© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
This book was written with an Indonesian
audience in mind. The word 'pendeta'
means clergyman.
Chapter 1
Traditions: Good, Bad, Neutral, and Apostolic
In the
One day an American woman was
cooking a ham, and her daughter was helping her prepare the meal. The mother cut an end off the ham, put the
ham in the pan, put the end of the ham on top of the ham, and put it all in the
oven.
The daughter asked her mother,
“Why do you cut the end off the ham before you cooked it?”
Here mother thought about it. “I don’t know,” her mother replied, “My
mother always cut the end of the ham and I just cook it the way she taught
me. I’ll have to remember to ask Grandma
about that some time.”
One day, while visiting with
Grandma, she asked, “Why do you always cut the end off the ham when you cook
it? Does it cook faster?”
“No,” Grandma said, “Our pan was
too small, so I cut the ends off the ham to make it fit.”
The Influence of Tradition on
Church Styles
Many church traditions are just
like this illustration. So many things
we do in church we do because of what we
have seen and heard in our church experience, and not because of what we read
in scripture.
Go into a Charismatic church in
Go into a Protestan church
and look around. In some churches, you
will see a high pulpit on the left, nice wooden pews, a piano, and an
organ. Listen to the music in a Protestan
church. You will hear old hymns written
in musical styles that were popular in northern
[footnote] The Open Church by
James Rutz says that, during the Reformation John Calvin wore regular business
clothes when he preached in church meetings.
The fancy, religious ceremonial clothes now worn by some Protestan
clergymen are the clothes that regular businessmen would have worn in
Special clothing for church
leaders has actually been a point of controversy since the Reformation. Many feel that it is appropriate for
ministers to dress like regular people in accordance with the priesthood of all
believers. If John Calvin dressed in
regular business clothes for church, it is ironic that the regular clothes he
once were are now associated with being a member of a holy pendeta
class.
According to an Irian Jayan church
planter, some mountain tribesmen who live in very remote areas have an
interesting tradition in their churches.
Some of the men still wear a koteka, though some may have a pair
of shorts. In church meetings in some of
these villages, the men will attend wearing nothing but a koteka-- but
not the preacher. He will wear a tie- no
shirt, no pants- a tie and a koteka or a pair of shorts. Why does he wear a tie? Because he is a preacher? Wearing a tie during a meeting is a common
practice for some western preachers, but it isn’t something the Bible teaches
us that we must do.
Many of these practices, such as
wearing ties or singing European-style hymns are not wrong. It is just strange that we, as humans, have a
tendency to consider non-essential traditions to be sacred. Many of these traditions evolve over
time. Unfortunately, some of these
traditions can actually hinder the spread of the Gospel.
Sundar Singh was born a well-to-do
Indian Sikh. His mother hoped that he
would become a sadhu, a religious holy man who traveled from place to
place. After his mother died, as a
teenager, Sundar Singh led a band of boys who threw rocks and Christians. He hated Christianity. On the verge of suicide, he prayed to God to
reveal himself and had a revelation of Christ.
In his teen years, Sundar Singh became a radical Christian. While still young, he began to travel from
place to place as a Christian sadhu, evangelizing Indians. He spent his life evangelizing in
Sundar Singh wore Indian clothes,
ate like an Indian, talked like an Indian, and acted like an Indian. This method of evangelism was quite
revolutionary. Some call Sundar Singh
the apostle to
What do English-style clothing,
English cooking utensils have to do with Christianity? The earliest believers had none of these
things. The
Let us consider Paul’s philosophy
of ministry in regard to evangelizing people of different cultures:
1
Corinthians 9:19-22
19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I
made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I
might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I
might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law,
(being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain
them that are without law.
22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might
gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save
some.
If a preacher every had a good
reason to impose his culture on others, wasn’t it Paul? Paul was Jewish. He was from a nation that God revealed
Himself to and through. God gave
There were some things from Jewish
culture which were important and carried over into the practices of the Gentile
churches. Jews would greet one another
with a kiss, and the Gentile Christians were to practice the holy kiss. The Lord’s Supper, practiced by all the churches,
had roots in the Passover feast.
Let us consider the issue of church
music. Gentile churches developed hymns.
Think of the old hymn Oh Come Let Us Adore. [semba dan puji dia] This Latin hymn is believed to date back to
the 300’s. No doubt these hymns sounded
quite different from the hymns sung by the Jews in the temple. The earliest
If the early Christians were not
completely adapt Jewish culture—clothing, musical styles, and various other
customs, should a modern Gentile Christian group expect new believers from
other cultures to accept their culture?
Let us suppose that a missionary
reaches a very remote village in
Sometimes the foreign culture
missionaries introduce into new native churches can make the Gospel seem
unnecessarily foreign to unbelievers in that area. Missionaries need to be careful not to
compromise to pagan customs, preserve essential Christian traditions, but also
keep from evangelizing people with their own culture, rather than the Gospel of
Jesus Christ.
The early churches we see in the
Bible met in homes. Yet some people seem
to think that pews, pulpits, and church buildings are essentials to plant a new
church. The apostles did not wear
neckties, white collars, or purple robes, yet some think that preachers must
wear special clothes. The apostles had
no organs or electric guitars. Yet some
feel uncomfortable without one of these instruments in their meetings. Let us truly consider what is Biblical
Christianity, and what are aspects of our own culture associated with religion.
European hymns and American
worship choruses are beautiful. Western
styles of music are now a part of mainstream Indonesian culture except in the
remotest areas. There is nothing wrong
with a little bit of cross-cultural experience in church. Americans sometimes like to sound Russian
sounding hymns. But we err when we begin
to think that Christianity has to be wrapped in western garb in order to be
legitimate. To this day, there are
people who think that a church is not singing properly if it sings worship
choruses rather than the old hymns. Is
this because the Bible teaches us to sing old European hymns? No.
Those who believe this way usually believe it because they sung hymns in
their own church experience. It is what
is familiar to them, and what ‘feels right.’
A lot of what we do in church we
do because we are imitating what we have seen and heard, not because of what
the scriptures teach. These are
traditions that we hold to. Some of
these traditions can be good, some can be bad, and others are neutral.
George Patterson is an American
missionary who planted churches in
One principle that George
Patterson stresses is that new churches that are planted have to be
reproducible. For example, if a
missionary goes into the jungle and uses an overhead projector to teach
discipleship lessons to new believers using colorful overheads, this is not a
reproducible pattern. Some of those
young believers may eventually turn into teachers. The way these believers know how to teach
discipleship methods is with color slides.
If they have had no experience even hearing a lesson presented another
way, the model they have learned is not reproducible.
Later, when the missionary has
gone on to another work, and this jungle church wants to plant a church among
their fellow tribesmen
Imagine a missionary from
These Dayak believers now
associate pews and raised pulpits with church.
Obviously, they are important, they reason, or else the missionary would
not have bought them. Later, when the
missionary has gone on to another field, this Dayak church decides to reach out
to other Dayak in other villages. Each
time a new church is planted in a village, special care is made to either
construct nice polished pews and raised pulpits, or else to raise money to buy
them from another island. The process
for completing the pulpit and pews may take nearly a year.
Slowly, one year at a time, one
village is reached and one church building complete with pews and pulpit is
assembled.
Just imagine the difference if a
missionary from
One missions magazine reported on
the missions efforts in
Following Apostolic Traditions
To many evangelicals, ‘tradition’ is almost a bad word. Many think of tradition as the enemy of scripture. But the Bible tells us about certain kinds of tradition that are actually good. Read the verse that follows carefully.
2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the
traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
Not only are we to follow the doctrinal
teachings of the New Testament, but we are also to follow the traditions of the
apostles. By studying the New Testament,
we can learn the way the apostles did things, and imitate them.
Paul realized that people imitate
what they see. Just think about a little
child. A little boy learns to talk like
his father. He may walk like his father
walks, use his father’s gestures, and repeat the phrases his father says. If his father says dirty words, you can
expect that the child will imitate him.
Paul, as an apostle, had to live a
clean life—a life worthy of imitation.
He also had to demonstrate the proper traditions to the churches to
imitate. Paul wrote, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of
Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that
ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to
you. ( 1 Corinthians 11:1-2.)
Paul wanted believers to imitate
him, and also to imitate the traditions concerning church meetings he passed
down to them. Look at the arguments Paul
made to persuade the Corinthians to follow his instructions for church meetings
given in I Corinthians 14.
1 Corinthians 14:36-37
36
What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him
acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the
Lord.
Look at verse 36. Paul tries to persuade the Corinthians to
obey his instructions based on the fact that the word of God did not originate
with them and they were not the only people to have received it. The word of God had come out from
In verse 37, Paul offers an even
stronger argument for following his instructions. They were commandments of the Lord.
What kind of practices do we see
the apostles and the early church carrying out when we look in the
scriptures? The
Acts 2:46 “And they, continuing daily with one accord
in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with
gladness and singleness of heart,”
After the Gospel was preached
among the Gentiles, who lived far from the
This principle of apostolic
tradition is one reason many people in house churches choose to carefully study
the patterns of scripture, and implement them.
We all realize that there were some things practiced by the apostles
that were only for a certain time or only for people of a certain area. One example would be participating in temple
rituals. Paul was arrested while
preparing to participate in a temple
ritual. Yet we know from the teaching of
scripture that this is not required for Gentile Christians.
In some areas, Christians will
disagree on what is a required apostolic pattern. One passage in scripture shows believers
meeting on the first day of the week.
(Acts 20:7.) Another verse
instructions Christians to save their money for a particular offering on the
first day of the week. (I Corinthians
16:2.) Some Christians adamantly argue,
based on this, that Christians must meet and eat Holy Communion on the first
day of the week, even though Acts 2:46 shows the Jerusalem church meeting and
breaking bread daily.
We as believers must be tolerant
of one another, and be sensitive to other believer’s consciences. It is possible for some to go to far with
reading apostolic traditions into scripture.
On the other hand, much of the church pays little attention to many
Biblical patterns and traditions.
In regard to church planting, there
are many Biblical patterns that can be applied to modern evangelistic
efforts. From the first century to the
fourth century, Christians, though persecuted at times, grew rapidly until the
pagan
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2001
How Paul Planted Churches
We use the Bible as a source for
doctrine and subject matter for preaching and teaching. But so many times, we overlook the fact that
the Bible contains examples of church practices for us to imitate.
Many of the modern strategies for
church planting are different from the strategies we see in the book of
Acts. Let’s consider a modern church
planting strategy for reaching unreached areas:
Send Indonesian young people who want to be preachers to Bible
school. When they graduate, send them
one by one or two by two to a village that does not have a church. During this time a church or yayasan
contributes money to support the church planters. After a church planter has started a new
church and the number of people has grown, the church then goes about raising
funds to rent, buy, or build a new church building. The church planter stays at the church he has
planted, serving as pastor. If he
chooses to leave and plant more churches, or to return to the city and minister
there, another Bible college graduate may be selected to take his place as
pastor.
No doubt many new churches have
been planted by this strategy. But how
does this strategy compare with what we see in the scriptures? The strategies for planting churches found in
the book of Acts are actually more efficient than this. Let us study the method of church planting
used by Paul and Barnabas on what is known as their First Missionary Journey,
recorded in the book of Acts.
Who were Paul and Barnabas?
Before Saul of Tarsus (also known
as Paul) was a believer, as a young man, he was a persecutor of Christians. He had been trained in Jewish religious law by
the famous Jewish scholar Gamaliel in
Saul was very zealous in his
religion, and sought to persecute the church. He held the garments for those
who stoned Stephen, consented to the death of other Christians who were
prosecuted for their faith. Saul went
around dragging Christians out of houses, to put them in prison. He got letters from the chief priests
authorizing the arrest of Christians in
Barnabas was a Levite from
When scattered believers went to
Paul and Barnabas’ God-Approved
Church Planting Methodology
Saul and
Barnabas were sent out by the Spirit from
Acts
13:1-4
1 Now there were in the church that was at
Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called
Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod
the tetrarch, and Saul.
3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid
their hands on them, they sent them away.
4 So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost,
departed unto
Something
important to notice in this passage is that the Holy Spirit sent the apostles
off on their journey to complete the work that He, the Spirit, had called them
to do. The brethren only separated them
to ministry by the laying on of hands.
After this, the book of Acts refers to both men as ‘apostles’ (Acts
14:4, 14.)
Did Paul and Barnabas complete the
work the Spirit gave them? Let us look
at the following verse about Paul and Barnabas at the completion of their
journey.
Acts
14:26 And thence sailed to
Here we see
that Paul and Barnabas had fulfilled the work they were sent to complete. Who had designed for them the work to
do? The Spirit.
Christians may
debate whether people in the stories in the Bible did what was right or
not. Some may say that David was wrong
to fight with the Philistines. Some
Christians think it was right for Paul to go to
In these
chapters, we see a God-ordained strategy for missions. Let us carefully examine these chapters to
learn how these apostles planted churches.
An Overview
of the First Missionary Journey
Saul and
Barnabas set off with John Mark, Barnabas’ nephew, They traveled to
From Paphos,
Paul and Barnabas sailed back to the mainland, to
We know from
Acts 13 and 14 that many churches were started through Paul and Barnabas’
ministry on the mainland in
After this,
Paul and Barnabas traveled to Perga, preached the word there, went to Attalia,
and from there sailed back to
This journey is
known as ‘The First Missionary Journey’ because it is the first of three
journeys Paul took that are recorded in the book of Acts. It is estimated that this journey may have
taken less than two years.[1]
Paul and
Barnabas’ strategy on the journey was to preach to the Jews, proselytes, and
believing Gentiles in the synagogues in the cities they visited. Usually, some people from the synagogue would
believe the Gospel. They would preach
the Gospel to the Jews first, before turning to the Gentiles, and therefore
preached in the synagogues first. (Acts
13:46-49.) Sometimes Jews who did not
believe their message would stir up opposition to them, and Paul and Barnabas
would flee in the midst of persecution and find another place to preach.
Principles
from the First Missionary Journey
Since the
missionary strategy that Paul and Barnabas followed in Acts 13 through 14 is
endorsed by God, we would benefit from studying it in depth. Let us consider some key principles from the
first missionary journey.
1.
Paul
and Barnabas were sent out by the Holy Spirit.
2.
The
apostles sent out planted many churches in a relatively short period of time.
3.
Paul
and Barnabas left churches behind, entrusting them to the Holy Spirit, instead
of remaining at a few churches pastoring them for decades.
4.
The
apostles visited churches started through their ministry to strengthen them and
to check up on them.
5.
The
churches planted by apostles were already ‘churches’ before elders were
appointed in them.
1.
The
apostles appointed elders from within the churches started through their
ministries.
2.
.The
apostles were commended to the grace of God by the
Sent Out by
the Holy Spirit
As believers in
Christ interested in evangelizing
Paul and
Barnabas were chosen specifically by the Holy Spirit for the mission they
chose. The brethren in
How did the
Spirit speak to the church, to reveal His will regarding whom to send? We are not completely sure from the
text. Prophets were present. It is conceivable that the Spirit spoke
through prophets. Compare this to
Timothy’s experience in recorded I Timothy 4:14.
Saul and
Barnabas were already faithfully serving the brethren in
Something to
notice about Saul and Barnabas is that the Spirit had called them to go
out. They weren’t sent on a mission
because they had completed Bible college and were looking for a job. They didn’t go out just because the church
members thought it might be a good idea.
The Lord directed the church.
What would
happen if the Spirit spoke to your church about people among you who were
called to go out, preach, and plant churches?
How would your church respond?
Would you support them with prayer and fasting.
Yayasan, Bible colleges and denominations
sometimes send out preachers. But how
often does a local church send out preachers to preach the Gospel? It does happen in
We need to pray
for the Lord to send forth laborers into his harvest, as Jesus taught (Matthew
9:38.) We need to pray in faith,
expecting God to prepare people from our churches to go preach the Gospel in
the unreached areas,
Planting
Many Churches in a Short Period of Time
Imagine the
criticism that Paul and Barnabas might receive from modern church leaders.
“Paul and
Barnabas, how could you leave those churches alone. You should have stayed there and pastored at
the first church you started. How could
you leave those churches so quickly?”
Paul and
Barnabas’ method of leaving behind young churches and going off to start new
ones resulted in many churches. We don’t
know exactly how many cities Paul and Barnabas planted churches in on their
journey together, but we do know that they preached in at least 7 cities. It is possible that they planted more than
seven churches. If all this were
completed in about two years, those results are phenomenal.
One of the
problems with modern church planting methodologies is that they assume that God
has one type of minister ministering the word.
Apostles, evangelists, and local church overseers are put into the same
category, ‘hamba Tuhan.’ It is common to
hear preachers use verses about apostles, and apply them to local church
pastors.
In order to
better understand church planting in the Bible, we have to understand that
there were many kinds of ministers. The Bible mentions apostles involved in the
work of the ministry, elders, charged with shepherding local churches, and
deacons, chosen to serve the needs of the church. Mixing the roles of the apostle and the elder
in the Bible create confusion.
Today, one of
the missions strategies is to train men in Bible college, ordain them as pendeta
and then send these men out alone or in groups of two or more to start new
churches. The idea seems to be that one
of the Bible college graduates who plants a church will stay behind and pastor
that church for an extended period of time.
Tying a church
planter down with the responsibility of staying behind long-term, can actually
limit his usefulness to the kingdom.
Paul’s heart was to preach the Gospel to those who had never heard of
Christ (Romans 5:12.) The call of God on
His life was for him to travel from place to place Paul didn’t stay behind in a church he
planted and be the ‘full-time pastor.’
If he had, how could he have accomplished so much in his ministry?
If God gifted
men to travel and preach the Gospel among the unreached,, starting new
churches, might He not do the same today?
There is a lot more focus on apostles who ministered like this-- Paul,
Barnabas, Timothy, Silas, and many others—in the New Testament than there is on
local church ministers. We don’t even
know the name of any local church elders who were not also apostles in the
first century church.
If the Bible
pays a lot of attention to traveling evangelistic church planters, then
shouldn’t we consider this important to God?
Why is it that many churches church planting programs assume that the
church planter will settle down as a local pastor?
Visiting to
Strengthen Churches
We see that on
the first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas returned to churches they had
planted already.
Acts
14:21-23
21 And when they had preached the gospel to that
city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and
22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and
exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much
tribulation enter into the
23 And when they had ordained them elders in
every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on
whom they believed.
Paul and
Barnabas did not stay behind for years in any church they planted while on this
first missionary journey. But they did
go back and visit the churches. During
this time, the churches apparently had no appointed pastor until Paul and
Barnabas returned to appoint elders.
Later, on
Paul’s Second missionary journey, we see that we would either return to
churches he had planted, or else send trusted co-workers in the Lord. The epistles frequently mention Paul sending
Timothy and other co-workers to churches that had been planted to help
them. On the First Missionary Journey,
human resources may have been scarce.
Mark had left the group when they arrived on the mainland from
After the First
Missionary Journey, Paul and Barnabas returned to
Acts 15:36 And some days
after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every
city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.
We can see how
important it was for these apostles to keep an eye on the new churches. On the one hand, they must have had
incredible trust in the Holy Spirit to protect and guide these new
churches. On the other, they were
responsible for the work the Lord gave them.
Being responsible did not mean staying behind as local pastors in any
church they had started. The Lord had
prepared men able to pastor the churches, as wee see in Acts 14:23, above. The Lord caused elders to mature to the point
where they could be responsible for the household of faith.
Churches
Already Churches Before Elders Are Appointed
Something to
notice from the First Missionary Journey is that the churches Paul and Barnabas
planted were churches even when there were no appointed leaders. Let us consider Acts 14:23 carefully:
“And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had
prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.”
The passages
shows us that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church. The passage does not teach that the assemblies
of believers became churches after the apostles appointed elders.
Somehow, the
churches Paul and Barnabas left behind could still function without apostles or
elders to lead the meetings. The saints
could still meet, probably celebrating the Lord’s Supper, baptizing new
believers, and functioning as churches in the absence of appointed leadership.
Many have the
idea that a church is only a church if there is a professional pastor there,
and that otherwise a church is not legitimate.
But we can see in the First Missionary Journey, that this is not a
scriptural concept.
Let us imagine
an evangelist goes to an unreached village with the Gospel and that people
repent as a result of his ministry. The
believers there gather together to exhort one another. Some would view this group as a ‘fellowship’ [persekutuan]
if they were not registered with a denomination as a ‘church.’ Is this idea scriptural?
Watchman Nee
addressed the issue of the definition of ‘church’ in his book The Normal
Christian Church Life.
...in the
course of the apostles' first missionary tour, many people were saved in
different places through the preaching of the Gospel. Nothing is mentioned
about their being formed into churches, but in Acts 14:23 it is said of Paul
and Barnabas that "they...appointed for them elders in every church."
The groups of believers in these different places are called churches, without
any explanation whatever as to how they came to be churches. They were
groups of believers, so they simply were churches. Whenever a number of
people in any place were saved, they spontaneously became the church in that
place.
If in a given place anyone believes on the Lord, as a matter of course
he is a constituent of the church in that place. No subsequent
"joining" is required of him. Provided he belongs to the Lord, he
already belongs to the church in that locality; and since he already
belongs to the church, his belonging cannot be made subject to any condition.[2]
We see that
neither registering with a denomination nor having an appointed elder in a
congregation are prerequisites to a group of believers having a church. As important as elders are to the church,
there were very good reasons for the apostles allowing churches to grow and
develop without appointed elders.
In I Timothy
3:6, Paul writes that an overseer is not to be a novice. Naturally, if the apostles did not want to
appoint novices in the faith, they would need to wait for men to mature
spiritually before they could be appointed as elders of the church.
A key factor
that allowed Paul and Barnabas to appoint so many churches was that they were
willing to leave infant churches in the care of the Holy Spirit. During the time without official, appointed
elders, the Holy Spirit worked in the churches, and eventually the Lord
prepared elders in the churches.
