.  At least not to teachers as the ones designated by the Holy Spirit in him giving them that gift.  Rather, I was referring to the fact that everyone should know what they believe and be able to share their faith adequately.

For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.  

Who's pushing?  In the marines, every man is first a rifleman,  i.e. everyone knows how to do the basics, and then specializes from there.  So what does every disciple of Jesus have in common?  Aren't some of the basics of Christianity to 1. Know the Word  2. Preach the Word  3. Live according to the Word?

Let me put it another way.  I would expect that a good disciple of Islam would be well-versed in the Koran and be able to share with me what exactly it is that he believes.  It doesn't have to be fancy, but I would hope that he knows what he believes and why he believes it.  I would also expect that he lives like what he believes--he bows five times towards Mecca, tries to make a pilgrimage to Mecca, etc.  Then what would you expect from a disciple of Jesus?

In regards to knowing the Word, isn't it the "glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."  Weren't the Bereans more noble because they did so.  

In regards to preaching the Word, when Paul charges Timothy, "before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;  Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine."  Is it only to Timothy that he speaks?  Is it only to elders, deacons or teachers?  Or is something that every believer should do?  And what of the Great Commission?  Couldn't we all echo with Paul, "Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!"

In regards to living the Word--there are three statements in John by which Jesus indicated what it means to be a disciple of his:
1.  "Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed."  John 8:31
2.  "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."  John 13:35
3.  "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples."  John 15:8

And the inverse of the implication is stated in Luke14:27-33,
"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.  And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple...So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple."

Arthur

[editor]

Agreed, but that wasn't what I was referring to.  At least not to teachers as the ones designated by the Holy Spirit in him giving them that gift.  Rather, I was referring to the fact that everyone should know what they believe and be able to share their faith adequately.

Good points, all.

1320 didaskalos {did-as'-kal-os}
from 1321; TDNT - 2:148,161; n m
AV - Master (Jesus) 40, teacher 10, master 7, doctor 1; 58
1) a teacher
2) in the NT one who teaches concerning the things of God, and the
duties of man
1a) one who is fitted to teach, or thinks himself so
1b) the teachers of the Jewish religion
1c) of those who by their great power as teachers draw crowds
around them i.e. John the Baptist, Jesus
1d) by preeminence used of Jesus by himself, as one who showed
men the way of salvation
1e) of the apostles, and of Paul
1f) of those who in the religious assemblies of the Christians,
undertook the work of teaching, with the special assistance of
the Holy Spirit
1g) of false teachers among Christians

Being able to share one's faith, or lead a small group Bible study is not quite the same as being a "master."  I totally agree with you regarding the need for spiritual literacy among God's people.  How I wish I had some about 20 years ago!

However, one danger we must avoid at all costs, is to look out on what we perceive the state of Christians to be, weigh it and find it wanting, and then take it upon ourselves to lay down a law in order that the situation can be remedied.

I think this happens far too often, in far too many churches.  It is simply a form of legalism.

I am somewhat hesitant to share more on this, because I am beginning to sound like a Calvary Chapel promoter...but at risk of the same, let me share a short version of a story that Chuck Smith relates in his book, "Harvest."
This is the short, paraphrased version, but I do recommend getting the book.  There is no question that the Calvary Chapel movement has been used mightily by God.

When Chuck was pastoring one of his first churches, the church was not doing well.  It wasn't growing, and the members were not at all, "fired-up."  This is not a good sign for a Four-Square pastor!

He began to stir up revival in their midst, and asked them to invite people to the meeting, in order to hear the gospel and get saved.  He would preach the gospel, week after week to already saved people.  The members in his congregation were not acting responsibly, and were not doing enough to win lost souls.  He correctly pointed this out, using the scriptures, month after month, and prayed vigorously, in order to stir them up.  It wasn't working.

Broken before God, in the face of real failure, he learned something.  He had been using God's sheep as if they were beasts of burden, and their work was responsible for the increase of the flock.  True, they were not functioning as evangelists, or showing hospitality, etc.  But the reason is that they were tired and hungry.

Chuck stopped beating and goading the sheep to perform, and began to feed them.  His messages stopped focusing on what they should be doing, and started to focus on what Christ had done.  He built them up with grace, and the love of God.

Then things began to happen.  Visitors started showing up, and the church grew.  Healthy, fat sheep reproduce.  Thin, harrassed sheep don't.

At his next church, he began having "sharing" times for Bible study, instead of being up front and doing all the teaching.  This was also successfull, because people who normally never said a word began to pray publicly, and speak and teach.

The next church after this one, was a little place in Costa Mesa, California, that had about 35 members....

Healthy, well fed sheep reproduce.

The key to growth is to feed God's people, and give them an opportunity to step out in faith.  

Brent

[Arthur]

However, one danger we must avoid at all costs, is to look out on what we perceive the state of Christians to be, weigh it and find it wanting, and then take it upon ourselves to lay down a law in order that the situation can be remedied.
....
Broken before God, in the face of real failure, he learned something.  He had been using God's sheep as if they were beasts of burden, and their work was responsible for the increase of the flock.  True, they were not functioning as evangelists, or showing hospitality, etc.  But the reason is that they were tired and hungry.

Chuck stopped beating and goading the sheep to perform, and began to feed them.  His messages stopped focusing on what they should be doing, and started to focus on what Christ had done.  He built them up with grace, and the love of God.
....
Healthy, fat sheep reproduce.  Thin, harrassed sheep don't.

Good points.  Reminds me of the old adage, "You can attract more flies with honey than vinegar."  
And really that is kin to one of the themes of the Bible.  Law is a heavy burden that no one can handle; a reminder of sin and the result is death.  Love sets free and gives life.  

So you're saying that Christians will not become more literate or able by blows but by encouragement?  I agree.   But there is something to be said for discipline or chastisement.  Or should we all have the attitude of amorphous free love like the hippies?  
"reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine."
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." The shepherd has the rod and the staff.  

I think the point of the story you related above is that Chuck's attitude changed from using the flock to caring for the flock.  Caring involves some correction and discipline at times of course, but the focus and goal is the well-being of the flock.  

Interesting to note that Love (i.e. THE love of Christ) worked within the confines and constraints of the Law, in that Christ was "born under the law", and was offered up as a sacrifice to bear the wrath of the law which we deserved.  Christ's demonstration of the love of God was not aimless or arbitrary.  It was narrowing and humbling.  It was an act of obedience.  The freedom that Love gives was not without great cost.  

We know that some things in life, particularly valuable things, have costs associated with them.  But in terms of our eternal spiritual condition, there was no price we could pay to buy our freedom.  Jesus paid it all, all to him I owe.  And he is building his church.  He is the one who gave gifts to men.  He is the one who gave some to be pastors, teachers, etc. for the building up of the church that he paid for.  The emphasis on "the building up".  
So, as far as expecting to see believers being compentent disciples--I guess my take on it is that first, I should be one myself (only by the grace of God), and second I should, only out of love, encourage it in others, trusting that God will accomplish his purpose in building his church.  

Arthur