Elders
Appointed From Within
Something very
important to notice about Paul and Barnabas’ church-planting method is that the
elders of the New Churches were appointed from within the
congregation. We can also see from
Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus that it was the practice to appoint men
from within churches as overseers. (I
Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5)
There is a lot
of confusion about the word ‘elder.’ The
Bible uses the term ‘overseer’ interchangeable with the word ‘elder.’ (Acts 20:28, Titus 1:5-7.) The elders of the church were men charged
with pastoring the flock of God (Acts 20:28, I Peter 5:2). Today, terms like ‘pendeta’ or ‘gembala’
are used to refer to official, recognized local church leadership. The New Testament generally uses terms
‘elders’ or ‘overseers.’
A common church
practice in
This is very
different from the practice of the apostles, who appointed elders from within
churches. There are many benefits to
appointing elders from within a church which will be dealt with in later
chapters of this book. But, in regard to
church planting, one of the most obvious reasons is that appointing elders from
within churches allows for faster church planting.
Imagine a mengkudu
tree. A mengkudu tree can grow from a
seed from a mengkudu fruit. Just
plant the seed in the right kind of ground in the right conditions, and given
time, it will grow into a full tree. All
the genetic information to produce all the parts of that tree is included in
that little seed. The roots, the wood,
the bark, the leaves, the mengkudu fruit, the expensive juice inside the
fruit, and even new seeds are all inside one small mengkudu seed.
Now, think
about churches ‘planted’ by the preaching of the word of God. In the DNA of a New Testament church, are various parts of a
whole ‘tree.’ Over and over, the
apostles preached the word of God and new churches formed. As these churches formed, different parts of
the ‘tree’ developed. A certain ‘part of
the tree’ that developed was the elders of the church. If churches in the New Testament produced
elders who were able to pastor the flock of God, shouldn’t we expect that New
Testament style churches planted today will produce elders?
Why then are so
many church systems set up to hire pastors from outside the church, rather than
to teach and train potential elders from within the church? Why is so much money spent on sending people
to Bible college, instead of bringing ‘Bible college’ into the local church
community?
Confusion of
Apostle and
Many of the
offices in modern churches and denominations often do not exactly correspond
with the offices found in the New Testament.
Isn’t it time that we returned to the New Testament? If we believe that leaders in the church are
empowered to do their work through gifts of the Holy Spirit, then shouldn’t we
expect that the gifts that God gives today are the same types of gifts named in
the New Testament.
If the New
Testament does not mention pendeta, why should we assume that God gives
out a pendeta gift? The Bible
does mention gifts in regard to pastors, teachers, evangelists, prophets, and
apostles. Why should we expect God to
gifts that correspond with modern denominational positions? Shouldn’t we rather expect him to give gifts
described in the Holy Scriptures?
The word pendeta
is not found in the Bible. It actually
comes from an Indian word used for Hindu scholars. The concept of the Christian pendeta
is a mixture of the Biblical roles of apostle, elder, deacon, gift of helps, and
various other extra-Biblical ideas. A pendeta
may be sent out from a Bible college or denomination to a new area. The New Testament apostles were sent out to
new areas. The local church elders
mentioned in the Bible developed and matured to the point of being suitable for
leadership while within existing congregations.
A pendeta
may function as a local church overseer, tending to the needs of a local flock,
praying for the sick, ministering the word locally. In this sense he functions somewhat like a
local church overseer.
A pendeta
is expected to be able to handle minute details of church administration and
services, duties that may have been performed by early believers in the role of
deacon, or with the gift of helps.
And, of course,
pendeta, are often expected to perform many extra-scriptural functions,
such as govern a church alone without fellow overseers, marry the young, and
bury the dead.
Many
denominations expect pendeta to perform the work that, Biblically,
should be done by an entire local body.
This makes for a very difficult job.
No wonder so many pendeta are overworked.
Biblically, is
there any reason to expect that all of the elders of early churches would have
been gifted to plant new churches? Some
elders might be gifted in this sense, but others may not. Then why do we expect such things of modern
men ordained as pendeta.
In the Bible,
we see that apostles generally were the ones to plant new churches, and elders
generally pastored local works. Yet,
today, many denominational policies combine the duties of apostles and elders
into the role of the pendeta—which creates confusion.
If someone were
gifted to travel and plant new churches, he might be able to receive
recognition as an ‘evangelist’ in some denominations. In some denominations, however, an evangelist
is not allowed to baptize, or else not allowed to sign a legal baptism
certificate. Evangelists far out on the
frontiers of the Gospel may be left with the decision to follow the Biblical
practice of baptizing new believers, and trying to find someone to sign a
certificate later, or else not baptizing new believers themselves.
In the Bible,
traveling preachers like Paul and Barnabas baptized. Why shouldn’t traveling preachers now
baptize? Why do some denominations only
have pendeta baptize?
Pendeta is a word from a pagan religion. So let us abandon the word pendeta and
the unscriptural concepts associated with it, and return to scriptural
terminology and concepts in regard to church leadership. Let us not only use the Bible as a source for
teaching material, but let us also use it as a guidebook for church structure
and evangelism strategy.
Conclusion
Paul and
Barnabas’s strategy for planting churches, recorded in Acts 13-14, came from
the Holy Ghost. It was a very successful
strategy, producing many New Testament churches in a relatively short period of
time.
The apostles,
Paul and Barnabas, were sent to preach the Gospel. Their calling made it necessary for them to
leave newly planted churches behind. But
that was okay, because the Lord took care of these churches. Though the apostles left these churches
without elders, the Lord was able to raise up elders from within the
congregations themselves. The apostles
didn’t send Bible college students to fill pastoral positions in these new
churches. God raised up the men
themselves, from within the churches.
If God sent
forth men to travel from place to place preaching and starting new churches,
shouldn’t we expect Him to do the same today?
If God could take care of churches left behind by the apostles for many
months at a time back then, can’t we believe Him to do the same today? If God could raise up local leadership from
within new church plants, couldn’t he do the same today? The Bible is not only a book of
sermon-material, but also a guidebook for how the body of Christ should
operate. It shows us how God
operates. Let us believe God to expand
the church in
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 3
New Testament Meetings and the
One of the keys
that allowed the apostles to rapidly plant churches was the way early believers
conducted their meetings. The apostles left
churches behind for some period of time with no appointed elders to lead them.
Imagine what would happen in many
traditional churches if the government came in and arrested the pastors and
other ‘official’ church leadership. What
would happen to churches if the pastors were taken? This may sound like an unrealistic scenario,
but it often happens in many countries. In
I have seen church services
canceled because the pastor was sick. I
know of one church that shut down because the pastor moved and took a secular
job to feed his family. Many people feel
that in order to have a church meeting, there must be a specially called
minister of the Gospel, ordained by the laying on of hands.
In Acts 14:23, we see that the
churches were already churches when Paul and Barnabas appointed elders. A ‘church’ is an assembly. These believers were already assembling
together as churches. They met without
apostles or official ordained leadership.
Yet they were still able to meet.
A careful study of the New
Testament reveals fascinating information about how the early church met. When we understand how the early church met,
we can understand how the apostles could leave churches for extended periods of
time with no appointed elders.
What you are about to read may
shock you. It may challenge some of your
most fundamental beliefs about church meetings.
I ask that you read this with an open mind, prayerfully searching the
scriptures to determine if the things I write are true.
Many seminaries teach students to
preach three-point sermons. Many
consider this to be the idea type of sermon.
A three-point sermon is composed of an introduction, body, and
conclusion. The introduction mentions
the three main points of the sermon, the body expounds on the three main
points, in the order in which they were introduced in the introduction. The conclusion, of course, is the end part of
the sermon.
In my studies of the New
Testament, I have never noticed a prophet, apostle, or the Lord Himself ever
preaching a three-point sermon. There
are many examples of sermons in the New Testament to examine. Paul certainly did not write letters with
only three points. If the New Testament
does not teach us to preach three-point sermons, and does not give us an
example of any three-point sermons, where does this type of preaching come
from?
The three-point sermon comes from
ancient
Christianity flourished in
Paul was most likely not a trained
public speaker:
II Corinthians 11:6
But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been
thoroughly made manifest among you in all things.
Paul was probably a powerful
speaker in a way. He had a lot of
knowledge, and probably spoke with much further. He was educated and had rabbinical training. But he may not have had the type of Greek
educated given to public speakers—the type of training philosophers had. If Paul’s writing style and sample sermons
from Acts are any indication, it is unlikely that Paul preached three-point
sermons. While a three-point sermon may
be a legitimate means of communicating a message, the Bible gives us no reason
to consider the three-point sermon to be the ideal means of teaching in church
meetings.
Sermons were preached in churches
long before the Reformation. But it was after
the Reformation that, in many types of churches, the one Sunday sermon came to
be viewed as the central focus of the church meeting. For centuries before the Reformation the most
important aspect of the church meeting was considered to be partaking of Holy
Communion. In Roman Catholic, Eastern
Orthodox, and certain traditional Protestant churches, Holy Communion still
holds this central place.
Why was Holy Communion considered
to be so important? Think about it. Where did the custom come from? Christ Himself instituted Holy
Communion. Of all the things we do in
our church meetings, Holy Communion stands out as the one unique practice that
Jesus Christ Himself instructed His disciples to do.
That is not to say that Bible
teaching is not important. It is clear
from the New Testament scriptures that hearing and learning the word of God is
essential. But we need to realize that
the way in which the word is taught in church has evolved over time. When Martin Luther nailed the 95 thesis on
the church door in
Martin Luther emphasized expounding
on the scriptures in sermons. He
translated the New Testament into German for his fellow countrymen to
read. Yet, Luther still emphasized the
importance of Holy Communion. In Roman
Catholic Churches, and many Lutheran churches, the pulpit is toward the left of
the sanctuary and there is an altar front and center for distribution of Holy
Communion. The arrangement of the
furnishings indicates the theoretical central importance of Holy Communion in
such churches. Now, ironically, some
Protestant churches in
Later Reformers after Luther took
the pulpit and placed it front and center in the congregation, where it still
stands in many congregations today. In
many churches since the Reformation, the central focus of the whole meetings is
a long sermon given by one leader.
There are many kinds of
sermons. This sermon may be a
three-point sermon. It may be a
verse-by-verse exposition of a passage.
Some sermons are just a preacher standing in front of a congregation,
reading a few verses, and then spouting out a few of his own unrelated
ideas. But in almost every church that
came out of the Reformation, there is a sermon every Sunday morning, and the congregation
generally considers the
What is the Biblical evidence for
the Sunday sermon? Acts records long sermons by Peter, Stephen, and Paul--
Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount and gave other extended teachings. But this was before ‘regular church meetings’
began after Pentecost. Peter preached a
sermon on Pentecost, and Paul preached sermons in synagogues and other public
places, but these were evangelistic in nature, rather than messages given in
gatherings of believers for the edification of the saints. Where is the evidence for the Sunday sermon
in scripture?
The closest thing to a piece of
scriptural evidence for a Sunday sermon preached in church is found in Acts
20:6-7.
6 And we sailed
away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to
7 And upon the
first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul
preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech
until midnight.
In the passage, the word for
‘teach’ [berbicera dengan] means that Paul was talking with the
saints. It is likely that he had an
interactive discussion with the saints until midnight. Paul probably had a dominant speaking role in
that particular meeting on this particular occasion because he was leaving the
next day, and the church needed to get as much knowledge out of him as they
could before he left.
What other evidence is there in
scripture for the Sunday sermon? I am not
able to find a good scriptural example of the custom of going to church to hear
a monologue from one man week after week.
Church meetings are the right place for Christians to learn and study
the word of God. Teaching should be a
part of such meetings. But this teaching
need not take the form of only one church leader giving a three-point
sermon. The Lord may gift a church with
many teachers. The early church allowed
more than one speaker per meeting.[3] Believers can also learn by hearing a passage
of scripture read, and discussing it with others. We should expect that the saints would be
more blessed by the gifts of many in a meeting than they would by the gifts of
one.
Hebrews 10 contains a verse often
quoted by preachers to encourage the members of the congregation to come to
church. Let us take a look at Hebrews
10:24-25
Hebrews 10:24-25
24 And let us
consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25 Not forsaking the
assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one
another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
Notice the context provided by
verse 24. Believers are to provoke one
another to love and to good works. I have
often heard verse 25 used in exhortations to attend church meetings, but it
seems like few people pay attention to the whole verse. The verse commands not to forsake assembling
together, but to exhort one another.
How many of us obey this
verse? Many of us do not forsake
assembling together, but when we assemble, we receive exhortation. But here Hebrews 10:25 instructs believers to
assemble and to exhort one another.
Do any other passages of scripture
teach us that meetings are supposed to involve mutual edification? In fact, the longest chapter that gives the
most detailed instructions in regard to church meetings tells how to have
mutually edifying meetings.
I Corinthians 14 was written to
correct excesses among the Corinthians.
Apparently, many of the Corinthians were either standing all at once and
speaking in tongues without interpretation in the meeting, or else standing one
by one and speaking in tongues with no interpretation. In this chapter, Paul explains that messages
in tongues without interpretation do not edify the assembly. Paul contrasts tongues with prophecy, which
edifies the church.
Something very interesting to
notice about I Corinthians 14 is that Paul does not correct the Corinthians
disorderly behavior by telling them to sit silently and listen to a preacher
preach a sermon. In fact, we see that
the Corinthians were not in the habit of hearing on man preach a sermon.
I Corinthians 14:26
How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a
psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an
interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
Here we see that ‘every one of
you’ had something to share in the meeting.
Paul does not address the issue of a meeting in which only one man
teaches, but a meeting in which the various members of the body of Christ use
their gifts to edify the whole assembly.
Paul’s solution for the Corinthian’s problems is not limiting the number
of speakers to one man, but rather allowing the Corinthians to express their
gifts in an orderly manner.
I Corinthians 14 has to be taken
in the context of the whole epistle. In
I Corinthians 12, Paul lists various gifts of the Spirit, and explains that we
all the members of the body of Christ have different gifts, and we all need one
another. Chapter 13 explains the
importance of love in relation to the gifts of the spirit. Chapter 14 then explains how the gifts of the
Spirit are to be used by the members of the body of Christ to edify one
another. The place for the exercise of
gifts of the Spirit to build up the body of Christ is in church meetings.
In I Corinthians 14, we see that
Paul was very positive about the idea of all prophesying in a church
meeting. In verses 24 through 25, Paul
presents a scenario demonstrating something positive that could happen if
everyone in the church meeting prophesied.
In verse 31, Paul writes, “For ye may
all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.” In verses 33 and 36 Paul indicates that what taught about church meetings
was the practice of the other churches and that the Corinthians did not have
the right to altar these practices. In
verse 37, Paul explains that his instructions for church meetings were the
commandments of the Lord.
Romans 12:4-8 teaches believers to
use their gifts to edify one another.
The passage instructs those with the gift of prophecy to prophesy
according to the proportion of faith.
Those with the gift of teaching
are to teach. Those with the gift
of exhortation are to teach. Why would
Paul have given such instructions if there were no opportunity for the saints
to use these gifts to edify one another in their meetings?
Consider Peter’s instructions:
1 Peter 4:10-11
10 As every man
hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good
stewards of the manifold grace of God.
11 If any man
speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it
as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified
through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
A steward is one entrusted to take
care of someone else’s property.
Christians are stewards of God’s grace.
If God gives us spiritual gifts, we must be responsible to use them
properly. Verse 11 mentions
‘speaking.’ Those who have speaking
gifts like prophecy or teaching, must use those gifts to edify others.
From these passages, we can see
that God gives regular believers gifts.
He expects us to use our gifts.
Unfortunately, the format of many churches allows little or no
opportunity for believers to use their gifts.
Often, one man, week after week, has an opportunity to use his gift, but
other people are not allowed an opportunity to use their gifts.
Synagogue meetings in the first
century were liturgical with ritual prayers and scheduled Scripture
reading. But the synagogue allowed a lot
more freedom for members to minister to one another in their meetings, in some
ways, that many modern churches allow.
In the first century synagogue,
any Jewish male member of the synagogue might read a passage of scripture. In many churches nowadays, the same man gives
the sermon week after week. But in the
synagogue, regular Jewish men could read the scriptures before the
congregation. A regular, unordained
Jewish man who knew the Bible well and had good moral character could be a
preacher of sermons in the synagogue.
After the sermon was given, others in the congregation would ask
questions and comment on the sermon in a discussion[4]. We often see Jews debating with Paul in the
synagogue in Acts
Christ, the twelve apostles, Paul
and Barnabas all spent a lot of time in the synagogue. This was a part of their cultural
background. Many of the saints in the
churches of the first century, even those planted by Paul and Barnabas, were
quite used to the synagogue. They were
used to discussions of teachings of scriptural passages. If a teaching were presented in a church
meeting in the first century, wouldn’t it have felt natural for the believers
to discuss the teaching in the meeting?
The epistles of
the New Testament emphasize the importance of using spiritual gifts to build
one another up. The first century church
had gifts that were not present in the synagogue before Christ came. The type of meeting Paul encouraged the
Corinthians to have would have allowed for believers to express their gifts to
build one another up much more freely than a synagogue format would have
allowed. Ironically, many churches these
days have less freedom for expression of gifts than a synagogue format would
allow.
The Gentile Circumcision
Controversy.
Let us take a
look at the problems that arose in Acts 15.
Acts 15:1-2
1 And certain men which came down
from
2 When therefore
Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they
determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to
In what venue did Paul and
Barnabas argue with the men who were teaching the Gentiles to be
circumcised? Considering the fact that
the Jews in the synagogue could discuss or debate a teacher’s teachings, and
that the apostles had grown up in the synagogue, isn’t it likely that Paul and
Barnabas rebuked the false teachers in the assembly? If they had not confronted the false
teachings publicly, many in the church may have stumbled.
Paul and Barnabas went to
Standing up an disagreeing with a
preacher in a church these days would seem like an incredibly rude act. But since the early church had an interactive
format to meetings which allowed for more than one person to speak.
In
Paul and Barnabas went to
Acts 15:4-5
4 And when they
were come to
5 But there rose
up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to
circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses.
Here Paul and Barnabas are
speaking before the church. Because of
the interactive format of church gatherings in the first century, some men
stood up promoting Gentile circumcision.
Acts 15 continues on to tell us
how the apostles and elders met and discussed the issue of Gentiles
circumcision, and finally reached a decision.
In this meeting, we do not see one man doing all the talking—preaching a
sermon—while the rest listen. Instead,
there was a lot of discussion until the assembly discerned the will of the
Spirit as expressed in the scriptures.
It is likely that the
Thessalonians had had to deal with false prophecies:
II Thessalonians 2:2
That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit,
nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
What advice had Paul given to the
Thessalonians about prophecy?
I Thessalonians 5:20-21
20 Despise not
prophesyings.
21 Prove all
things; hold fast that which is good.
Perhaps because of false
prophecies, the Thessalonians may have been tempted to despise
prophesyings. Paul’s solution for
dealing with prophecies was not to reject them out of hand, but rather to prove
them, and hold fast to the good.
The fact that prophecies were
given and that the Thessalonians heard them is strong evidence for the exercise
of the gift of prophecy in their meetings.
As in
Some would deal with false
prophecies by forbidding the gift. But
this is not Paul’s solution. To the
Corinthians, Paul instructs that the prophets speak two or three, and that the
other judge. (I Cor. 14:21.) Paul doesn’t instruct the churches to muzzle
the mouths of the saints to prevent their every being any false teaching or
prophecy. His solution is rather to allow
the saints to use their gifts, and to deal with problems after they arise.
There are,. However, false
teachers whose ‘mouths must be stopped”
(Titus 1:11.) The open format of
the early churches sometimes allowed room for false teachers to creep in. False teachers who deny the truth should be
resisted by the whole congregation and, in particular, apostles and elders.
Sometimes, regular believers in
the assembly may go off into strange doctrines, and want to preach them. The church in
I Timothy 1:6-7
6 From which some
having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7
Desiring to be teachers of the law;
understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
Paul taught not to pay attention
to such teachers. (I Timothy 1:4.)
The whole congregation of believers
must make an effort to withdraw from those who teach false doctrine. Paul wrote,
1 Timothy 6:3 If
any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of
our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
Paul writes of such a person, in
verse 5, “from such withdraw thyself.”
Apostles and elders in particular
have a role in resisting false teaching.
We see Paul and Barnabas resisted false teaching in
The elders of the church also have
a role in resisting false doctrine. The
elders met with the apostles in
In his instructions to Titus
concerning elders, Paul describes their responsibility to defend the truth of
the Gospel.
Titus 1:9-11
9 Holding fast
the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine
both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are
many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths
must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought
not, for filthy lucre's sake.
Clearly, the open, mutually
participatory nature of New Testament style meetings presents a lot of
challenges. False teachers and false
prophets may try to take advantage of the opportunity to share their dangerous ideas. Well-meaning believers may share ideas that
are not edifying. The Bible gives us
solutions to these problems. Apostles,
elders, and ‘regular believers’ must all resist false doctrine and stand for
the truth. Prophecies are to be
carefully weighed.
The Bible offers solutions to the
problems that arise in New Testament style meetings.
But the modern practice of not
allowing regular believers to use their gifts also causes many problems.
Many problems arise in churches
from not allow believers to exercise their gifts in church meetings. One problem is the fact that the local church
body misses out on the blessings and benefits of the gifts of those who are not
active in the meetings. Consider the
following verses from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians.
I Corinthians 12:19-23
19 And if they
were all one member, where were the body?
20 But now are
they many members, yet but one body.
21 And the eye
cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the
feet, I have no need of you.
We need the gifts of all the parts
of the body of Christ. We are supposed
to be ministering to one another with these gifts.
Imagine if the only part of your
body that you used to move around was your arm.
The rest of your body is in a cast, except for that one arm. If you are very persistent, you may learn to
drag yourself across a room by laying on the floor and pulling yourself along
with that one arm. After a year of doing
this, your arm muscles would be very strong.
You would have powerful fingers.
But what would happen if you were to remove the cast? The rest of your muscles would have atrophied. Your legs would not work properly.
Many churches are like this. A few parts of the local body use their gifts
to edify others. The rest of the
believers in the church often just sit there an listen. Many believers do not make much effort to use
their spiritual gifts to edify others.
Their gifts are often mostly unused, and are weak. They don’t use their gifts because they are
not taught that they should. They think
their role as Christians is simply to attend church meetings, pay tithes, and
live a fairly decent life. The pastor and
a few others in the church, who use their gifts, may have very well developed
gifts.
I Corinthians 14:31
For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be
comforted.
Notice that all prophesy so
that all may learn and be comforted.
What happens if only one prophesies?
Can we expect to get the same results if only one prophesies that we
could if all prophesied? God has
distributed His gifts among the body of Christ so that we need one another in
order to be properly edified.
A local church where
all believers use their gifts, and honor and seek the Lord with them is a
powerful threat to the
Christians are supposed to be a
loving community. The earliest saints in
Consider the words of Christ in John 13:35 “By this shall all men know that ye are my
disciples, if ye have love one to another.”
The use of spiritual gifts to
edify one another helps build community.
Being ministered to by someone can help you increase your love and
affection for that person. Think about
someone who has ministered to you spiritually in the past- maybe someone who discipled you, prayed with
you, or ministered to you in some other way.
When you think of that person, don’t you feel grateful? Hasn’t his ministry caused your affection for
that person to increase?
If you minister to someone, that
can also cause your affections for that person to increase. When we serve one another in the body of
Christ, it promotes love, community and oneness. Consider the words of Paul about the body of
Christ from Ephesians.
Ephesians 4:16
From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that
which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure
of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.
Notice in this verse that every
part of the body must work so that the body might edify itself in love. The word ‘edify’ shows up in many other
passages in Paul’s letter. One chapter
in which he uses the word many times in I Corinthians 14. Consider the following verse:
1 Corinthians 14:12
Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye
may excel to the edifying of the church.
This verse appears in the context
of a teaching on how to behave in church meetings. One of the main places the saints in the body
of Christ are to use their gifts to minister to one another
Throughout the New Testament, we
see that the early churches had a plurality of elders. Something especially dangerous about many
churches today is that they have one pastor, or one pastor over all the rest,
who, in some cases, is not held accountable if he preaches wrong doctrine.
While there are many humble
servants of God preaching the word faithfully, there are also men who preach
false doctrines. Guest speakers could
come and preach false doctrines. What
would happen in your church if a visiting preacher preached some strange
doctrine? Imagine what he preached was
not blatant heresy, but just something strange.
Would there be any format for anyone to correct the strange idea during
the meeting. Even if the preacher
preached blatant false doctrine, in many churches the congregation would sit
quietly and do nothing.
In
An interactive format helps
protect churches from false teachers.
But it can also help protect churches from their own pastors. The Bible never shows that apostles
appointing one pastor over a church.
They appointed a plurality of elders.
If one elder taught something wrong, there were other elders to help
correct the problem.
But something else to keep in mind
is that the fact that regular believers could use their gifts in meetings also
kept balance. In addition to the elders
of the church ministering to the body, the teachers, prophets, and other saints
could speak and minister. The Proverbs
say, “Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counselors
there is safety.” (Proverbs 11:14.)
One common problem in many churches
that have one pastor is that, even though the pastor may be preaching the
truth, he likes to focus on only a few issues.
It is not fair for us to expect for one man in the church to contain all
the gifts and knowledge of God. Of
course, pastors will have their favorite doctrines and teachings. But focusing only on a few teachings can lead
to an error of emphasis, or even doctrinal error.
Imagine a church where the
pastor’s favorite topics are speaking in tongues and eschatology. Week after week, church members learn about
little other than speaking in tongues and eschatology. Since the Bible contains a limited number of
passages on speaking in tongues, in order to keep preaching on the subject, the
preacher either has to repeat himself, or else be ‘creative’ in his
interpretation of Scripture. As a result
of overemphasis and ‘creative’ interpretation of scripture on this issue, there
are some Christians who pray in tongues at the same time in church meetings
without interpretation. Some even think
that the Devil cannot hear you if you speak in tongues and that you should pray
in tongues if you have a secret prayer you don’t want the Devil to hear. (Apparently, this idea comes from a strange
interpretation of I Corinthians 14:2.)
It is Biblically true that God
provides for His people, and this is a fine subject to teach on. But some preachers have focused too much on
the issue of financial provision in their teaching, and ignored the many
teachings of Christ against greed and trusting in wealth. Churches that overemphasize God providing us
with wealth can easily appeal to the carnal mind and encourage greediness. If believers hear week after week about god
giving them money, they may come to think that Christianity is all about
getting money. This kind of doctrinal
atmosphere is a place where conmen and false teachers can find easy prey.
An imbalanced focus on Calvinistic
teachings can lead to hopelessness and even immorality. The Bible teaches us about rewards and
punishments for a reason. If people are
simply taught that their destiny is already decided and has nothing to do with
their actions, they may grow lazy. On
the other hand, overemphasis on free will and man’s responsibility can lead to
false doctrine as well.
Having one member of an assembly
do all the teaching can lead to imbalance.
If one man teaches on God’s provision all the time, wouldn’t it be good
for another man in the assembly to have freedom to teach on Christ’s sayings
against greed?
An open format in an assembly
provides an opportunity for false teachings to be addressed before all. It can prevent errors of emphasis which occur
from hearing only one man speak on his favorite topics over and over again.
An open format in a meeting can
also protect against false prophecies.
Notice the common theme in the following verses:
I Corinthians 14:29
Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
I Thessalonians 5:20-21
20 Despise not
prophesyings.
21 Prove all
things; hold fast that which is good.
Prophecies are to be judged and
tested. What better place is there to
prayerfully, carefully, and reverently evaluate and apply prophecies than in a
church meeting? I Corinthians 12:10
mentions the gift of discernment of spirits.
In many churches that have prophecy in the meetings, the prophecies go
by without any comment from anyone in the assembly on them. Shouldn’t those with the gift of discernment
of spirits be allowed to exercise their gifts, right in the assembly to edify
others?
Some think that open, New
Testament style meetings can lead to doctrinal error. It is true that this type of format does
allow for problems to occur. A
well-disciplined congregation, used to such meetings, who know the word of God,
and strong leadership are needed to protect against false teachers arising in
the midst and from well-meaning brethren with strange ideas.
Ironically, though, open meetings
can prevent false teachings and strange ideas from spreading that are promoted
by leadership. A one-man pastorate with
no accountability structure is a potentially dangerous thing.
Meetings a Key to Understanding
Paul and Barnabas’ Approach to Church Planting
Understanding the way the early church conducted their meetings is a key to understanding how Paul and Barnabas could have planted so many churches. These two apostles left churches behind with no appointed leadership to lead their meetings, yet these churches were able to function for maybe months or years without apostles or elders to lead their meetings.
Churches that do not have elders
can have open, interactive meetings for breaking bread and mutual
edification. Such an environment is a
good place for believers to meet, and grow in their gifts. When the apostles returned to the churches
they had started, they were able to find men who could be appointed as elders
of the church. These men had grown
spiritually in the churches.
Participating in church meetings would have helped them mature into the
type of men suitable to be elders of the churches.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2002
Chapter 4
Planting Churches Without Overseers
The apostles
Paul and Barnabas left the churches of the first missionary journey alone for
some period of time, perhaps up to two or three years, without any appointed
elders. It was right that they did
so. Paul and Barnabas were called to a
certain work which involved traveling and preaching the Gospel.
In I Timothy
3:6, Paul writes than an overseer of the church was not to be a novice. Since the apostles appointed elders from
within local churches, it makes sense that the churches be given time to
grow and mature so that, in time, men would mature into elders of sufficient
spiritual character to take on oversight of the church.
These
Churches Were Churches
Some people
think that a church is not a true church unless it has an ordained
minister. But we see from the Bible that
these churches were indeed churches before any elders were ordained. Their assemblies were legitimate, in spite of
no elder being present.
Acts 14:23
tells us that Paul and Barnabas “ordained them elders in every church”. The passage does not say “and they ordained
elders in every fellowship, turning the fellowships into churches.” No, the churches were legitimate churches
before the elders were appointed. It was
advantageous to appoint the elders, or they would not have been appointed
It is likely
that Paul regularly planted churches without immediately appointing overseers,
allowing God to raise up such men in His time.
Of Paul’s epistles, only three mention elders or overseers in the
churches: Philippians, Titus, and
Timothy.
I Corinthians
deals with the need of the Corinthians to appoint judges over cases, but no
mention is made here of elders of the church.
It is conceivable that neither Paul nor his coworkers had yet appointed
elders in these churches.
Planting
Churches without Overseers
Some people
think that no new church plant may be begun without an ordained minister to
lead it. This idea is unscriptural, and
it can slow the growth of church planting efforts. Some think that a church planter must stay
with a new congregation until an ordained minister is available to take
over. This concept can also slow church
planting efforts.
Many church
planting efforts are based on the idea of a Bible college graduate or
experienced minister planting a new church, and staying there. A church planter who wants to move on and
evangelize elsewhere is expected to turn the work over to an ordained minister.
Evangelists who
follow the example of Paul and Barnabas, leaving new churches behind without
any appointed leadership could face criticism.
But we need to realize that some men have ‘itchy feet.’ It is a part of their call to take the Gospel
to new areas—to evangelize new souls.
In some cases,
God might want a church planter to stay for a long time in one location and do
long-term discipleship work. On other
occasions, a church planter may need to leave after a short time and fulfill
the call of God to preach in other areas.
Paul spent probably only months in some of the cities where he preached,
but he stayed in
A church
planter may stay in one church for a long time, or he may move around. He should follow the leadership of the Holy
Spirit in the matter.
Church planters
need to be freed from some of the traditional churches about church
planting. Realizing that a church can be
started, and even left behind without ordained elders, can free church planters
to go do other work.
Many church
planting strategies are based on sending young men to Bible college to serve as
professional pastors over new churches.
Educating a young man in Bible college is a slow, expensive
undertaking. Ironically, many Bible
college graduates are not even Biblically qualified to be overseers of the
church according to the lists of requirements given by the apostle Paul.[5] Very few of them fit the description of an
elder. The Greek word for elder, presbuteros,
does, after all, mean ‘older man.’
Caring for
New Churches That Don’t Yet Have Overseers
Many would
object to the idea of leaving a church behind with no ordained leadership in
charge. They think it far too dangerous
for such churches to be left alone.
In the New
Testament, we see that new churches could be tempted by false teachers and
false apostles. This was a real
danger. But we also need to realize that
churches that already had elders still had to battle with this problem. Many believe that Galatians was written to
the first missionary journey churches—to south
Such churches
are not truly left alone without an overseer.
I Peter 2:25 shows that Jesus is the Shepherd and Bishop of the souls of
the saints. God watched over the
churches that Paul left behind.
Though we do
see that Paul left churches behind, we see that he did not abandon them
completely. Paul earnestly prayed for
these churches. He also kept in touch
through men sent to and from the churches.
He responded to what he had heard from brethren who had visited these
churches in letters. Some of his letters
answer questions sent to him by these churches.
At times, Paul and his coworkers would travel back to churches to strengthen
and encourage them.
As more people
on what had been frontiers for the Gospel believed, there were also more
workers available to strengthen existing churches. Some of these people joined Paul in his
travels. After Paul had been ministering
many years, there were several men who traveled with him, who could also be
sent to existing churches to exhort them.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2001
Chapter 5
Sending Brethren
Sending
gifted brethren existing churches to strengthen them is beneficial to churches
that already have elders, but this practice must have played a very key role in
stabilizing new church plants in the first century.
Apostles Sending Brethren
In many cases, we see that an
apostle would send one of his co-workers back to an existing church to help
strengthen it. We often read of Timothy
and Titus being sent to strengthen existing churches. These men traveled with Paul, helping in the
work of preaching, teaching, and planting churches. Paul even indicates that Timothy and Silas
were ‘apostles of Christ’ along with himself.
But there were other, less-famous men that Paul sent to strengthen
churches as well.
Paul sent Tychicus and Onesimus to
Colosae to comfort the church there. He
sent Tychicus to
The short epistle of II John deals
with the issue of receiving brethren.
These brethren may have been sent by John or by a local church that John
was associated with.
Churches Sending Brethren
In addition to apostles sending brethren
back and forth, churches also sent brethren to other churches to strengthen
them.
The first church we read about in
the book of Acts was in
This church, with a huge number of
new converts, was probably in need of help.
The
Acts 11:22-26
22
Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was
in
23
Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted
them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.
24
For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much
people was added unto the Lord.
25
Then departed Barnabas to
26
And when he had found him, he brought him unto
There is no indication that
Barnabas was ordained as an elder or deacon of the church in
We also see that the
During the time Barnabas and Saul
were in
Acts
11:27-28
27 And in these days came prophets from
28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus,
and signified by the spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all
the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.
Whether Agabus and the other
prophets were sent with commendation from the church in
Acts 15 tells of the apostles and
elders in
Acts
15:22 Then pleased it the apostles and
elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to
15:32-33
32 And Judas and Silas, being prophets also
themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them.
33 And after they had tarried there a space, they
were let go in peace from the brethren unto the apostles.
Here again we see that the
It is interesting to note that
Silas and Judas were sent to
Letters of Commendation
Other believers besides Paul and
Silas were sent with letters of commendation.
Consider the case of Apollos.
Acts
18:24-28
24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at
25 This man was instructed in the way of the
Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the
things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.
26 And he began to speak boldly in the
synagogue: whom when
27 And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia,
the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was
come, helped them much which had believed through grace:
28 For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that
publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.
Apollos presents an interesting
case. Though Apollos had a partial
knowledge of Jesus before he met Priscilla and
Unlike Apollos, who probably had
that letter of commendation with him when he went from Ephesus to the church in
Corinth, Paul wrote that he did not need a letter of commendation to the
Corinthians.
II
Corinthians 3:1-2
1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or
need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of
commendation from you?
2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts,
known and read of all men:
Paul didn’t need letters to the
Corinthians. They already knew him. He had brought the Gospel there. Paul’s reference to letters of commendation
indicate that sending such letters was a common practice. Paul agreed to send money to
Some churches today do send
letters with members in good standing when they transfer to other churches. Some may see ordination papers as a type of
letter of commendation. Both are a
little different from what we see in scripture.
Sending a letter with a godly member who plans to move to another city
may well be a good practice, but many of the letters sent with brethren in
scripture were written to endorse their ministries. Ordination papers are a bit different from
the letters of commendation in scripture as well. Some get ordination papers through following
a set of academic guidelines or other requirements of a denomination. It is possible for someone to be ordained
without having a close relationship with those doing the ordination. The letters in commendation in scripture
endorse the character of the brethren with whom they are sent. Letters of ordination can last a
lifetime. The letters of commendation in
scripture were written as needs arose.
When a person was to be sent to another church, a letter of commendation
was written. Paul wrote many
commendations for Timothy. He didn’t
just write one letter for Timothy to use for a lifetime. A lifetime letter of commendation can be
dangerous because a preacher of the Gospel can fall into sin or error. In a couple of epistles, Paul sends greetings
from a brother named Demas, but in another, he informs his readers that Demas
had left him, having loved this present world.
Offering current letters of commendation is a wiser practice than
one-time ordination papers.
An obvious difference between the
letters of commendation in the scriptures and letters of ordination is that
ordination papers are often associated with local overseership ministry. There is no indication that local overseers
needed ordination papers in the Bible.
Why would they? The churches in
which they were ordained would already know them. Some of the brethren sent between churches
that we see in the New Testament probably had never been ordained by the laying
on of hands like elders. There is no
indication that prophets needed such ordination, or that Apollos had been
ordained. These men had gifts from
God. The churches they were a part of
recognized these gifts, and sent them on.
Letters of commendation could be
sent from the disciples, as in the case of Apollos, by apostles and elders, as
in the case of Judas and Silas, or from a single apostle like Paul. No letter of commendation in scripture was
ever originated by a denominational headquarters in response to completing a
course of academic study.
The Need for Sending Brethren
in
Many strategies to plant churches
today are based on the idea of a church planter either staying permanently with
a new church as a pastor. This strategy
could tie down a church planter, and keep him from fulfilling his calling in
other areas. Other strategies allow for
a church planter to bring a specially educated, ordained minister to serve as
pastor before moving on.
But in scripture, we see that the
practice of the apostles was to appoint men from within local churches to be
elders and oversee the local flock of God.
Leaving churches behind with no one mature to care for them is a painful
option for many church planters. Paul
and Barnabas did this early on in their church planting, but we see that later
in Paul’s ministry, as the number of Christians in Gentile areas grew, there
were a number of men that Paul could send to existing churches to help them be
strengthened in the faith. Existing
churches were also able to send brethren to less mature churches.
Imagine how wonderful it would be
for a church planter who realizes the Biblical pattern of God raising up elders
from within new churches, to know many mature believers who are willing to
visit these new church planters to prophesy, and teach doctrine, how to sing
and worship God, intercession, or whatever a new church needs.
Ultimately, new believers in a new
church should grow and mature. A church
should eventually have teachers, prophets, elders, and the various other
members of the body. Church planters and
brethren sent behind a church planter to strengthen the work should have this
vision in mind.
According to Hebrews 5:12, after a
certain period of time, if a church grows and matures properly, its members
should become teachers. This doesn’t
always happen. Some churches don’t
mature properly. The practice of having
new believers sit and listen only, and never use their gifts to edify others,
can stunt the spiritual growth of a church.
Those who minister to new churches should keep in mind the vision of new
believers growing to use their own spiritual gifts.
‘Reproduction’ is a key word to
keep in mind. Teachers should seek to
train new teachers in a church. Prophets
should encourage the gift of prophecy in a church. Consider Paul’s instructions to Timothy,
which shows the reproducible nature of the gift of teaching.
II
Timothy 2:2 And the things that thou
hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men,
who shall be able to teach others also.
Let us consider the advantages to
itinerant church planters followed by visiting gifted brethren who ‘water’
their work, in comparison to traditional methods of church planting. One major advantage is that the method of the
planting and watering method is that we have scriptural examples of this type of
ministry. Paul commanded churches to follow
his example and to hold to the traditions he taught.
Another major advantage is that
this method allows church planters to plant many more churches. Huge amounts of money need not be spent on
campaigns to train young Bible college students to be professional
pastors. Allowing the Lord to raise up
local elderships is much less expensive.
Churches can be established that follow Biblical patterns for
leadership, rather than innovations that have been introduced throughout church
history.
Visits from gifted brethren can be
a key ingredient in helping new congregations develop, grow, and mature until
the new church's own gifted brethren are mature in their own lives and
ministries. We can all see how teachers
can come and strengthen a new church.
But there are brethren with gifts that attract less attention who can
strengthen new churches as well. Have
you ever been to a church where there was a total lack of joy and enthusiasm
while the saints were singing to the Lord?
A brother or sister who is fervent in praise and worship can stir up
other believers just by singing with fervor.
In the house church I attend, the intensity of our praise and worship
has been greatly increased by a brother and his wife who have started
attending. Their excitement in worship
is contagious.
If a young church needs to learn
to pray, a gifted intercessor from another church can come to a prayer meeting
and pray with the new believers, giving them an example of fervent prayer. Even brethren with gifts that seem more
mundane, like administration, can come and help new churches set their affairs
in order.
One Irian Jayan brother I know
helps other churches by teaching their leaders not to simply store church funds
mixed in with their own money, but rather to keep it church funds in a separate
place. This type of advice may be
obvious to many of us, but some new believers need to learn such simple
skills.
Some visiting brethren may be able
to move to an area where there are new churches to be a part of the local body
and encourage new believers. Others may
be able to take a few weeks off of work, using their vacation time to
strengthen new churches. Gifted college
students may be able to use some time during their summer breaks to stay in the
home of a new believers who is part of a new church plant, and share their
gifts in church meetings and at other times.
Some brethren who visit may be able to take a long trip just to visit
for one meeting.
Imagine how the burden on apostles
and evangelists would be eased if, every time they planted a church and were
called to leave it, they knew that saints from other, more mature churches,
were ready and able to come and strengthen existing churches.
Think of an evangelist, on the
frontiers of the Gospel. He goes to a
village and preaches the Gospel and goes on to new territory. After some time, the believers in the village
grow and mature through ministering to one another and by receiving ministry
from visiting brethren from other churches.
The evangelist later returns, spending time with the villagers he won to
Christ and their spiritual children.
From this village, he goes out to another, nearby, unreached
village. When he leaves this village, he
can ask brethren from the first village he evangelized to visit and strengthen
the new church plant. In this way, the
Gospel can spread, and evangelists and apostles can be free to travel and
preach the Gospel. The burden of
discipling and encouraging new churches can be shared with existing
churches.
There are probably a multitude of
believers in
The Biblical methods for church
planting and strengthening existing churches
are superior to many of the methods later generations have
invented.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2001
Chapter 6
Evangelists Planting Churches
We have already
seen that many of the churches in the first century were planted by men
referred to as ‘apostles.’ Apostles like
Paul and Barnabas preached the Gospel and spent a period of time teaching each
church started through their ministry.
They returned to these churches, strengthened them, and appointed
elders. As we follow Paul’s ministry in
Acts and the epistles, we see that he would return to churches he planted, and
also send brethren to comfort and strengthen them.
The Greek word
for evangelist is euaggelistes. A
closely related Greek word, euaggelizo, refers to preaching the
Gospel. This verb is used in reference
to the preaching of John the Baptist, Christ, Philip the evangelist, apostles,
and regular scattered believers.
The plural of the word evangelist
occurs once in Ephesians 4:11. The
singular evangelist occurs twice in the singular in the New
Testament. One is in reference to
Timothy, and the other is in reference to Philip.
Acts 21:8 And the next day we that were of Paul's
company departed, and came unto
II Timothy 4:5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions,
do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
Let us consider the difference
between the roles of apostles and evangelists in the scriptures. Timothy is told to ‘do the work of an
evangelist,’ but I Thessalonians 1:1 and 2:6 indicate that Timothy was also an
apostle of Christ.
Apostles like Paul, Barnabas,
Silas, and Timothy preached the Gospel, taught new converts, appointed elders,
and returned to churches to strengthen them.
Philip the evangelist had a little
different ministry from these apostles from what little we can see in the book
of Acts. Philip evangelized
Philip was one of the seven men
chosen to care for the feeding of widows, as recorded in Acts 6:1-6. The apostles had laid hands on Philip in
connection with the work of feeding widows—traditionally considered to be a
ministry of the deaconate. There is no
indication that the apostles laid hands on Philip to be an evangelist. Philip’s exploits in
There is no indication that the
apostles or the church in
Acts 8:5 Then Philip went down to the city of
As was probably natural for
Philip, when he arrived in
There is no mention of another
brother going with Philip to preach in
Something we need to note about
Philip’s ministry of evangelism is that he did not merely go to believers who
already believed in Christ, and evangelize them. Rather, he preached to people who did not
believe the Gospel, who may have never heard it, and evangelized them.
Acts 8:6-7
6
And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip
spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.
7
For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were
possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were
healed.
As with the apostles, miracles
accompanied Philip’s preaching of the Gospel.
The result of these miracles was that the people listened carefully to
what Philip had to say.
Acts 8:14-17
14
Now when the apostles which were at
15
Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive
the Holy Ghost:
16
(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in
the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17
Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
Here we see a difference between
Philip and Paul’s ministry. In
Acts19:5-6, we see that after Paul baptized some brethren, he laid hands on
them, and the Holy Spirit came on them.
In the case of Philip the evangelist, this type of ministry was left to
others.
Apparently, Philip left this kind
of ‘follow-up’ ministry to the apostles, who were leaders of the church in
Not every church planter will have
the same gifts or grace. One could view
Philip here as a church planter, but his ministry in
We must realize that some church
planters have grace to evangelize and move on.
Others have the grace to evangelize, and to continue discipling
others.
Philip was able to turn to leaders
of his own church—apostles. Evangelists
may want to ask for help from their own local churches, or another nearby
church. Such a church can send gifted
brethren to come help new believers won by the evangelist. Other evangelists may turn to apostles who
are church planters with grace to disciple new believers.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2002
Chapter 7
Regular Believers Planting Churches
Scattered
believers, fleeing from persecution in
Acts
8:1-3
1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And
at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at
2 And devout men carried Stephen to his burial,
and made great lamentation over him.
3 As for Saul, he made havock of the church,
entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.
These believers were scattered to
various areas. Probably, many of the
churches started in Judaea and
Acts
9:31 Then had the churches rest
throughout all Judaea and Galilee and
We see here that these believers
formed churches in the areas where they gathered together. Some think that only ‘ordained ministers’ can
plant churches, but we see here that these believers formed churches in the
areas they scattered to. The early
believers probably realized how simple it was to have a church. No elders were necessary for the church to
begin. No ordained minister was required
to preach the sermon. Instead, all
believers could speak, using the gifts given by the Holy Ghost.
The scattered believers preached Christ to unbelievers, usually Jews, in
the areas they fled to. We see later in
Acts that these persecuted believers scattered to other regions, even
Acts
11:19-21
19 Now they which were scattered abroad upon the
persecution that arose about Stephen traveled as far as Phenice, and
20 And some of them were men of
21 And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a
great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.
In
Before Paul and Barnabas went out
on their apostolic mission, there was already a great wave of church
planting. Churches sprung up in the
areas of Judaea,
The believers from
[Add quote from Watchman Nee,
The Normal Christian Church Life.]
This type of church planting may
work well for
In
In many churches, few members are
expected to do any work for the kingdom.
Tradition has led us to believe that the clergy, and perhaps a few other
key church members are to do most of the work of the kingdom, while regular
‘pew sitters’ are supposed to devote themselves to secular work, pay their
tithes, and attend church to watch the show put on by the religious
professionals on Sunday morning.
Some churches expect a little more
commitment; they expect their members to
attend three meetings a week, and spend time every day in prayer and Bible
study.
One important, forgotten lesson of
scripture that we must learn is that God expects the whole body of Christ to
function, not just a few parts. Passages
like Romans 12 and I Corinthians 12 show us that every part of the body of
Christ has a gift. Every believer must
use his gift to edify others. I
Corinthians 14 shows us that the primarily setting to use many of these gifts
is in meetings of the local church.
Imagine if someone had a healthy,
functioning body, but he decided not to use any body parts to move around
except for his right arm. He struggles
to pull himself along across the ground with one arm. Eventually, if this man did not use his legs
they would grow weak and atrophy. He
might end up with one very strong arm, but his body would not be healthy.
By not allowing a local body to
function in church meetings, we keep fellow believers from growing in their
gifts. A few pastors who do much of the
ministry intended by the whole body may grow strong, but they will not be able
to fully replace the ministry intended for the entire body. Not only that, but by not allowing believers
to use their gifts, we also loose valuable resources that could be used in the
harvest.
There are many people in churches
who are gifted as teachers, but who aren’t given much opportunity to use their
gifts. Some of these people could be
very valuable serving as Bible teachers in a new church plant, or they could be
sent behind an evangelist to teach and strengthen a church plant. Their efforts could help increase the growth
of the Gospel in
Many potential teachers fail to
develop properly due to lack of spiritual maturity and lack of use of their
spiritual gifts. Consider what the
author of Hebrews wrote,
Hebrews
5:12-14
12 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.
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in
the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of
full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to
discern both good and evil.
Some think that only a small
percentage of Christians could ever be qualified to be teachers. But the author of Hebrews seems to see
becoming a teacher as related to time and maturity. The Hebrew readers of this epistle had been
believers long enough to be teachers.
But they weren’t as mature as they should have been. If they had been, then they would have been
teachers. In verse 14, we see that a
mature believer—one who could be a teacher—is one who has exercised his
spiritual senses.
How many believers have not
matured due to a lack of exercise? So
much church tradition discourages us from exercising what god has given
us. Believers should be using their gifts
in church meetings, but many do not because of the traditional order of
meetings. Those who do exercise their
gifts do so in additional church programs like Sunday school classes, or by
diligently pursuing other opportunities to use their gifts. Many church leaders, instead of encouraging
those who want to use their gifts and mentoring them, tell them to go to Bible
college.
The church paradigm that many hold
to actually limits the number of workers in the harvest. If believers really realized that they were
supposed to use their gifts to care for one another, and acted on this truth,
the church would grow and mature much more quickly. If believers bound by traditional concepts of
church would realize that the work of the kingdom is for all believers, and not
just a select ‘clergy class,’ just imagine the freedom they would
experience! This would free up some who
are gifted to evangelize, but not to become professional ministers, to pursue
their gifts. Those called to teach, who
never became professional preachers, would be freed up to teach new converts
brought in by the harvest. These new
converts could then use their gifts, grow, and mature into the type of people
who can minister to others.
Consider how much more quickly
churches would grow if all believers diligently used their spiritual
gifts—instead of relying on two or three gifted brethren to do all the work!
By allowing regular believers to
minister in their gifts, we can encourage them to grow into their
ministries. Some ‘regular believers’ who
sit in pews could actually become mature apostles or evangelists. God gives more to them who are faithful. As brethren use their spiritual gifts, we can
expect God to bless some of them more and more, and give them more and more
responsibility in ministry.
Consider Barnabas. We first see Barnabas in Acts 4:36-37. His name was originally Joseph, but the
apostles named him ‘Barnabas,’ perhaps because he was faithful with his gifts to
prophetically encourage other people.
‘Barnabas’ means ‘son of prophecy’, a name Luke translates as ‘son of
encouragement. We also see in these
verses that was a faithful giver.
Later, we see that Barnabas was
sent by the
Other itinerant ministers like
Philip, Apollos, and Timothy also grew
up and matured by being faithful in local churches. It is a very damaging concept to think that
the standard way for God to raise up an itinerant minister like an apostle or
evangelist is through giving that person a ‘call’ before he is 20, and
directing him to Bible college. Some
itinerant ministers enter their ministries at young ages. Others grow into these ministries over a long
period of time. We should expect God to
raise up itinerant ministers from among faithful brethren who use their gifts
faithfully in the church over a period of time.
These men may earn there living in many different ways. Not all will have gone to Bible college.
The practice of restricting the
ministry of the word and other ‘important’ ministries to ordained clergy works
against believers who would gradually grow and develop in their gifts. Instead, these believers are expected to sit
quietly and watch while a few other believers use their own gifts.
If church planters and leaders of
local churches realize how simple it is for regular believers to start a church
and to simply gather and edify one another, they will understand a great tool
for reaching the unreached people of
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2001
Chapter 8
Ordained and ‘Unordained’
Ministries
Many Christians believe that,
without an ordained minister, a gathering of believers is not a true
church. We have already seen that this
is not the teaching of the New Testament.
Many New Testament churches were called ‘churches’ before any elders
were appointed with the laying on of hands.
In the New Testament, we see that
the apostles laid hands on certain men set apart to serve in ministry. The Seven, whether they were elders or
deacons, were set apart for ministry by the laying on of hands of the apostles.[11] The prophets and teachers in
Timothy had a gift that he had
received through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders, and a gift
that he had received through the laying on of Paul’s hands.[12] In the epistle of I Timothy, Paul gave
Timothy instructions regarding what kind of men were to be appointed as
bishops, and also instructed him to “Lay hands on no man suddenly...”[13]
It is possible that Timothy practiced ordaining elders by the laying on of
hands.
In Acts 14:23, we see that Paul
and Barnabas ordained elders “in every church.”[14] The book of Titus directs Titus to ordain
elders in every city.[15] Though two different Greek words are used,
both relate to the idea of choosing or appointing.
I Timothy 3 and Titus 1 list
requirements for church overseers. The
role of church overseer was a role that was recognized by others in the
body. We see that elders in the New Testament
were pointed out by the apostles. These
passages also list requirements for one to serve as a deacon, indicating that
deacons were pointed out as well. It is
possible that elders and deacons were appointed by the laying on of hands.
We see three types of ministries
that we might refer to as ‘ordained’ ministries: apostles, elders, and deacons. These types of ministers were somewhat
‘officially recognized’ in their work in ministry. Many of the men in these roles in New
Testament times may have been ordained
or separated to ministry by the laying on of hands.
The Twelve apostles were ordained
by Christ Himself. We do not know if He
laid hands on them as a part of this ordination. The book of Acts begins to call Paul and
Barnabas ‘apostles’ only after prophets and teachers laid hands on them for
what the Spirit described as “the work whereunto I have called them.”[16] These men had already been called to the
work. The prophets and teachers
separated Paul and Barnabas to this work.
There is evidence, however, that
Paul was an apostle before this. Jesus
sent Paul to the Gentiles when He called Him on the road to
Galatians 1:16-17
16 To reveal his
Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred
not with flesh and blood:
17 Neither went I
up to
Paul may have considered himself
to have already been an apostle when he went into
Galatians 2:7-8
7 But
contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed
unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
8 (For he that
wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same
was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
Many traditions
have developed related to the concept of ordination. Many of these have no basis in scripture.
There is not
indication that the elders that Paul and Barnabas appointed ever had to get a
Bible college degree in order to be ordained.
There is no indication that they had to take a multiple-choice
theological test. It is highly doubtful
that any of these men had a letter authorizing them as ‘ordained ministers.’
Another tradition that has arisen
about ordained ministers is that they must earn their living by their
ministry. Paul argues that he and his
fellow apostles who evangelized had a right to receive payment for their
ministry, but he still made tents for a living.[19] Paul encouraged the Ephesian elders to follow
his example of not accepting any man’s silver or gold, but rather working with
his own hands to support himself and others.[20] I Peter 5:2 commands elders not to serve the
flock of God for money, but rather willingly.
If an elder serves the church because he is motivated by getting paid,
he is disobeying scripture.
Considering these examples, we
should expect that many ordained ministers would work for a living.
Many Christians think there are
two kinds of employment: secular employment
and holy employment. Some think that it
is the job of pendeta and other religious professionals to do the holy
work of the kingdom, and that the rest of the believers are supposed to devote
themselves to secular work. Those with
this mindset often think that regular believers are only obligated to attend
church meetings and to pay tithes and offerings to finance the ministry of the pendeta.
This idea is not Biblical. The Bible calls believers a priests,
and not just their leaders.[21] The work of regular believers should be
considered holy and sacred before the Lord.
Paul writes, ‘do all to the glory of God.’[22] Every aspect of the believer’s life must be
consecrated to God.
And the ministry of the church is
not supposed to be limited only to a few religious professionals. In I Corinthians 12 through 14, Romans 12,
and various other passages, we learn that all believers are to use their
gifts to edify one another. Church
meetings are a time for all believers to edify one another.
In Charismatic circles these days,
the concept of ‘five-fold ministry’ has become very popular. Many believers have come to realize that the
modern church system which sees ‘the pastor’ as the central figure in the church
is not the same picture we see in the New Testament. The concept of ‘five-fold ministry’ is taken
from Ephesians 4.
Ephesians 4:11-12
11 And he gave
some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors
and teachers;
12 For the
perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the
body of Christ:
Actually, verse 11 speaks of four
types of ministers. ‘Pastors and
teachers’ in this verse speaks of people gifted to both pastor and teach. So some speak of ‘four fold ministry’ since
four types of ministers are mentioned.
Some speak of ‘five fold ministry’ because five ministries are
mentioned.
It is wonderful that many of the
saints are beginning to study the scriptures and see that there is more to
church ministry than the ministry of ‘pastor.’
But there is also something dangerous about some of the five-fold
ministry going around.
Many people try to squeeze the
concept of five-fold ministry into the concept of professional clergy. Some think that every church must be governed
by a panel of all five of these ministries.
Others think that all apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and
teachers must be professional clergy, be ordained, and earn their money from
their ministry. One damaging teaching is
that all five-fold ministers must be ‘full-time ministers.’
The Bible says nothing about a
special class of ‘full-time’ ministers.
In my country, the
Some think that prophets are
‘full-time ministers.’ The subject of
prophecy and prophets has received a lot of attention in recent years. Many believers feel the Lord has called them
to prophets. Many of these people have
also heard that prophets are ‘full-time ministers’ and think of church meetings
in terms of pulpit and pew type services.
Just imagine how many thousands of believers there must be out there
waiting for God to one day send them to Bible college and have them ordained
with denominational paperwork so that they can be ‘full-time ministers’ and
finally operate in their ministry as prophets.
How free many of these people would feel if they realized that they can
be prophets without quitting their jobs and going to Bible college or being
ordained by a denomination.
One major problem in churches
which prevent prophets from realizing their ministry is the unbiblical order of
church meetings. In I Corinthians 14, we
see that prophets are to be free to minister in church meetings according to
certain guidelines. They are to take
turns and yield the floor to other believers who receive revelations. In this type of environment, there is
opportunity for the budding prophet to exercise his gift under the watchful eye
of a local body until he matures into what the Lord has called him to be.
There is no indication in the New
Testament that prophets become prophets through the laying on of hands. Prophets are set forth in the church by the
Lord. They are prophets by virtue of the
gifts the Lord has put in them, not by ordination through the laying on of
hands. In the Old Testament, we see that
God raised up prophets in many different ways.
There were ‘professional prophets,’ but some of these men were false
prophets. Many true prophets were sent
forth in their ministries when the Lord spoke to them. He didn’t use an official agency to make them
prophets, or a special commission from the nation of
A prophet is known by his
gifts. I Corinthians 14:37 says “If any
man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual....” This comment makes little sense if one were made
a prophet by an ordination ceremony.
There would be no room for one to ‘think himself to be a prophet’ if all
prophets were officially recognized. We
can also see from this verse that, to some extent, determining who is a prophet
can be somewhat subjective. One might
think himself to be a prophet, but the body may not quite recognize it yet.
Some who are promoting the idea of
five-fold ministry think that if a man is a prophet in a church, he should be a
part of five-fold ministry church government.
The Bible does not teach that, by virtue of being a prophet, one is
entitled to rule the church.
Apostles and elders are two types
of ministers we see in scripture that have a ‘governmental’ type of authority
in the church. We see that apostles left
behind elders to care for the churches.
Must elders be five-fold ministers?
The overseers of the church are supposed to be ‘apt to teach’ and are
commanded to pastor the flock of God.[23] They are to pastor in the Biblical sense of
taking care of the needs of sheep. The
word ‘pastor’ here does not mean to become a professional clergyman or to serve
as a CEO of a religious organization.
So, to some extent, all elders are to be able to function as ‘pastors
and teachers.’
A prophet may be appointed as an
overseer in the church as long as he is qualified. But it is possible for a man to be a prophet
and not be mature enough in his own life to be an overseer in the church. A new believer could be a prophet. He would still be a novice. If a prophet does not rule his own house
well, he should not be entrusted with ruling the household of faith.[24]
Being an overseer in the church is
not merely a matter of being gifted.
Unfortunately, many in the Charismatic movement would appoint overseers
based merely on giftedness, and not on the Biblical qualifications set forth in
I Timothy 3 and Titus 1. One could be
full of human charisma and even spiritual gifts, and not be spiritually
mature. Paul wrote that the Corinthians
came behind in no spiritual gift, and yet considered them to be carnal babes in
Christ.[25]
Many of the Charismatics and more
traditional churches ignore the requirements for elders when they appoint educated
ministers as well. One could be a young
novice, not an elder, physically or spiritually; never have even held down a
job, much less demonstrated an ability to rule a household well. An overseer must be one who has been faithful
at ruling his own house well. Many of us
have heard of naughty young people whose parents sent them to Bible college
hoping they would get straightened out there.
Four years later, these young people may have a chance to lead their
spiritual seniors, serving as ‘pendeta.’
An overseer must first prove his
ability through a smaller task of ruling his own house well, before he can be
given the larger task of ruling in the household of faith. As Jesus said,
Luke 16:10 He
that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that
is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.
We should appreciate the gifts and
education of prophets and young Bible teachers.
But we must return to the teaching of scripture about church
overseers. One of the reasons so many
people who feel a ‘call to the ministry’ try to become professional pastors is
because many churches have ignored the Biblical teachings on how to conduct
their meetings. Those who have gifts to
share with the church have little other means of using their gifts than to be
ordained as professional ministers. Our
church system drives unqualified believers to become church overseers to find
an outlet for their gifts, and we willingly accept them.
One should be able to use his gift
in the assembly without being an elder of the church. We shouldn’t set people up as overseers of
the church merely because they have gifts that need to be shared with the
congregation.
Some think that merely because one
claims to be called and gifted as an Ephesians 4:11 ‘pastor and teacher’ that
he is qualified to be an overseer in the church. There are actual character and lifestyle
requirements for being an overseer in the church. One must be able to pastor his own family
well, for example, before being given.
The gift of ‘pastor’ should be
seen as something separate from the role of church overseership. A man with the gift of pastor who serves as
overseer in the church at
Overseers of the church are not to
be novices in the faith. But it is
possible that a man who is very young in the Lord could have a budding gift of
pastor in him. This gift may enable him
to gather other younger believers around himself and teach them the ways of the
Lord. If a young has such a gift in him,
it does not mean that we take the man and make him an overseer.
Many of us have seen believers who
have had real gifts to care for others, but their own personal lives were in
disarray. For example, a man may be able
to teach and comfort other believers, but he has marital problems and his
children disobey him. Such a man should
not be appointed as an overseer or deacon.[26] Allow the man time to grow in holiness until
he is mature and able to rule his own house well.
We do a great disservice to the
body of Christ if we appoint leaders who are merely gifted and not mature. ‘Elders’ comes from the Greek ‘presbuteros’
which means ‘older man.’ If we would
allow gifted members of the body to grown and mature to the point where they
have their houses and lives under control, think how much better off our
churches would be.
An elder is prepared for ministry
to the church by being a good husband and father in his own household. There is now a great emphasis in the church
on finding spiritual fathers and mentors.
Is it any wonder that we sense a great need for spiritual fathers,
consider that we have ignored the scriptural teaching concerning elders of the
church? Instead of appointing elders as
overseers, we follow church leaders based on their educational accomplishments,
denominational ordination papers, and polished oratory abilities.
Many of those who are spiritually
capable of being elders are overlooked and ignored because they did not choose
‘ministry’ as their occupation when they were young. If we would recognize the true spiritual
elders among us, men that meet the descriptions laid out in the epistles to
Timothy and Titus, then we would know who to turn to act toward us as
fathers. These fathers have already learned
to be fathers by ruling their own natural households well, and raising their
own children up in the way of the Lord.
There is no
indication in Ephesians 4:11 that all pastors and teachers are ordained by the
laying on of hands. Elders are to
pastor, but that doesn’t mean that all gifted as pastors are elders. Ironically, the word ‘pastor’ has taken on so
many other meanings from tradition, that it is hard to understand the true
meaning of the word. A ‘pastor’ is a man
who takes care of sheep.
There is no indication in
Ephesians 4:11 that that ‘pastor’ means any of the following:
1.
The head of a legal
organization, registered with the government, called a ‘church.’
2.
The man who preaches a
sermon on Sunday morning.
3.
The man who performs
weddings.
4.
The man who receives
administers from the offering plate.
The word
‘pastor’ has to do with caring for sheep.
In ancient
Ironically, some men are called
‘pastors’ who keep their fellow brethren at arms length. Imagine a mega-church pastors who has hired a
mean [galak] secretary to screen out calls and visits from believers who
are not deemed important. Such men
usually act as though ‘pastor’ means business manager of a religious
organization. They prefer to train a few
key leaders who train others further down the hierarchy. Some men in this position like acting as
CEO’s rather than really caring for sheep.
Perhaps pastoring is not truly their gift. Other men find themselves frustrated acting
as CEO’s and making executive decisions instead of really developing
relationships with the believers under their care and pastoring them.
The pastor and teacher has a gift
from the Lord. The overseer is to be a
man who demonstrates certain characteristics in his life. The pastor and teacher is what he is by
spiritual gift. Overseers are to be
recognized and ordained to that position, by virtue of their spiritual
character. Spiritual giftedness as a
pastor is not enough to be appointed as an overseer. One must also have character which is
developed by following the Lord.
The twelve apostles were chosen by
the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Acts starts
calling Paul and Barnabas ‘apostles’ after their experience recorded in Acts
13. The Spirit spoke saying to separate
Saul and Barnabas to the work to which he had called them. The prophets and teachers there laid hands on
them and sent them out. Scripture refers
to Timothy and Silas as apostles.[27] Timothy received a gift through prophecy,
with the laying on of hands of the elders.[28] It doesn’t specify which gift was given this
way, but it seems similar to how Saul and Barnabas were sent out on their first
apostolic journey together.
Apostles are gifted members of the
body of Christ. But we also see that
they can be sent out by the Spirit with the laying on of hands of other
brethren.
Many denominations ordain
evangelists. Were evangelists ordained
by the laying on of hands in scripture?
The word ‘evangelist’ occurs twice
in the New Testament. Paul uses the term
‘evangelist’ in reference to the ministry of Timothy:
II Timothy 4:5
But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an
evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
Some believe that Timothy was not
especially gifted as an evangelist, but that he was told to do the work of one
anyway. Others see this as a verse
designating Timothy as an evangelist.
The epistles indicate that Timothy helped Paul evangelize on their
journeys together.[29]
As we have read before, Timothy
had a gift in him given by prophecy accompanied by the laying on of hands. But we must keep in mind that Scripture
refers to Timothy among the ‘apostles of Christ.’ He may have received the laying on of hands
in connection to his ministry as an apostle or some other spiritual gift.[30]
Acts 21:8 calls Philip ‘the
evangelist. This Philip was one of the
seven men chosen to tend to help feed widows in
Today, some traveling ministers
who teach are called ‘evangelists’ even though they don’t do much preaching to
unbelievers. Today, many churches ordain
men as ‘evangelists’ who plan to travel from church to church, instead of
identifying men as evangelists by virtue of their gifts.
If I were to define an
‘evangelist’ based purely on my own church experience growing up in
Pentecostalism, without any study of scripture, I might think that an
evangelist is a preacher who goes from church to church, preaching to believers
in ‘revival’ meetings [KKR] A few
unbelievers might come by. Evangelists
may preach on salvation, or else healing or baptism with the Holy Ghost. Some evangelists seem to preach the same few
sermons over and over again. This might
be my understanding of the term ‘evangelist’ if I based in solely on my church
experience.
If we compare this to Philip the
evangelist’s ministry, we see that Philip went to where the unbelievers were to
preach. He didn’t invite the unbelievers
to come to a church meeting, or even a Gospel tent meeting to hear his
message. Philip went to a Samaritan city
where there was no church, and preached there. This is very different from preaching in the
friendly territory of a church building or Christian [KKR] revival
meeting.
Many use the word ‘Gospel’
narrowly to refer to a specific set of doctrines that relate to salvation. But we see in the Bile that ‘Gospel’ is used
in a broader sense. Jesus speaks of the
Gospel of the kingdom. The first four
books of the New Testament scriptures, which tell the story of Christ, are
referred to as ‘Gospels.’ An evangelist
is one who proclaims the good news of the Gospel. We need to keep in mind that the ‘Gospel’ is
not a very narrow set of doctrines when we consider what an evangelist is, and
the message they are to preach.
[If possible, fine patristic
quote saying it is the duty of the evangelist to tell of the miracles of
Christ, etc. found in Evangelism in the Early Church.]
One of the main reasons for
misunderstanding of the roles of various ministries is the fact that so many churches
do not follow the Biblical commands for church meetings found in I Corinthians
14 and Hebrews 10:24-25. They see many
types of ministries in the Bible besides that of pastor or elder, and yet
church tradition places so much emphasis on ordained ministers speaking in
meetings.
Some view the Ephesians 4:11
ministries as professional clergy roles.
The problem with this idea is that it is based on the idea that only a
certain few members of the body of Christ can speak in church. The Bible teaches us about the ‘manifold’
grace of God. There are many gifts, not
only five, and believers should use these gifts to build one another up in
church meetings. As important as these
five ministries are, other gifts also need to be expressed in the body of Christ.
One does not need to be an
‘officer’ of the church to use his gift in the assembly. Elders are to watch over the flock and
protect it. But the meetings are for all
believers to use their gifts to edify one another, and not exclusively for the
leaders.
The belief that only ‘officers’
should teach or exhort the assembly has led to many unqualified, but gifted,
members of the body being appointed as overseers. We must learn to allow freedom for all
members of the body to minister, and not to appoint unqualified people to
ordained ministries because they are gifted.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2002
Chapter 9
The Case for Apostles
The idea of there being modern
apostles is very popular in some circles, and very controversial in
others. Much hype and fluff is being
taught about apostleship these days, but real apostolic ministry is genuinely
needed in the church today.
Different Kinds of Apostles
“Apostle’ comes from the Greek word apostolos,
which can be translated as ‘sent one.’
Hebrews 3:1 identifies Jesus Christ as an apostle. Jesus was sent forth from the Father.
During His earthly ministry, Jesus
designated twelve men as ‘apostles’ and sent them forth before Himself to
preach and heal in towns and villages He was to visit. These men traveled with Christ, and He taught
them during His time here on earth.
Judas, one of the Twelve, betrayed Jesus, and was replaced by Matthias
after Christ’s ascension.
The following
verses give Peter’s description of the requirements for being one of the Twelve
apostles:
Acts 1:21-22
21 Wherefore of these men
which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out
among us,
22 Beginning from the
baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be
ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
We see here that the Twelve were
all witnesses of the resurrection of Christ and had spent time with Christ and
the other of the Twelve apostles from the time of John the Baptist until some
time before Pentecost.
Later in the Bible, we read of
apostles who do not meet this criteria:
who were not with Christ from the time of John the Baptist. In Acts 1, Peter describes the requirements for
replacing Judas as one of the Twelve, not the requirements for being an
apostle. The Twelve apostles are given
unique honor. The Twelve will sit on
Twelve thrones, judging the Twelve tribes of
Pre-Ascension Apostles Beside
the Twelve
Let us consider the other
apostles, besides the Twelve, mentioned in scripture. In I Corinthians 15, Paul tells us that after
the resurrection, Christ appeared to Peter, then to the Twelve, then to 500
brethren, then to James and then He was seen of ‘all the apostles.’ Jesus was seen of ‘all the apostles’ after
the Twelve. Perhaps there were other
apostles besides James and the Twelve that Christ appeared to.
The Greek word apostolos is
the noun form closely related to the verb apostello which means ‘to
send.’ One of the forms of the word apostello
appears in Luke 10:2, which refers to the sending forth of the Seventy. The Seventy were sent forth with a mission
nearly identical to that given to the Twelve.
The Gospel of Mark actually calls the Twelve ‘apostles’ in connection
with their being sent out to preach on one of these missions. Some consider the seventy to have been
apostles as well. Hippolytus, in the
third century, wrote of the seventy apostles.[31]
Two passages of scripture indicate
that James, the Lord’s brother, was an apostle.
Galatians
1:19 But other of the apostles saw I
none, save James the Lord's brother.
I
Corinthians 15:7 After that, he was seen
of James; then of all the apostles.
Post-Ascension Apostles
The Twelve were called apostles
before Christ rose from the dead. But
Ephesians 4 tells of gifts that God gave unto men after the ascension of
Christ. Among these gifts are
apostles.
Ephesians
4:7-13
7 But unto every one of us is given grace
according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on
high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he
also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
10 He that descended is the same also that
ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets;
and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the
work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith,
and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of
the stature of the fulness of Christ:
The apostles, prophets,
evangelists, pastors and teachers are gifts Christ received from God for the
church after His ascension. Verse 13
tells that they are given until we reach the full measure of the stature of
Christ.
Watchman Nee
makes a strong case for the difference between the Twelve and the
post-ascension apostles in his book The Normal Christian Church Life:
The Son came to
glorify the Father; the Spirit has come to glorify the Son. The Father then
appointed Christ to be "the Apostle"; the Son while on earth
appointed "the twelve" to be apostles. The Son has returned to the
Father, and now the Spirit is on earth appointing other men to be apostles. The
apostles appointed by the Holy Spirit cannot join the ranks of those appointed
by the Son, but nonetheless they are apostles. The apostles we read of in the
fourth chapter of Ephesians are clearly not the original twelve, for those were
appointed when the Lord was still on earth, while these date their
appointment to apostleship after the ascension of the Lord - they were
the gifts of the Lord Jesus to His Church after His glorification. The twelve
apostles then were the personal followers of the Lord Jesus, but the apostles
now are ministers for the building up of the Body of Christ. We must
differentiate clearly between the apostles who were witnesses to the
resurrection of Christ (Acts 1:22,26), and the apostles who are ministers for
the edifying of the Body of Christ. It is evident, therefore, that God has
other apostles beside the original twelve.[32]
Some think that the only apostles
in scripture were the Twelve and the apostle Paul. They claim that Paul should have been the one
to replace Judas Iscariot. Paul did not meet the criteria for being one of the
Twelve listed in Acts 1:21-22. In fact,
Paul recognized that he was not one of the Twelve in I Corinthians 15:4-8,
where he says that Christ appeared to the Twelve apostles before appearing to
him. Paul was a post-ascension apostle,
but he was not the only post ascension apostle.
Barnabas was also an apostle. A careful study of Luke will show that Luke
only begins to call Paul an apostle after he and Barnabas were sent out in Acts
13. We also so that, in the book of
Acts, Luke only calls Paul an apostle in connection with Barnabas.
Acts 14:4 But the
multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with
the apostles.
Acts 14:14 Which
when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and
ran in among the people, crying out,
Paul himself indicated that he
recognized that Barnabas was an apostle in I Corinthians 9:6.
I Thessalonians 1:1 identifies the
authors of the epistle as Paul, Silas, and Timothy. Unlike many Pauline epistles, this epistle is
primarily written in the third person plural, using the word ‘we.’. It is not the case that Paul alone refers to
himself as ‘we.’ The authors, Paul,
Silas, and Barnabas, all address their audience. Chapter 2 continues to refer to the authors
as ‘we.’ Consider the following verse,
I Thessalonians 2:2
But even after that we had suffered before, and were shamefully
entreated, as ye know, at
Paul, Silas, and Timothy had been
treated badly by unbelievers in
A few verses later, we find an
interesting statement:
I Thessalonians 2:6
Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we
might have been burdensome, as the apostles of Christ.
Here Paul, Silas, and Timothy all
refer to themselves as apostles of Christ!
Apparently, they all felt that Christ had sent them out to preach the
Gospel.
Some think that apostleship was limited
to the Twelve and Paul, but we see that the scriptures do not agree. Barnabas, Silas, and Timothy—men who
participated in the same type of work as Paul—were all apostles.
Other Post-Ascension Apostles
Watchman Nee thought that either
Apollos or Sosthenes may have been an apostle as well. Consider the following verse:2
I Corinthians 4:9
For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were
appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels,
and to men.
The immediate context is talking
about the ministries of Paul and Apollos.
But Sosthenes is listed as a coauthor of the epistle in I Corinthians
1:1. Paul may be referring to one of
them as an apostle.
Consider this verse:
Romans 16:7
Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are
of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
Either Andronicus and Junia were
notable apostles, or they were noted among those who were apostles. Some argue that ‘Junia’ is a female name,
though scholars have different opinions on the subject.3
Paul had many other co-workers who
traveled with him and did apostolic type ministry. Titus traveled with Paul, and was sent to
young churches to strengthen him, the same type of ministry that Timothy was
involved in. Paul instructed Titus to
ordained elders in
The Colossian church had never
seen Paul. From the references to Epaphras
in Colossians, it is likely that the Colossian church had been planted by
Epaphras. Maybe he was an apostle or
possibly an evangelist.
The following verses speaks of
other ‘apostles.’
II Corinthians 8:23
Whether any do inquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellowhelper
concerning you: or our brethren be inquired of, they are the messengers of the
churches, and the glory of Christ.
The word for ‘messenger’ here is
the Greek apostoloi—a plural form for apostles. These ‘apostles of the churches’ that Paul
writes of here may have been sent for the purpose of assisting in the delivery
of money donated for the poor saints in Judea.
Writing to the
Philippians, Paul calls Epaphraditus 'your apostle.'
Philippians
2:25 Yet I supposed it necessary to send
to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellowsoldier,
but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants.
Paul, Silas,
and Barnabas were 'apostles of Christ.' They went to new territories, evangelizing
unbelievers. But it seems that churches
also had authority to send out 'apostles' with authority to carry out specific
tasks.
In his article Are There
Apostles Today?, Don Walker writes,
In addition to these, there are
others who, by inference, could be added to the list: Apollos (I Cor. 4:6-13),
Titus (II Cor. 8:23), two unnamed brethren (II Cor. 8:23), Erastus (Acts
19:22), Tychius (II Tim. 4:12), Judas (called Barsabbas) (Acts 15:22-23). [33]
These verses use the Greek word
for ‘send’ which is closely related to the word apostolos.
What do the Twelve apostles and
the apostles Paul and Barnabas have in common?
Are there any common features that we can examine to help us understand
the meaning of the term ‘apostle’ as it is used in the New Testament. Apostles are ‘sent ones,’ but what does that
mean?
Matthew and Mark both start to
call the Twelve ‘apostles’ in connection with their being sent on evangelistic
journeys to preach the Gospel. Matthew 10:2 tells how Christ labeled the Twelve
as apostles. Verse 5 of this passage
shows that the apostles were sent (a form of the Greek word apostollo—a
verb form closely related to apostolos (“apostle”) is derived.) Mark 6:7 uses a form of the Greek verb apostollo
to describe the when Christ sent the apostles out on their evangelistic
journey. Mark only begins to call the
men apostolos in Mark 6:30, after the apostles had returned from the journey
on which they had been sent.
Acts only begins to call Paul and
Barnabas ‘apostles’ after they had been sent on an evangelistic journey,
also. Timothy and Silas are also
referred to as ‘apostles.’[34] They also went out on evangelistic
journeys.
The Twelve apostles went out on a
mission exclusively to Israelites to preach repentance and the
Watchman Nee made some interesting
points about apostleship.
Our Lord said, "The servant is
not greater than his Lord: neither the apostle [Greek] than He that sent
him" (Jn. 13:16). Here we have a definition of the term
"apostle." It implies being sent out - that is all, and that is
everything. However good human intention may be, it can never take the place of
divine commission. Today those who have been sent out by the Lord to preach the
Gospel and to establish churches call themselves missionaries, not apostles,
but the word "missionary" means the very same thing as "apostle,"
i.e. "the sent one." It is the Latin form of the Greek equivalent,
"apostolos." Since the meaning of the two words is exactly the same,
I fail to see the reason why the true sent ones of today prefer to call
themselves "missionaries" rather than "apostles."
Here we see that the word missionary
actually comes from a Latin word used to translate the Greek apostolos. We need to be careful, however, to realize
that not all who go by the term missionary are truly apostles in the New
Testament sense of the word. Some missionaries
are foreign actually foreign evangelists, teachers, or prophets, or even
humanitarian aid workers who were not sent out by the Spirit to do the same
type of work as Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13.
Some use the term missionary to refer to any foreigner engaged in
Christian ministry in another country.
Considering the
nature of Biblical apostolic work, and the nature of church planting missions,
we should expect that some missionaries really are Ephesians 4:11
apostles. Many missionaries sense a call
of God to preach in foreign fields and to plant new churches.
Paul wrote of ‘the signs of an
apostle.’
II Corinthians 12:12
Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in
signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.
We see here that signs and wonders
accompanied Paul’s ministry as an apostle.
[Present vie—is it from Your
spiritual Gifts can Help your church grow?—that the signs of an apostle that
Paul speaks of are his sufferings and footnote.]]
Paul lists another mark of his
apostleship in I Corinthians 9:2, where he says, ‘for the seal of mine
apostleship are ye in the Lord.’ The
church in
We must keep in mind that Paul did
not ‘plant’ the church in
There are many believers who are
uncomfortable with the idea of modern apostleship. Some of the objections, like the idea of the
Twelve and Paul being the only apostles, are addressed in this passage.
Others are rightly alarmed at some
of the hype and weak teachings concerning apostleship. It is easy to see how the modern trend toward
men calling themselves apostles and attempting to attract pastors to submit
their churches under their authority in certain Charismatic circles would cause
concern among Christians were are serious about Biblical Christianity. In the
Because of the strange teachings
and disturbing trends that go under the label of ‘apostolic restoration’ some
may be tempted to reject the modern role of apostolic ministry altogether. But this is not a proper response. Instead, we should embrace the Biblical
ministry of apostleship, and reject unbiblical extremes.
There are other objections to
apostolic ministry. One question that
some might want to ask is this: “If the
New Testament scriptures were written by apostles, and there are modern
apostles, then couldn’t these modern apostles add new books to the Bible?”
If we look at the New Testament
scriptures, we see that only a small number of the apostles named in these
books actually contributed any books to the New Testament. In fact, some of authors of New Testament
scripture, like Mark, Luke, and Jude, aren’t specifically called ‘apostles’ in
scripture. Most of the apostles were not
chosen by God to write scripture. So we
can see that, though the majority of New Testament scriptures were written by
men referred to in scripture as ‘apostles,’ not all apostles were chosen by God
to write New Testament scripture. Neither James the son of Alphaeus nor Simon
Zealotes left us with any New Testament scripture. Barnabas was a post-ascension apostle, but he
didn’t contribute any books to the canon either. Those of us who believe in a closed canon can
also see the Biblical role for modern apostles, who like Barnabas, are sent out
as apostles, but not empowered to add books to the Bible.
Some say that all apostles must
have seen the Lord, based on I Corinthians 9:1.
Let us look at the verse.
I Corinthians 9:1
Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our
Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?
Is Paul saying here that all
apostles have seen the Lord? This seems
unlikely. Paul also asks ‘Am I not
free?’ If freedom were a requirement for
apostleship, then did Paul lose his apostleship when he became a Roman
prisoner? Did John lose his apostleship
when he was imprisoned on
In I Corinthians 9, Paul is
listing his qualifications to receive payment for his ministry as an apostle—a
right he waived for the good of the Corinthian saints. Paul being free, and not a slave, was
certainly related to the issue of receiving payment. Slaves did not receive payment. The fact that Paul had seen the Lord was all
the more reason to value his ministry, but he does not state that all apostles
would have seen the Lord.
It is possible that some of the
post-ascension apostles who came out of the
Many Christians will confess their
belief that the Bible contains all the doctrinal knowledge that we as
Christians need to know. They will confess
to believe in sola scriptura.
But when it comes to the issue of the ministries of the church, they
neglect the teachings of scripture in favor of tradition. Instead of believing in the Biblical system
of elders, they believe churches should be run by Bible college graduates who,
in some cases, don’t fit the Biblical description of what an elder ought to be.
The Bible leaves us with a
description of the types of ministers God raises up to evangelize new
areas. One of the main ways God raises
up new churches that we see in the New Testament record is by sending out
apostles.
John Wesley’s name is famous
now. His work as an evangelist made him
famous throughout the world. In John
Wesley’s day, the role of the evangelist had long been ignored. ‘The ministry’ was seen to be the work of
deacons, priests, and bishops—local settled ministers. John Wesley was actually criticized for
preaching out of doors. It was thought that
preaching had to take place within church buildings.
Nowadays, many evangelical
believers will accept the validity of the role of the evangelist, and don’t
even realize how controversial the ministry was three hundred years ago in
traditional Christendom. But many of
these same brethren will reject the idea of modern apostleship.
The New Testament not only teaches
us how men come to salvation. It also
teaches us about church order and structure.
It tells us of the types of gifts God gives to men. Ephesians 4:11-13 teaches us that apostles
are given “Till we all come in the unity of
the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the
measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ...”
We also see
in the book of Acts and Galatians that God was able to make an apostle out of Saul
of Tarsus without the commissioning of the existing Twelve apostles. We see in Acts 13 that God was able to send
Saul and Barnabas out on a missionary journey as apostles without a special
apostolic ordination from the Twelve apostles.
God is able to raise up apostles through the church.
The church
needs to have a restored understanding of the New Testament ministry of the
apostle. If we recognize the Lord’s
apostles, it will be a great blessing to us and to them. If churches recognize the ministry of the
apostles, then we free up our fellow-brethren that have the potential to grow
into apostleship to do what God has called them to do. If believers recognize the apostolic
ministry, then they will be more willing to give their money to apostles who go
out and preach the gospel in new areas.
Believing the teachings of scripture on this matter will also enable us
to pray with faith for the Lord to send apostles into His harvest.
In the late first century, perhaps
after many of the original twelve apostles had died, we read the following
words from Christ in the book of Revelation.
Revelation 2:2 I
know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear
them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and
are not, and hast found them liars:
Some had come to the Ephesian
church, claiming to be apostles, but they were not. Jesus commended the Ephesians for testing
these so-called apostles. If the only
apostles were the Twelve, Paul, and a few associates, then there would be no
reason for the Ephesian church to test apostles. They would merely need to reject all who
claimed to be apostles aside from the Twelve, Paul, and a few of Paul’s
co-workers. But, since the Lord does
send true apostles, and there are also false apostles, a church must determine
whether an apostle is true or false based on his message and his lifestyle.
The test of apostles is a topic
that is dealt with in The Didache. This
document written toward the late first century, or the beginning of the second
century. It was written during a time
when there were traveling prophets and teachers. Various tests are given to distinguish a true
prophet from a false prophet. The
Didache even refers to some of the traveling ministers as apostles:
11:4 But concerning the apostles
and prophets, so do ye according to the ordinance of the Gospel.
11:5 Let every apostle, when he
cometh to you, be received as the Lord;
11:6 but he shall not abide more
than a single day, or if there be need, a
11:7 but if he abide three days,
he is a false prophet.
11:8 And when he departeth let the
apostle receive nothing save bread, until he findeth shelter;
11:9 but if he ask money, he is a
false prophet..[35]
The Didache is not part of the canon of scripture, and one wonders
whether the Twelve apostles or Paul would have lived up to the criteria of not
abiding for more than three days. But
this work does show that early on, probably at a time period after the death of
the Twelve apostles, that certain traveling ministers were still referred to as
‘apostles.’
The Didache was written during a time in which charismatic ministries,
like those of traveling apostles, prophets and teachers, were still highly valued in the church. The work mentions the importance of the roles
of bishops and deacons alongside the prophets and teachers.[36]
Some time after the writing of the
New Testament, the role of bishop or elder was divided in two roles. One man was appointed as a ‘bishop’ over the
elders of a church. Such a bishop might
be put in leadership over a whole city church.
The settled ministries of bishop, elder, and deacon became increasingly
more important, and the role of itinerant apostles, prophets, and evangelists
came to decrease in prominence.
Over time, churches put more
emphasis on the roles of the settled, ordained, ministries of bishop and
deacon. Many centuries later, the role
of elder and bishop was split into two roles.
One of the elders of the church would exclusively be given the title
‘bishop.’ It came to be believed that
the role and authority of the apostles was inherited by the local church
bishops.
Eusebius, the third century
Christian historian, wrote of the generation immediately following the original
apostles. He wrote of evangelistic
preachers who sold all they had and traveled around preaching the Gospel.
For indeed
most of the disciples of that time, animated by the divine word with a more
ardent love for philosophy,369 had already
fulfilled the command of the Saviour, and had distributed their goods to the
needy.370 Then starting out upon long
journeys they performed the office of evangelists, being filled with the desire
to preach Christ to those who had not yet heard the word of faith, and to
deliver to them the divine Gospels.[37]
Like Paul and Barnabas, these
preachers of the Gospel traveled from place to place, preaching the Gospel,
instructing new converts, and appointing shepherds. This was still a time of great growth of the
church. Eusebius continues:
And when they
had only laid the foundations of the faith in foreign places, they appointed others
as pastors, and entrusted them with the nurture of those that had recently been
brought in, while they themselves went on again to other countries and nations,
with the grace and the co-operation of God. For a great many wonderful works
were done through them by the power of the divine Spirit, so that at the first
hearing whole multitudes of men eagerly embraced the religion of the Creator of
the universe.[38]
In spite of these trends, the idea
of an apostle as a church planter who reached out to new areas continued on in
the church over the centuries. The
traditional role of bishop became very important over time, and many men who
did apostolic work were ordained as bishops.
St. Gregory the Illuminator
(257?-337?) is know as the apostle to the Armenians. Gregory was born in
St. Patrick (389-461) is known as
the apostle of
St. Martin of Tours (c. 315-397)
was the son of a pagan soldier. As a
young man, he wanted to become a Christian, and studied as a catechumen, but
was conscripted in the army. Later, he
was baptized, and was allowed to leave the military. Martin became a monk. Martin became known for the miracles that he
performed, some of which were performed as he evangelized unbelievers. When a new bishop as to be appointed, Martin
was chosen with much support from the common people. Martin preached the Gospel to the village
areas, performing miracles and tearing down pagan sites of worship.[44]
Anskar (801-856) was a monk. He was the head of a monastic school and
taught a local congregation. Anskar saw
visions which led him to do missionary work.
Anskar traveled to
Cyril (827-869) and Methodius
(826-885) were brothers born to a
senatorial family in Thessolonica. They
renounced these honors, and became monks[47]. Cyril labored among the Chaser, a Hun people,
instructing and baptizing their champ (king) and their nation. He appointed pastors and returned to
Cyril co-labored with his brother,
Methodius, on his next mission to the Bulgarians. Boigoris, king of the Bulgarians, had a
sister who was a Christian and who witnessed to him. This king was also fond of hunting. He had built a new palace and wanted it
painted with hunting scenes. Methodius,
as many monks of his day, was an artist.
He was sent to the king who asked him to paint scenes that would strike
terror in those who saw them, hoping for terrifying hunting scenes. But Methodius painted terrifying scenes of
the day of judgment. The king agreed to
be instructed in the Christian faith and was baptized. The populace at first opposed the king’s
conversion, but later followed him in the faith.
Cyril and Methodius also labored
to bring the Gospel to the Moravians.
They developed liturgies for the Moravians in the Slavonic tongue. These two even developed a Slavonic
alphabet. They faced persecution from
other bishops for holding church meetings in the common tongue. Methodius was ordained as an archbishop. Some historical writings say that his brother
Cyril was ordained as well soon before his death, and others say that he died
soon before his ordination. Many
miracles are attributed to these two brothers.
They have been called “the
apostles of
Traditional churches that place a
lot of emphasis on canonized saints like the Roman Catholic Church use the term
‘apostle’ to refer to historical saints like the ones above who brought the
Gospel to new areas. Some ministers of
the Gospel in Protestant movements since the reformation are also sometimes
considered to be apostles.
John Eliot is known as the apostle
to the Indians. He came to the
Massachusetts Bay Colony, an English colony in what would later be the
In his
dealings with the Indians, Eliot was not interested in a mere outward change of
religious beliefs. Rather, his emphasis was on repentance and belief in Jesus
Christ as Savior. Having learned Algonquian, Eliot began teaching Christian
truths to the Indians in their own language. He would begin by describing the
glorious power, goodness, and greatness of God as seen in His creation. By
presenting the ten commandments to the Indians, Eliot pointed out what God
required of them and the punishment which would come from breaking His holy
law. All this was preparatory to the comforting words that "God had sent
Jesus Christ to die for their sins."[49]
Some Indians left their nomadic
lifestyle and formed Christian Indian villages known as ‘praying
villages.’ They based their laws on
Biblical principles. John Eliot
completed a translation of the Bible in Algonquian. In 1663, this became the first version of the
Bible to be printed in
Ludwig Ingwar Nommensen is
sometimes referred to as the “Apostle of the Batak”. In 1861, Nommensen led missionary efforts
from the German Reinish Missionary Society to convert the Batak people to
Christianity. Nommensen won villages and
tribes rather than just individuals.[51]
These men fit a historical use of
the term ‘apostle’ to refer to those who carry the Gospel into new areas,
winning new tribes, villages, towns, cities, or countries to Christ. There are many other foreign missionaries and
local evangelists in
An Apostle’s Measure of Rule
Post-ascension
apostles, like Paul, had a measure of rule that was closely related to their
work. Paul and his coworkers had
authority in the areas where they had introduced the Gospel. Much of what can be learned about the sphere
of apostolic authority is found in Paul’s epistles to the Corinthians.
The
following passage gives us insight into the basis of Paul’s authority in
relation to the Corinthians.
I Corinthians 4:14-16
14 I write not these things
to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
15 For though ye have ten
thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ
Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
16 Wherefore I beseech you,
be ye followers of me.
Paul
was a spiritual father to the Corinthians.
He did not merely nurture them in a fatherly manner. The Corinthian saints were actually born
again through Paul’s ministry. Before
Paul and his coworkers came to
I Corinthians 3:5-8
5 Who then is Paul, and who
is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every
man?
6 I have planted, Apollos
watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he
that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the
increase.
8 Now he that planteth and
he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according
to his own labour.
Here we see that Paul had planted in
I Corinthians 3:9-11
9 For we are
labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
10 According to
the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid
the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how
he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that
is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Paul
laid the foundation of Christ in the sense that he, assisted with his
co-laborers, was the first to win men to Christ in
Because
of this, Paul and his companions could claim a measure of rule that extended to
the Corinthians. We read about these
boundaries of Paul’s authority in II Corinthians 10. In this chapter, Paul is addressing the issue
of the so-called ‘super-apostles,’ self-promoting false apostles who were
troubling the Corinthians.
The
false apostles were apparently foolishly boasting about the Corinthian church,
as if they had started it. Paul and his
co-authors pointed out that if they were to boast about the Corinthians, they
would not be fools for doing so. The
Corinthian church was the fruit of their labor in the Gospel.[53]
II Corinthians 10:13-16
13 But we will
not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the
rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you.
14 For we stretch
not ourselves beyond our measure, as though we reached not unto you: for we are
come as far as to you also in preaching the gospel of Christ:
15 Not boasting
of things without our measure, that is, of other men's labours; but having
hope, when your faith is increased, that we shall be enlarged by you according
to our rule abundantly,
16 To preach the
gospel in the regions beyond you, and not to boast in another man's line of
things made ready to our hand.
Here
we see that Paul and his coworker’s authority extended to the church in
Paul
generally tried to preach in unreached areas.
Romans 15:20-24
20 Yea, so have I
strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build
upon another man's foundation:
21 But as it is
written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not
heard shall understand.
22 For which
cause also I have been much hindered from coming to you.
23 But now having
no more place in these parts, and having a great desire these many years to
come unto you;
24 Whensoever I
take my journey into Spain, I will come to you: for I trust to see you in my
journey, and to be brought on my way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat
filled with your company.
One
reason Paul had not yet gone to
Why
did Paul not want to build upon another man’s foundation? If Paul and his companions laid the
foundation of Christ in a
The
Bible does not teach that an apostle must minister exclusively in unreached
areas. Paul returned to churches started
through his ministry to strengthen and encourage them. Early in his ministry, before being sent out
as recorded in Acts 13, Paul had taught an existing church in
When Paul came to
Some think that there is a chain
of command in the kingdom which requires all elders of the church to submit to
all apostles. People who think like this
may be inclined to see Ephesians 4:11 as some sort of military pecking order. The church is not supposed to be like a
Gentile kingdom in which there are rulers who lord it over others. Jesus warned the apostles to be servants, and
not to lord over one another.[54] Peter instructed the elders of the church not
to lord over the flock of God.[55]
It is interesting that Paul,
though an apostle, submitted to the elders of the
Paul did not have the measure of
rule in the
Paul
could minister to churches outside of his special measure of rule. Though Paul did not found the church at
Three
passages of New Testament scripture speak of the appointing of elders. Acts 14:23 tells of Paul and Barnabas
appointing elders in the churches started through their ministries. Naturally, these churches fell into the
measure of rule of the Paul and Barnabas.
In I Timothy
3:1-7, we see that Paul gave Timothy a list of requirements for anyone who was
to appointed as an overseer in the church.
The epistles makes reference to elders already present in the church.[57] But it is possible that Timothy was still
preparing to appoint bishops as well.
From the book of Acts, it seems that Timothy was with Paul when
Titus
1 shows us that Paul had left Titus behind in Crete to set things in order and
to ordain elders on the
In
Acts, we see that, early in their ministry in
In the
early days of the church in
When
Paul came to
We
also see that Paul wanted churches to grow and mature, rather than to grow
increasingly more dependant on him. In I
Corinthians 5, Paul addressed the issue of a man who was committing sexual
immorality with his father’s wife. Paul
was willing to act as a judge in the case and tell them what to do. But in chapter 6, Paul reproves the Corinthians
for not appointing judges among themselves to settle issues that arise. Paul wanted the Corinthians to grow up and be
increasingly more responsible. He did
not merely want them to remain as infants dependant on himself to take care of
their every spiritual need.
One of
the uses of the Greek word for ‘church’, ekklesia, is in reference to
all the believers in a city. The New
Testament uses the singular ‘church’ to refer to the church in one city, and the
plural ‘churches’ to refer to churches in more than one city. Even the
Paul
was planting churches in new cities. He
did not go to a city that already had a church, and to evangelism among those
in that city who had not yet believed, and claim these believers as the seal of
his apostleship, or his measure of rule.
It could be that this is possible, but that Paul felt especially called
to preach in new areas. There is clearly
a lot of evangelistic work that can be done in cities that already have a
Christian witness. The Twelve apostles
spent many years evangelizing in
In
recent years, many are promoting the idea that there are modern apostles. Most books and articles on the subject are
coming from the Charismatic movement.
Many of the teachings about what an apostle is bear little resemblance
to the ministry of apostle as described in the New Testament.
Wolfgang
Simson wrote in an issue of House2House magazine:
In a way,
this is a corrupted version of apostolic ministry. If I were the devil, what I
would do first if genuine apostolic and prophetic ministries were about to
appear, is to throw up a smoke screen. I would throw up false types, or
corrupted types of these ministries and call it the real thing, so that
everybody would be confused when the real thing came. Nobody would recognize it
because converts would be already fooled, the books would be already written.[60]
Let us
consider some of the ideas of what an apostle is that are prevalent.
Some think that an apostle is the equivalent of the head of a denomination or the leader of many churches. Basically, this view makes an apostle something like an archbishop, cardinal, or pope.
What
is the basis for this view of apostleship?
The apostle Paul did have spiritual responsibility for many
churches. But Paul and his coworkers had
a measure of rule that extended to these churches because they had actually
started them by evangelizing unreached areas.
Being an apostle is not merely a matter of being given responsibility
for many churches. Many of the
hierarchical positions of modern church governments do not have scriptural justification.
Some
in the Charismatic movement think that an apostle is a preacher who is just
more ‘anointed’ than other preachers.
Some who see a preacher who seems really ‘anointed’, does greater
miracles than other preachers, preaches better sermons, and has a large
following, and think “That man must be an apostle.”
One
can be a gifted miracle worker and a great Bible teacher without being an
apostle. Apostles aren’t apostles merely
because they are ‘anointed.’ They are
apostles because the Lord sent them out as apostles. The Twelve apostles, Paul, and Barnabas were
all sent out on apostolic missions to preach the Gospel to those who had not
heard it. Apostleship is not merely a
matter of having impressive gifts. An
apostle is one who is sent out.
One
teaching that is circulating is that local church leaders need to have an
‘apostolic covering.’ The term
‘covering’ is not used in the New Testament to refer to apostles. I Corinthians 11 speaks of ‘coverings’ used
to cover women’s heads, but not of apostolic covering.
The
apostolic covering teaching is that a local church pastor needs to have
authority over him, so he goes out and finds a super-anointed preacher who
serves as an archbishop over many churches, either giving orders to local
pastors, or giving them fatherly advice.
It is
good for local church leaders to seek advice from other men who are mature in
the Lord. Maybe this is one reason why
the Bible shows us that early churches had a plurality of elders, and not just
one pastor.
We
know that Paul went to
Paul’s
comments to the Corinthians on the measure of rule of apostles are very helpful
to us as we consider some of these new concepts of apostleship. Paul shows that his measure of rule extended
to the areas where he had evangelized.
The false ‘super-apostles’ tried apparently tried to exert authority
over the Corinthian church, though it was not the fruit of their own labors. [61]
Let us
compare the situation of the Corinthians to some of the modern doctrines of
apostleship. If a modern preacher who
calls himself an apostle tries to claim authority over churches that were not
started through his own labors and begins to boast about his authority over
these churches, isn’t he following the example of the false apostles Paul
describes in II Corinthians 10?
The
role of the apostles who laid the foundation of Christ in
Fortunately
the Biblical apostles worked to make churches less dependant on
themselves. They wanted the churches to
grow up and develop in the things of God.
Eventually, the apostles that founded these churches would die. These churches needed to be mature and strong
in the faith to function properly without these founding apostles that had a
special measure of rule. Some who think
of the role of modern apostles as some sort of ‘super-anointed mega-bishop’ try
to make churches more dependant on men who have no Biblical claim to a
special apostolic measure of rule in these churches.
With the
resurgence of interest in apostles in recent years, some occasionally mention
the idea of ‘apostolic teams.’ Often,
what is meant by this is a team of ‘five-fold ministers’ lead by a man labeled
as an ‘apostle’. We do not see any
specific examples of this type of team mentioned in scripture. What we do see is that apostles would go out
in groups of two or more. Jesus sent the
twelve apostles out in pairs on their apostolic mission to
As time went on, a number of men
would travel with Paul to different places.
Paul was nearly always ministering with another apostle, or at least
another co-worker who may or may not have been an apostle. When Paul and Barnabas were ministering
together, Luke’s account in Acts pays much more attention to Paul. The scriptures do not teach us that Paul
considered himself to have authority over Barnabas, or that Barnabas considered
himself to have authority over Paul. As
mature brethren, they may have considered themselves to be equal partners in
ministry. We read nothing about an
argument about lack of one refusing to submit to the other’s leadership when
they decided not to travel together as recorded in Acts 15:36-40. Later, Paul would travel with young men like
Timothy, with whom he had a father-son type relationship. Naturally, Paul had a strong leadership role
when working with younger men whom he discipled in the Lord.
There is no indication that the
Lord Jesus set one apostle over another when He sent them out in pairs. Late in Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Twelve
were still arguing about who among them would be the greatest. Jesus’ response to this was to teach them
that the greatest among them would be the servant of all.[64]
There
is a pattern in scripture that apostles minister together in pairs or
groups. Similarly, we see a plurality of
elders in the churches in the New Testament.
In the New Testament, we see the importance of teamwork rather than
apostles or elders each working individually as a ‘one-man show.’
Some
in the house church movement in the
Paul’s
team went into un-evangelized territories and preached the Gospel to those who
did not know it. They planted churches
in the sense that, through their preaching, churches of Christ were started where, before, there
were no churches of Christ. Paul did not
merely go to a city that had a great number of believers and start up a new
meeting and call it ‘the church.’
Many
church planters start a new meeting in a city that already has a church. A preacher may come to a town that has many
Christians. He may rent a room in a
hotel or some other facility, pass out fliers, and convince believers to attend
the meetings he leads. By preaching
exciting sermons and arranging for such things as exciting music, good Sunday
school programs, and good parking for those who attend, the meeting may grow. Many people consider this type of work to be
‘church planting.’ It is possible to
‘plant a church’ by merely drawing believers away from other meetings. This is not the type of church planting that
Paul did. This is not the type of
evangelistic church planting that is truly apostolic. An apostle who spends some of his ministry
time doing this type of ministry does not have the same measure of rule that he
would have in a church where he laid the initial foundation of Christ.
That
is not to say that there is no room for Christian workers starting new meetings
in areas where there are already believers.
No doubt, the number of house-to-house meetings in
In the
There
is definitely a place for church planters who do not go off on apostolic
ministries. In a sense, a responsible
Christian who opens his home to start a new meeting when another house church
meeting in his city or village fills up could be considered a house church
planter. A few Christian families with a
heart for evangelism may want to host a new house church meeting in an
un-evangelized area. House church
planting can be an effort of the local, city-wide church, or the work of an
itinerate apostle.
One
view of apostleship, which is growing in popularity with some in the house
church movement, is the view that an apostle is a man who has a great vision
for the church who imparts this vision, and encourages believers to be more
sincere in their faith. Apostles, as
preachers of the Gospel, should do these things. But one can have a great vision for the
church to impart to the saints and encourage saints to be sincere without being
an apostle. Prophets, evangelists,
teachers, and brethren with the gift of encouragement can do these things.
Some
describe apostles as men whose hearts are full of compassion, who weep over the
church, but who would be ignored by most Christians today.
The
label ‘apostle’ is used as a mark of spirituality today. It seems that some preachers add the title
‘apostle’ to their list of honorific titles for the purpose of exalting
themselves. In the first century, apostles
were considered to be the offscouring of all things.[66] In II Corinthians 11 and 12, Paul lists the
sufferings he endured for Christ’s sake.
In his day, bearing the title ‘apostle’ did not win him accolades when
he came into a new town.
No
doubt, apostles should have hearts full of compassion for the church. Paul had a great burden on his heart for the
churches he had planted and other churches as well. Paul wrote to the Roman Christians that he
always made mention of them in his prayers.[67] Epaphras was likely one of the church
planters that introduced the Gospel to Collosae. He also ‘labored fervently’ for them in
prayer.[68]
Paul described his great burden
for the churches in II Corinthians 11:28-29
28 Beside those
things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the
churches.
29 Who is weak,
and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?
Apostles
certainly must have great hearts. They
may be unrecognized. But one can have a
great heart full of compassion, pray fervently for churches, and go
unrecognized by others without being an apostle. We need to understand the
specific role that apostles have to play in the church based on what the New
Testament teaches.
>From the New
Testament, we can clearly see the importance of apostolic ministry in planting
churches. If we understand what apostles
are in the scriptures, then the idea of modern apostles, sent forth by the Lord
to preach the word and lay foundations, is not a frightening idea. By understanding the role of apostles in
scripture, we can also protect ourselves from men who would use ‘apostle’ as a
title to exalt themselves without doing apostolic work.
The apostles of
the Lord are chosen by the Lord. Jesus
chose the Twelve apostles. He also chose
Paul. Acts 13 shows us that both Paul
and Barnabas were called by the Holy Spirit before they were sent out. We look at
Consider the
following scripture:
Matthew 9:37-38
37 Then saith he
unto his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few;
38 Pray ye
therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his
harvest.
Immediately after these verses, we
read of Jesus empowering the Twelve and sending them out to preach and
heal. Luke 10 shows Jesus saying similar
words while sending out the Seventy.
If we want to see the Lord send
forth apostles and evangelists, we must pray for the Lord to empower and call
such men. Our churches must be ready to
recognize these Biblical ministries and confirm their callings according to the
leading of the Spirit.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2002
Chapter 10
Who Were the Elders of the Church?
On the first
missionary journey, we see that the apostles, Paul and Barnabas, appointed
elders in churches that they had planted.
Though Acts 13 through 14 does not give us much detail about the type of
men appointed as elders, other passages of scripture give us quite a bit of
information about the appointing of elders..
Plurality of
Elders
When we read of
appointing elders in the New Testament, we read about elders in the
plural. Notice the use of plurals in the
following verses.
Acts
20:17, 28 “And from
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock,
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the
I
Timothy 5:1717 Let the elders
that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour
in the word and doctrine.
Titus
1:5 For this cause left I thee in
There are many other
passages that show us that New Testament churches had a plurality of elders,
and not just one elder leading a whole congregation.[69] There is no indication in the New Testament
that one elder was placed above the others.
Elders as
Bishops
The New Testament
refers to the elders of the church as episkopos, that is, as ‘bishops’
or ‘overseers.’
Paul refers to
the Ephesians elders in Acts 20:28 as episkopos.
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over
the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the
Notice how Paul
refers to elders as bishops in his letter to Titus.
Titus
1:5-7
5 For this cause left I thee in
6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife,
having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the
steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker,
not given to filthy lucre;
Paul’s letter
to the Philippians mentions a plurality of bishops.
Philippians
1:1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of
Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at
Elders, Pendetas,
or Pastors?
An important
issue we need to consider is that the labels for the roles in church government
in scripture are very different from some of the labels used in certain
denominations. Church leadership titles
have evolved since the first century, and especially since the
Reformation.
Of course, the
Bible makes no mention of pendeta being in charge of the flock of
God. Pendeta comes from a Hindu
word used to refer to Hindu scholars. It
is unfortunate that Indonesian Christians have adopted this title. To prevent confusion, it is best to use
terminology to refer to leadership that is already used in scripture. That way, people can relate their own church experience
to what they read in the Bible.
What about
‘pastor?’ [Gembala] That is a Biblical word. However, we need to pay careful attention to
the fact that the Bible never says that the church was put into the care of
‘pastors.’ It does tell us of elders
being appointed in churches, and these elders are instructed to pastor [mengembalakan]the
flock of God. In Acts 20:28, Paul calls
the group of elders from
The Scriptures
speak of Christ shepherding the church, of course. But we also see indications that apostolic
ministry involves shepherding as well in John 21:16 and I Corinthians 9:7. Many Christians have a traditional notion of
what ‘pastor’ [Gembala] means.
They believe that the word refers to a specific office in the church,
that of the local minister who does most of the teaching in the church and
presides over the Lord’s Supper. The
word ‘pastor’ is associated with the settled local ministry in the church. However, if we look in the scriptures, the
‘elders of the church’ or ‘bishop’ are often used to describe this role. Many apostles were itinerant ministers. In writing to the Corinthians, Paul compared
his ministry to that of a shepherd tending a flock.[70] The Bible does not specify how long Paul was
in
What does
‘pastor’ mean then? To understand what
‘pastor’ means, we should consider the literal meaning of the word, and
disregard many of the traditional religious ideas that many think of when they
heard the word gembala today. In
the first century, as today, there were literal pastors who took care of sheep
in the wilderness. They led the sheep to
food and water. They protected the sheep
from wolves. They poured oil on their
heads to protect them from bugs. The
shepherds picked bugs off the sheep, and fought off wolves.
Clearly all of
these things are good metaphors for the work that elders do. But if we
think of gembala as a gift, rather than as an official position
in the church, then we are free to consider the possibility that some people
who are not overseers in the church may be gifted as pastors.
An older woman
who teaches younger women to be good wives and mothers may never be the
‘husband of one wife,’ but that does not mean that she cannot tend to the
younger women as a shepherd cares for sheep.
A Christian teenager in middle school may not have the maturity or depth
of knowledge of the word of God to shepherd or teach a congregation full of
older people, but he might have grace from God to tend to others his own age or
younger, helping them repent if they sin, encouraging them to following the
Lord, and teaching them to pray and read the Bible. Teaching the word of God can be done from
places other than the pulpit. Some
believers have never been ordained as bishops have ministries that involve
visiting the sick, visiting other believers in their homes and encouraging
them, leading Bible studies, and other ministries that involve caring for
others. Some people do these things
spontaneously, rather than as a part of an organized church outreach. Is it possibly that some of these people are
gifted as ‘pastors’, even if they have not been ordained?
The New Testament
does not tell us that ‘pastor’ is an ‘officially ordained’ position in the
church. The elders, or overseers, of the
church were specifically pointed out by the apostles, and hands were laid on
them. Pastoring is a part of an elder’s
work. But this does not mean that elders
are the only ones in the body gifted to take care of sheep. To prevent confusion in teaching on this
subject, it would be beneficial for us to use terminology that is consistent
with that used in the Bible. ‘Bishops’
or ‘elders’ are appointed to care for the flocks. ‘Pastors’ are members of the body gifted to
take care sheep. The local settled
ministers known as ‘elders’ or ‘bishops’ did pastor the sheep, but this does
not mean that they were the only ones gifted to tend to the sheep.
Ironically,
some churches have a board of ‘elders’ who, unlike the elders in the
scriptures, are not expected to do pastoral ministry. In some of these churches, the elders serve
as board members making financial decisions, and are expected to submit to the
pastor. But if we look in scripture, the
elders, and not ‘the pastor’ were the officially recognized leaders in the
local church. A pastor who is not also
an elder or apostle should submit to the leadership and guidance of the
elders.
Is Giftedness
the Only Requirement for Church Leadership?
Some churches
that believe that the only requirement to be given responsibility over the
flock of God is to be gifted as a 'pastor.’
Being a pastor is a matter of giftedness. Consider what Paul wrote
Ephesians
4:8,11 “Wherefore he saith, When he
ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto
men....
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some,
evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Pastors are gifts
to the church. But notice that this
passage does not say anything about a ‘pastor’ being one man who is the CEO of
a local congregation. The Greek word for
‘pastor’ is ‘poimen.’ This is a word
used not only for spiritual pastoring, but also for literal shepherds, as in
Luke 2:8.
A pastor in the
body of Christ is someone who is gifted to take care of sheep. Isn’t it possible for a novice in the faith
to have this gift? Isn’t it possible for
someone with the gift of taking care of sheep to fall into sin and become a
drunkard or a fornicator? Judas was a
gifted man, one of the twelve who had been given power to do miracles (Matthew
10) and yet he fell into sin. Balaam could
prophesy accurately, yet he willfully caused
Paul’s
instructions to Timothy and Titus listed requirements for bishops. These requirements did not focus much on
giftedness. Paul wrote to Timothy that a
bishop had to be ‘apt to teach.’[71]
Other than that, there is not much emphasis on the bishop being gifted. Paul gave requirements that focused on
character and lifestyle.
A new believer
may be gifted as a pastor, but he is not qualified to be a bishop in the church
because scripture forbids a novice from being an overseer.[72]
One might argue
that what we call ‘pastors’ or ‘pendeta’ are really ‘elders,’ and that
it does not matter if we call them by the title ‘pastor’ instead of ‘elder’ or
‘bishop.’ But using different
terminology from what the Bible uses can cause confusion.
The New
Testament lists no requirements for being a ‘pastor,’ and it certainly lists no
requirements for being a ‘pendeta.’
Being a ‘pastor,’ as far as we can see from Ephesians 4, is a matter of
giftedness. The Bible also does not show
any example of someone being put in charge of a church purely on the basis of
his being gifted as a pastor. The Bible
does show examples of elders or bishops being appointed in churches, and there
are requirements for elders or bishops.
Because church
leaders are called ‘pendeta’ or ‘pastor’, and are not called ‘elder’ or
‘bishop’ by many churches, some churches do not examine the scriptures to
determine whether candidates for church leadership meet the Biblical
requirements. Why should a church see if
a candidate for pendeta meets the Biblical requirement for
eldership? After all, he will be called
a pendeta and not an elder.
The problem with this, of course, is that the Bible does not give any
commandment or example to support the idea of a church being led by a pendeta,
and instead gives examples of a churches being led by elders (bishops.)
So, in effect,
leaders are chosen to oversee churches who do not meet the Biblical
requirements for leadership. One of the
reasons for this is the confusion that results from using terminology for
church leadership that is not truly Biblical.
Why not simply use terms like ‘elder’ and ‘overseer’ or ‘bishop?’
What Kind of
People Are Qualified to Be Bishops?
In two of
Paul’s letters, he specifically addresses the issue of what kinds of men are to
be bishops. Both of his epistles are
written to co-workers who were responsible for setting church affairs in
order. These two co-workers were Titus
and Timothy.
Paul and Titus
had traveled to
Actually,
Timothy is referred to in scripture among the ‘apostles of Christ.’[75] He traveled with Paul, evangelizing
unbelievers. On the first missionary
journey, Paul and Barnabas, men who had evangelized the new churches planted on
that mission, were the ones to appoint elders.
In I Timothy, we see that Timothy, who was involved in the
evangelization of the saints in
The two similar
lists of requirements for church overseers listed in I Timothy and Titus were
written to men in itinerant apostolic ministry, who were responsible for
appointing the local church presbytery.
Many try to read the epistle as though it were addressed to a local
church pastor who was in charge of a board of elders. This approach leads to misunderstanding the
passage.
Read the
requirements for church overseers in the following passages.
I
Timothy 3:1-9
1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the
office of a bishop
, he
desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband
of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to
teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of
filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having
his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own
house, how shall he take care of the
6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride
he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
7 Moreover he must have a good report of them
which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not
doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure
conscience.
Titus
1:5-11
5 For this cause left I thee in
6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife,
having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the
steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker,
not given to filthy lucre;
8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men,
sober, just, holy, temperate;
9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath
been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to
convince the gainsayers.
The Age of
Elders
The Greek word
for ‘elder’[penetua] in the New Testament scriptures is
‘presbuteros.’ The word means ‘older
men.’ The Greek word ‘presbuteros’ is
also translated as ‘tua-tua’ when referring to the tua-tua of
The New
Testament did not introduce a completely new system of government when it
refers to penetua. The New
Testament penetua system of leadership is a carry-over of the Old
Testament system of having tua-tua.
Both the Hebrew word zaqen for ‘tua-tua’ and the Greek word presbuteros
translated as ‘tua-tua’ or ‘penetua’ refer to older men.
A form of the
Greek word presbuteros is translated as ‘orang yang tua’ in I Timothy
5:1. Timtohy is told not to ‘terhadap
keras orang yang tua.’ The passage
continues on to exhort Timothy to treat older women as mothers and younger
women as sisters. A plural of the word
translated ‘orang yang tua’ is used in verse 17 of this same chapter, and is
translated as ‘penetua-penetua.’
“Penetatua yang baik pimpinpannya patut dihormati dua kali lipat,
terutama mereka yang dengan jerih payah berkhotbah dan mengajar.” The implication is that elders were older
men. Perhaps one of the reasons Timothy
had to be concerned with the church respecting his apostolic authority was that
he was a young man ministering beside elders who were many years older than he,
in a culture in which age was respected.
The
Apostolic Constitutions,
is a work estimated to have been written around 380 AD. [cite source—Cath encycl? Or other
encycl?] It is made up of compilations of earlier works, and claims to
have been written by the apostle Matthew.
Many scholars see it as a valuable historical document because it shows
us some of the beliefs an practices of churches of that era.
The Apostolic Constitutions require that a man be at least 50 years old before he be
appointed as a bishop. It allows for a
man of younger age to be appointed in a less populous city where there is no
one qualified over the age of 50, provided that he be especially mature for his
age.[76] This work is written during a period when the
system of having one monarchical bishop over the other elders is
recognized.
Desire
In I Timothy
3:1, we see that some men have a desire to be a bishop. We also know that God can put desires in
men’s hearts. If true elders are made oversees
by the Holy Ghost, then we can expect that the desire that motivates them to
become overseers is from God.[77]
Some men want
to become overseers out of the wrong motives.
Others have good motives and are not qualified Biblically. Desire does not prove a man qualified to be
an overseer. But God also works on men’s
hearts to give them a desire to tend the flock of God. Some young men may have a godly ambition to
become overseers when they mature to the point to become qualified. Others men who are otherwise qualified as
elders do not have the desire to oversee the flock at first, but the Lord works
on their hearts and makes them willing.
Elders should serve ‘not by constraint, but willingly”.
How
Potential Elders are Taught
In the New
Testament, there is no indication that elder-candidates traveled off to a Bible
school to study for several years before beginning their duties. Neither do we see any indication that
specially-trained students would graduate a Bible college and become elders in
a local church they were never a part of.
The apostles appointed elders from within the churches.
Titus 1:9 says
that a bishop must hold fast the faithful word which he has been taught. If the early church did not have Bible
colleges or seminaries for hundreds of years, how could the bishop have learned
the word of God, before even being appointed as a bishop? Is it possible to learn the word of God
outside of a Bible college or seminary?
Of course it is. The first
century Christians learned the word of God from the apostles who traveled from
place to place. They also learned the
word of God in their own local churches, where those familiar with the
apostles’ doctrine would teach, and where the Old Testament scriptures and
letters from the apostles were read.
We see a method
for spreading the teaching of doctrine from one generation to the next in the
words of Paul to Timothy.
II Timothy 2:2 And the
things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to
faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
Here we see
that Timothy was to teach what he had learned to faithful men, who would be
able to teach others. This simple method
of teaching being passed down from generation to generation was the means by
which men who would later be bishops learned the Gospel. They learned the word of God in the church,
not in the seminary. The apostles
brought the knowledge that was needed to the church, and taught it. The church could then teach it to others in
the months, years, and decades ahead.
Not only were
bishops to know the word of God, but every believer is supposed to learn the
word. Timothy was to commit the word to
faithful men. But only some of these men
might later be the elders of the church.
Some think that only professional pendeta and evangelists should
have an in-depth knowledge of the word of God, but, in fact, all believers
should learn the scriptures.
Paul addressed
the Ephesian elders in Acts 20. It is
clear from his words that he had spent a lot of time with them. Maybe one of the reasons some of them were
able to become elders eventually is that, before the were recognized as elders,
they had taken the effort to spend a lot of time with Paul to learn the word of
God.
Let us consider
some of the words from the passage.
20 And how I kept back nothing that was
profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and
from house to house,
21 Testifying both to the
Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord
Jesus Christ.
Notice that Paul not only taught the elders, but he also
taught publicly. The word of God was not
a secret only for the elders. Paul told
the Ephesian elders,
Acts 20:26-27
26 Wherefore I take you to record this day, that
I am pure from the blood of all men.
27 For I have not shunned
to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
Paul hadn’t
withheld ‘all the counsel of God’ from anyone.
He hadn’t reserved the whole counsel of God only for the elders. He had shared it with others as well. The knowledge of the Gospel that the elders
are supposed to have is the very same knowledge that should be taught in the
church. A church planter should deliver
this knowledge of the Gospel to the churches he plants. The teachers in the church should pass this
same knowledge on to others. Some of
these will eventually become teachers and elders in the church. If many in the church have a great depth of
knowledge in the word, and some of them become elders, the elders should not
have to go to a special school to learn the about Bible, since they already
have a solid knowledge of the word of God.
A church
should, in a sense, reproduce itself.
Some think of churches reproducing themselves only in terms of church
planting. That kind of reproduction is
great, but there is another kind of reproduction. One generation of a church should reproduce
itself in the next. If one generation of
a church has elders, the next generation of the church should have elders. The elders should teach the younger men, some
of whom may become elders later on. If
there are teaching and prophetic ministries in a church, we should seek the
Lord and pray that the Lord continue this type of ministry in the next generation,
so that future generations of the church not be weaker than the current
generation.
Church planters
may also want to spend extra time building relationships, teaching, and pouring
their lives into elders or those whom they perceive to be potential elders in
the future. Consider Paul’s words to the
elders of
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to
all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed
the
29 For I know this, that after my departing
shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise,
speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the
space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.
32 And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and
to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an
inheritance among all them which are sanctified.
33 I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or
apparel.
34 Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands
have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me.
35 I have shewed you all
things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the
words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to
receive.
Paul had spent
a lot of time with the elders, warning them with tears of things that would
happen in the future. He warned them
‘day and night,’ which indicates that he spent a lot of time with them. He taught them, no only with words, but with
his actions. By his working hard with
his hands to support himself and others
(probably making tents[78]),
he gave the elders an example of working hard to support themselves and
others.
An important
element of the way Paul taught was that he taught people to imitate
himself. Jesus not only taught His
disciples, He also sent them out to preach and do miracles. He had them do the things He was doing. Paul trained young traveling companions like
Timothy to do the things he did.
Training for ministry is not merely a matter of learning doctrine as an
academic subject. Shepherds learn to
care for sheep by doing it, not just by reading a book about it. Paul’s modeling of Christian leadership
skills must have been very useful to these Ephesian elders. The Bible college and seminary method of
training new leaders, while it fills them with academic knowledge, often lacks
this one-on-one apprenticeship aspect of training that we see in the ministries
of the Lord Jesus Christ and apostles like Paul.
The Biblical
method of potential elders gaining the knowledge they need through the teaching
of church planters or faithful teachers within the church, is superior in many
ways to the modern Bible college system.
Teaching the entire church Christian doctrine, instead of reserving much
of it only for elders, makes for strong, knowledgeable believers. In a church that has Biblical, interactive
meetings where teachings are tested by the saints, believers have an
opportunity to study the Bible in depth and really learn about the Gospel.
The interactive
meetings of the early church must have provided an excellent atmosphere for new
believers to grow in the word of God.
Even though Paul and Barnabas were away from the First Missionary
Journey churches for a long time, when they returned, some of the believers in
these churches had matured to the point where they could be appointed as
elders.[79] The interactive meetings in which brethren
gifted to prophesy were allowed to prophesy, and those allowed to teach could
teach, must have given the believers in these meetings an opportunity to
exercise their spiritual gifts and become more skillful in the word. In their close-knit community, their extended
family-style church, some of the men must have started pastoring others, and
caring for them. When Paul and Barnabas
returned to appoint elders, they may have simply seen what the Lord was doing
in the lives of the people there, and, with the Lord’s leading, identified
those the Lord had equipped to be overseers and appointed them as elders.
In a rapidly
expanding house church planting movement, church planters can train, teach, and
minister to new believers and let the Holy Spirit work on them until some of
them are qualified to be elders. As
these house churches grow and multiply into new house churches, new elders can
be produced, being taught within the very churches they will minister to. Some involved in church planting would want
to identify those Biblically qualified for eldership and send them far away
from their new, immature churches, to Bible school for a few years. During these years, though, an immature
church can suffer because some of its strongest members are not there to pastor
and guide the flock.
The Need for
Biblical Eldership
It is clear
that the system of leadership in many churches and denominations is quite
different from what we see in the New Testament. Using unscriptural terminology for those in
charge of churches, instead of terms like ‘elders’ and ‘bishops’ makes it easy to overlook Biblical passages
for this role. The result is that some
are put in positions of authority that do not meet the Biblical
qualifications. Elders or bishops are
not, as some think, the only people in the body of Christ who should teach the
word of God, but they certainly should teach it. All members should learn the word of God, and
out of these Biblically-educated believers, we should expect the Lord to raise
up men qualified to be elders of the church.
The elders in the scriptures were a part of the fellowships they
ministered to before they were appointed as elders. It would be wise for us to learn these things
and, in faith, expect the Lord to raise up and identify such men in the church
today.
Some in the
churches ministering as ‘penetua’ and ‘pendeta’ fit the Biblical requirements
for eldership. Some did not meet these
requirements when they became ‘pendeta’ but grew to meet them later on. There are other men in the body of Christ who
are not professional preachers who are spiritually fit to be elders of the
church. Those who are not elders,
spiritually, need to have the courage to
step out of such roles of leadership and minister in the areas in which they
are gifted. The body of Christ should
also be willing to recognize elders that the Lord raises up who did not go to
Bible college and who still work a ‘secular job.’
Church planting
apostles working primarily with unbelievers in unreached areas have an
advantage in this area. These new
believers will be inclined imitate the traditions they see and learn from a
church planter. If the church planter
has a Biblical understanding of eldership, he can teach the new church a
Biblical understanding of this ministry without the trouble of having to teach
against unscriptural notions that have taken so strong a hold in the minds of
many believers.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2001
Chapter 11
Biblical Oversight Verses the Pendeta System
A careful study of scripture shows
that the pendeta system in so many Indonesian churches is very different
from the system of Biblical overseership shown in the scriptures. The word pendeta likely comes from a
Hindu word for a Hindu religious scholar.
Somehow, Christians have adapted this word to refer to Christian church
leaders. When asked for the scriptural
basis for the role of a pendeta, some pendeta will point to the
role of the elder or bishop in scripture.
Let us carefully consider the New Testament bishop and the modern pendeta.
There are two main philosophies
when it comes to determining who is qualified to be a pendeta. One view is that one is qualified to be a pendeta
because he completes a program of theological educated. Another view is that pendeta should
receive a special call from God. Many
churches hold a combination of these views, believing a pendeta should
both be called, and also complete a program of theological education. Let us compare the qualifications many
churches use to choose their pendeta to the Biblical qualifications for
elders.
When Paul and Barnabas returned to
the churches planted on the first missionary journey, they did not send away to
the “
Elders need to know doctrine well
enough to correct doctrinal error that arises.
Titus 1:9-11
9 Holding fast
the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine
both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are
many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths
must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought
not, for filthy lucre's sake.
If elders had this doctrinal
knowledge, and did not go to seminary, how did they learn proper doctrine?
In Acts 20, we see how Paul taught
the elders of the church at
20 And how I kept
back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught
you publickly, and from house to house,
21 Testifying both
to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward
our Lord Jesus Christ.
Here we see that the elders had
spent a lot of time learning from Paul.
Much of this time was spent with him as he was also teaching and
evangelizing other people.
In his Acts 20 address, we also
read that Paul warned the elders day and night with tears about wolves that
would rise up from among them.[80] Paul had spent a lot of time with these men,
pouring his life into them.
The educational system the
apostles used is described in II Timothy 2:2.
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many
witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach
others also.
Paul had spent a lot of time with
Timothy, teaching him by demonstrating his godly lifestyle and by explaining
the Gospel. Timothy was to commit what
he had learned, and teach it to faithful men.
These men, in turn, would be able to teach others, and so the cycle
could continue on and on. This is the
Biblical method of education within the church.
Paul does not say that the ‘faithful men’ Timothy was to teach were to
only be the bishops, but certainly men who would later be bishops would have
been included among the ‘faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.”
Paul’s method for educating
leaders was similar to the method Jesus used.
Jesus found a group of Twelve men and other disciples, spent a lot of
time with them, and taught them the Gospel.
They grew to have a close relationship with Him. They followed him around. Paul also traveled with other men that he
taught. His relationship with Timothy
was like that of a father to a son.[81] No doubt, Timothy felt like Paul was like a
father to him. If we were able to go
back in time, and interview Paul’s disciples, and ask them how they felt about
him, no doubt, many of them would say that he was like a father to them. The ancient Christian method of discipling
others was to love them, to pour one’s life into them, and also teach them
doctrinal truth.
This method is very ancient. Who succeeded Moses? Joshua, Moses’, a man who was close to Moses,
who served him, and even followed him when he went up onto the
How does this compare with the
method of education used in many Bible college and seminaries. It is possible for a student to go to a Bible
college or seminary without ever really getting to know his professors. Students have many professors, and professors
have many students. Many students and
professors focus on academics—learning material read from books.
The lists of qualifications for
bishop in I Timothy Three and Titus 1 are rather long. Titus says that an overseer must hold fast to
the faithful word he has been taught.
Does a degree from Bible college seminary guarantee that one will hold
to the faithful word he has been taught?
Of course not. It is possible for
someone who is book-smart to pass seminary classes, and still misuse scripture
and create new doctrines. Some are able
to pass academic courses, but are still not stable teachers of the word.
Ironically, some seminaries are a
hotbed for teaching that runs contrary to the faithful word that the apostles
taught. Some seminary students are
taught not to believe the scriptures. They
are taught liberal theology which is in opposition to the word taught by the
apostles. Indonesian seminaries may not
have this problem to the degree that seminaries in other countries do, but it
is still a potential problem.
Titus 1:7 says,
“For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God;
not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to
filthy lucre;”
Is it possible for someone to be
selfwilled, have a bad temper, be a drunk, and love money, and still graduate
seminary? In many cases, yes it is. Clearly, a seminary or Bible college degree
is no guarantee that a man is qualified, Biblically, to be an overseer in the
church.
Unfortunately, many Christians,
and even church leaders, pay little attention to the Biblical teaching on church
leadership, and instead continue to follow the traditions they were raised
in. Many church traditions think it
necessary that a pendeta be a Bible college or seminary graduate. Ironically, the overseers mentioned in the
Bible were not required to be Bible college or seminary graduates. Some churches pay little attention to the
character and lifestyle requirements mentioned in scripture. If the man meets their traditional criteria,
they do not stop to think if he meets the scriptural criteria.
Some may read this and think,
“Paul and Barnabas appointed elders who were not seminary trained because they
did not have seminaries available at that time.
If they did, they would have hired seminary graduates to be preachers.”
Let us apply
this same type of reasoning to a situation that occurred in the Old
Testament. Imagine if a king of
What would you say to someone who
says, “The reason the early church ate bread and wine for communion was because
they did not have shrimp krupuk and cola.
So we celebrate communion with shrimp krupuk and cola.”
As Christians, we need to be
careful to value what God values, rather than what the world values. Many in the world certainly value advanced
degrees in education. There is nothing
wrong with education. The Proverbs teach
us to hunger and thirst after knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. True education is a wonderful thing.
But on the other hand, we need to
realize that our Lord Jesus Christ was probably not education in a highly
reputable school of His day. Jesus knew
the scriptures, and He was educated by God.
Many were surprised at His depth of knowledge. It was surprising for a tukang from
the lower classes of
“Matthew 13:54
And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their
synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man
this wisdom, and these mighty works?”
Jesus chose common men to be His
disciples. There is no evidence that any
of the Twelve had rabbinical training.
We know that four of them were fishermen. At least one of them was a tax collector, an
occupation despised by fellow Jews.
Later, we know that one of the
apostles chosen after the ascension, Paul, had studied at the feet of the
famous Jewish rabbi Gamaliel.[84]
God was kind enough to see to it
that the New Testament scriptures record how elders were taught and
chosen. Isn’t it right that we simply
follow what the scriptures teach, rather than inventing our own methods?
While it seems like many
traditional liturgical Protestan churches emphasize the importance of
education as a qualification. Many other
denominational groups like Charismatic, Pentecostals, and Baptists have
traditionally emphasized the importance of a call from God as a qualification
to be an overseer in the church.
Clearly, Paul emphasized his
own call to be an apostle. Repeatedly,
he began his epistles by introducing himself with a reminder of his call to be
an apostle. The following verse is an
example.
Romans 1:1 Paul,
a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel
of God,
If we carefully study the
scriptures, however, we see that the role of apostle is different from that of the
local elder who is chosen to be an overseer.
The local overseers we see in scripture were appointed by apostles to
shepherd the flock of God in a particular area.
Paul told Titus to appoint elders ‘in every city.’[85] Presumably the elders from a church in one
city are entrusted with the care of the believers in their own city. Peter tells elders to tend the flock of God
‘which is among you.’[86] The elder’s work of tending the flock is
local. His work is tied to one place.
Apostles, on the other hand, could
be very mobile. Paul, Barnabas, Silas,
and Timothy were itinerant ministers.
They might stay in one place for several months or even a few years, but
the Lord would then have them go elsewhere and proclaim the Gospel. Paul was certain called to preach the Gospel,
in an evangelistic sense. His ‘call to
preach’ was note merely a call to speak to the same believers behind a pulpit
week after week for twenty years. It was
a call to proclaim the Gospel to those who had not yet heard or believed the message.
Some men who might aspire to be
overseers are discouraged from doing so because of teaching they have heard
that one must be called of God to be a preacher. Many preachers have compared their own
calling to that of Saul on the road to
Many people think that a preacher
must earn his living from preaching.
They think of preaching as a vocation—that one must go to Bible college
or seminary, get ordination papers from a denomination, and leave his former
profession to be a preacher. They do not
realize that God might call a farmer to proclaim his message, and still allow
the man to be a farmer.
Historically, many of the
denominations that emphasize the importance of being called by God have been
influenced by Methodism. Many early
Methodists believed they had been called by God to preach the gospel. But John Wesley, known as the founder of
Methodism, did not believe that a call to preach qualified one to be an
overseer in the church. In fact, John
Wesley thought that it was appropriate for men who were not ordained overseers
in the church, but who were called by God as evangelists, to expound the
Gospel.[87]
Let us consider the words of Peter
on the matter. To the readers of I
Peter, the apostle writes,
I Peter 4:10-11
10 As every man
hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good
stewards of the manifold grace of God.
11 If any man
speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it
as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified
through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Here, Peter says, “if any man
speak.’ He is not specifically
addressing the elders of the church. He
is addressing any man in the whole church.
Regular believers who are not ordained as elders are allowed to use
their gifts, even speaking gifts, in accordance to the command of
scripture. Not only are believers
authorized to use their gifts, but this passage also commands believers
to use their gifts, even gifts that involve speaking to the congregation, as
good stewards.
When I was in my early 20’s, I
sensed that the Lord had put a gift of teaching in me that was beginning to
develop. I was a bit confused, though,
because of the teaching I had grown up under.
I thought that one should be called to be a ‘pastor’ or ‘evangelist’ or
some other Ephesians 4:11 minister to speak behind a pulpit. I had heard preachers talk about being called
to preach, comparing their experience to Paul’s experience on the road to
I prayed, and God encouraged me
through the scripture, Ephesians 3:4 “Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my
knowledge in the mystery of Christ.”
This encouraged me to study further.
Later, I
realized that I Peter 4:10-11, actually commands us to use our gifts to edify
one another. Peter does not say only to
use your gift of teaching, prophecy, or encouragement if you have gone to
seminary and have denominational ordination papers. When we realize that scripture teaches that
church meetings are the appropriate venue for believers to use their gifts to
edify one another, rather than merely a time to listen to an ordained
ministers, this all makes sense. Hebrews
10:25 teaches us not only to assembly, but also to ‘exhort one another.’ I Corinthians 14, the chapter that gives the
most detailed instructions about church meetings, gives us instructions for how
‘regular believers’ can use their gifts to edify one another.
For the one
gifted to prophesy, the call to prophesy is found right in the pages of scripture. We don’t have to go out searching for a call,
walking the road to
Do you need
to hear a special call from God to give food to someone who is starving? Do you have to wait for God to speak to your
specifically before you provide assistance to your parents or children who are
in need? Do you need to hear God
specifically speak to you before you thank him for the food you eat? We Christians should do these things automatically. The Bible already teaches us to do these
things, and so we don’t need to wait around to hear a voice from heaven. We already have a word from heaven in the
Holy Scriptures. Similarly, if we know
that we have a gift, and the Bible tells us to use that gift, then we should
use it.
Some
Christians have spiritual gifts, and know that they have them. Yet, because they never had a special
experience of being ‘called’, they sit around waiting for a call, not using
their spiritual gifts. What is the ‘call’
that some people speak of? Many people
who use the term use it to describe the fact that God has revealed to them that
they are supposed to function in a certain ministry. Some people may tell of experiences almost like the apostle Paul,
hearing the voice of Jesus. Others
become convinced of their calling in a less dramatic way as God speaks to their
hearts.
If you have
a spiritual gifts at work in you, that is really from God, that is really the
operation of the grace of God in your life, then you can have this kind of
‘call’ to. All you have to do is believe
the following scripture when you read it:
I Peter
4:10 As every man hath received the
gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the
manifold grace of God.
That verse
‘calls’ you to use your gift. Not only
are you called to use your gift, but you are commanded to do so. If you are a believer and have no idea what
your spiritual gifts are, then ask God to empower you with His Spirit and give
you spiritual gifts, and ask Him to show you what gifts you have. It is a good thing to seek after and pray to
receive spiritual gifts to edify the body of Christ.[88] It may help you to read I Corinthians 12 and
14 and Romans 12..
If one attends a church that obeys the instructions of I
Corinthians 14, there may be many opportunities to use one’r
gifts in the meeting, without trying to promote oneself into a place of
authority. If one’s church is strong in
fellowship and believers have strong relationships and friendships with one
another, then he may be able to find plenty of opportunities to use spiritual
gifts outside of the church meetings.
Ministering to the needs of the poor, encouragement, showing mercy, and
even gifts like encouragement, prophecy, and teaching can function in
one-on-one meetings with others.
Churches that do not obey the instructions of scripture found in I
Corinthians 14, and that do have strong relationships may be frustrating for
those who desire to use their spiritual gifts.
Some believers in churches like this find opportunities outside of the
church meeting to use their gifts.
Some people do have dramatic encounters with God. Some people can point to a day and hour in
which the Lord made it known to them that they were to preach the Gospel. Other people gradually see the Lord work in
their lives, and slowly come to realize the gifts with which the Lord has
entrusted them. We should appreciate the
gifts of all saints, no matter how God has worked in their lives.
The elders of the church should teach and pastor the flock of God. But they are not the only ones who are able
to teach or address the assembly. The
brethren should be allowed to use their gifts to edify one another in the
church, as the Bible teaches. The
brethren who speak do not have had a miraculous experience of being called to
the ministry. The fact that they have
spiritual gifts, and the Bible commands them to use their spiritual gifts to
edify one another is enough of a qualification to allow them to address the
assembly.
Neither the
list of qualifications in I Timothy 3 nor the list of qualifications in Titus 1
list a ‘call’ as a qualification for being an overseer of the church. It is ironic, then, that some churches completely
ignore the Biblical qualifications for overseers, and instead choose men based
on the fact that they claim to be ‘called to preach.’
I Timothy 3:2
tells us that an overseer must be ‘apt to teach.’ Many insist that a local overseer must be
‘called to preach,’ reminiscent of Paul’s call to preach the Gospel as
described in I Corinthians 9:16, ‘..yeah, woe is unto me if I preach not the
Gospel.” Ironically, Paul here is
talking about evangelistic preaching of the Gospel. Paul had a burning drive to preach to
unbelievers. The ‘preaching’ of many
local church overseers is often Bible teaching and exhortation. Some local overseers may be called by God to
labor extensively in evangelism on a local level. Hopefully, any local church overseer should
have some ability to do personal evangelism, since overseers should be mature
believers. But we should not expect that
every local church overseer, whose ministry is to take care of a church in one
location, would be called to an itinerant evangelistic church planting ministry
like that of the apostle Paul.
But what about
the idea of an overseer being called just to be an overseer? The word ‘called’ does not show up in either
of these two passages, but does that mean that overseers do not have to be called? Let us consider I Timothy 3:1
“This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a
bishop, he desireth a good work.”
We would expect, after reading
this, that if Timothy were looking for a man to serve as a bishop, he would
have considered men who desired to be in this role. I doubt he found men who did not want to be
overseers, and begged them to do the work.
The men who were ready for this role would already have had their hearts
prepared by the Holy Spirit. Some may
consider this to be evidence of a ‘call’ to be a bishop.
We need to be careful not to add
some of our traditional concepts about ‘the call to preach’ to the Biblical
qualifications to be an overseer. An
overseer does not have to have a dramatic,
God deals with different people
differently. If a man is gifted as a
prophet and often has dreams, and the Lord wants him to be a bishop, he may
have a dream telling him that he is to be a bishop. A gifted Bible teacher who learns the things
of God by careful study of the scriptures may slowly come to realize that he meets
the qualifications of overseer as he looks at his life, and the Lord works on
His heart. We need to realize that God
works on the hearts of men differently to prepare them to do the work of
overseer.
If a church is following the
headship of Christ, and submitting faithfully to His will, then we can trust
that the Lord will work in the body to place the proper members in the proper
roles.[89]
Replacing Biblical
Qualifications with ‘the Call.’
Some churches emphasize the
importance of a ‘call to preach’ that they ignore the Biblical qualifications
for an overseer. The real test some
congregations give to a prospective pendeta to see if he is ‘called to
preach’ is to listen to one of his sermons.
If they are pleased with the sermon, they may acknowledge that he is
‘called to preach.’
Unfortunately, it is possible for
men to be great at making religious speeches without meeting the qualifications
for overseer described in the Bible.
Isn’t it possible for a man to speak well at church, but secretly drink
excessive amounts of alcohol at home, or have an adulterous affair, lazy, or
not sober-minded? As important as it is
to be ‘apt to teach,’ An overseer is to
be ‘given to hospitality.’ Yet how many
congregations, seeking a new pastor interview the pastor or his friends to find
out if he often has people over to his home or if he uses his home to house
traveling brethren? It would be
interesting to pass out a questionnaire in some churches asking “Have you ever
been to your pendeta’s house?” and collect the results of the survey.[90]
I am sure we have all heard
stories of a pendeta who lived a secret sinful lifestyle while
ministering to a congregation. But it is
possible for a man to be a godly Christian, but still not meet up to the
Biblical qualifications for overseer. It
is possible for a man to have a real gift for teaching or evangelism, and still
not be qualified to oversee other men’s souls in the congregation.
Scripture teaches that an overseer
be “not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation
of the devil.”[91] If a young man repents, and gives his life to
Christ, and enters Bible college at age 18, if he graduates at age 22 with his
mind full of theological and historical knowledge, he could still be a
spiritual novice by the time he graduates.
Even if he were not a novice after
four years in the faith, that does not mean he is a spiritual elder. He certainly would not be an elder
physically. All of us are at different
stages of our spiritual growth. I John
was written to believers at different stages of spiritual growth.
I John 2:13-14
13 I write unto
you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write
unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you,
little children, because ye have known the Father.
14 I have written
unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have
written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth
in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.
At what stage of spiritual growth
is it best for a man to become an overseer in the church? When is one mature enough to be considered an
elder? Does it not make sense that the
‘fathers’ described in this passage, would make the best elders?
As precious as the little children
in the Lord are, they are not mature enough to be elders. They are happy that they know the
father. Young men in the Lord may do
great exploits, overcoming the evil one.
Some at the ‘young man’ stage are gifted as preachers are teachers. They are more mature than the little
children, but they are still young men.
Fathers, on the other hand, have
known the Lord for a long time. Their
experience serving the Lord and learning bout him through experience is
valuable to those younger in the faith.
The elders of the church should be
mature men among their brethren. In a
church full of new believers, like those started through Paul and Barnabas’ missionary
journey, elders may have only been believers for several months or a few
years. The most mature saints in these
churches would have been young in the Lord compared to Paul and Barnabas, but
they would have been more mature than the other saints around them.
Unfortunately, many churches have
overlooked that the fact that ‘elder’ means ‘older man.’ I Peter 5:5 indicates that elders are
older. I Timothy 5:1-2 indicate that
elders are older men as well. Throughout
the Old Testament, we see that the wisdom of the old is to be respected. The
Authority
can be difficult for some young men to handle.
Jesus warned His disciples not to lord over others.[93] Men who have been fathers for a long time are
used to having authority in their own family, and many have learned not to lead
their families in a domineering manner.
Age is no guarantee that a leader
will not dominate in a non-Christ-like way, but it is one safeguard to help
protect against it. Youths who are given
great authority in the church before exercising any authority in their lives
beforehand are prime targets for temptation.
Having mature leaders and plurality of eldership can help protect our
churches from the situation described in the following passage.
Isaiah 3:4-5
4 And I will give
children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.
5 And the people
shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the
child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against
the honourable.
Isn’t it strange that so many
churches want to put a young man in authority over his physical and spiritual
seniors? Doesn’t it make more sense that
older men lead in the household of faith?
Timothy was a young man, perhaps
less than thirty, when I Timothy was written.
How could a young man like Timothy have this authority? Timothy shared in a measure of rule in areas
where he helped plant a church. Timothy
had a special kind of authority with churches that came into being through his
joint ministry with Paul, Silas, and other co-workers.[94] Timothy probably had many people who were his
spiritual children who were physically older than he. In spite of Timothy’s authority, he still had
to show respect to those who were older, entreating older men as fathers and
older women as mothers.
Many young pendeta are not
put in charge of older saints that they won to Christ, but are rather put in
charge of saints who are more mature than themselves spiritually, as well as
physically. The lives of many believers
in their twenties is characterized by uncertainty. They think about things like “What am I going
to do with my life?” “Who will I
marry?” “Will I ever get married?” During this stage of life, many young people
get a sense of direction. Is this the
best age group for our leaders to come from?
Wouldn’t it be better if our leaders were truly elders, spiritually, and
even physically?
Timothy, an apostle is described
as a ‘young man.’ But even Timothy, as
gifted as he was, worked closely with an older man in the faith who treated him
as a son. As Paul grew older, we read of
an increasingly growing number of men who worked with him. It is likely that many of these were younger
men that Paul taught how to minister.
Titus 1:6 tells us that elders must “be blameless, the husband of one
wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.” I Timothy also tells us that overseer must be
the husband of one wife and that he must be
“One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection
with all gravity; (For if a man know not
how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the
[try to
find Maimoinodes quote on Sanhedrin qualifications]
Ironically, some people are put in
the position of pendeta in their youth, while they are trying to find a
spouse, have children, and figure out how to raise them. Elders, who are truly older men, and have
already been through this stage of life, can use their experience in leading
the church. An elder should demonstrate
his ability to pastor his own household before being put in charge of
the church.
Having children teaches patience,
love, and mercy to those who walk in righteousness. New parents must learn to give of
themselves. Before having children, they
had the night to themselves. But after
the baby is born, they are forced to sacrifice sleep. During the early years of a child’s life, the
parents must always keep an eye on the child, constantly protecting him from
danger. As the child grows, parents must
learn how to discipline him, and how to teach practical and ethical
issues. The parents must deal with the
child’s struggle for independence and poor judgment during the teen years. These practical life lessons are valuable for
those who would mature into elders.
Natural fatherhood is a great training ground for those who would labor
in the spiritual fatherly role of elder.
Unfortunately, many young people
appointed as pendeta must learn to pastor on the church, instead of on
their own families. Some of these people
eventually grow into effective elders.
But wouldn’t it be better to wait until they meet the Biblical
qualifications first?
Even if a pendeta has a family,
some churches are so focused on either education or gifting and calling as
qualifications for church oversight, that they pay no attention to whether a
candidate for pendeta rules his own house well. Some pendeta have wild children who
get into all kinds of trouble, even while living under their own roof. How can a man give himself to serving the
household of faith when he has crises in his own family?
One reason pendeta are
chosen without regard to Biblical qualifications for oversight is because the
job of pendeta has wrongly been turned into a career, just like any
other job.
Let us think about the type of men
Paul and Barnabas probably chose to be elders on the first missionary
journey. It is extremely unlikely that
they chose men who made their living as religious teachers before becoming
Christians. It is possible that, at some
church, a former teacher of pagan philosophy, or a Jewish rabbi could have been
appointed as an elder at one of the churches Paul ministered to during his
lifetime, but it is likely that elders came from a variety of trades and
professions. The elders of the Jewish
synagogues at that time did not have to be professional religious teachers.
Jesus even chose apostles who knew
trades like fishing or tax collecting.
Paul had religious scholarly training, but he was able to work as a
tentmaker. If the elders Paul and
Barnabas appointed were indeed ‘elders’, that is, older men, and they ruled
their houses well, they obviously had found some way to supply for their
households before being appointed as elders.
Paul wrote that a man who would not provide for his household was worse
than an unbeliever.[96] Clearly, the elders the apostles appointed
must have been men that knew how to work hard to make a living.
Working hard to make a living is
an important part of leading one’s household.
Hard work builds character. An
elder who knows what it is like to work a full-time job and struggle a little
to pay the bills understands what other members of the congregation are going
through. This kind of hard work can help
prepare a man to be an elders of the church.
By turning pendeta into a
profession for the young, some young people go into ministry without ever
learning how to earn a living by conventional means. Some Bible college students and pendeta
feel that it is somehow unholy to work a secular job. But, we read in the scriptures that the
apostles Paul refused to exercise the right to make a living by preaching the
Gospel, and worked with his own hands.
Paul exhorted the elders of the church in
If we were to follow the teachings
and patterns of scripture for church oversight, then our church overseers would
have experience making a living by some means besides preaching. Now, there are many pendeta who have
no trade besides preaching. This creates
many problems. The pendeta who is
put in his position before proving his pastoral skills by ruling his house
well, who falls into sin, my find himself
out of a job. If his name and reputation are ruined even after he
repents, what can else he do for a living?
Some pendeta burn out. In
some cases, a young man is expected to do the ministry work that the Bible
assigns to the whole congregation, and is expected to do the church oversight
work that the Bible would assign to a plurality of elders. A pendeta who collapses under the load
and leaves a church may find himself without a trade.
The Professional Pendeta
and Lay Eldership Model
Some churches have one man called
the pendeta and a committee of men called ‘elders.’ Sometimes the pendeta is young and
just hasn’t’ lived long enough to meet the scriptural qualifications for church
eldership. Sometimes, he has worked as a
pendeta for years. The elders are
generally expected to make decisions that the pendeta has to follow, or
else serve as yes-men who carry out the pendeta’s plans.
Some church have elders who don’t
meet the lifestyle qualifications for church eldership either. Elders may be chosen because they are good
businessmen. Maybe this is because many
think the role of elders is simply to make business decisions, and that it is
the role of the pendeta to pastor the flock. But if we look at the scriptures, we see that
the elders are charged with pastoring the flock of God.[98] Elders should be able to teach the word of
God, and are to help protect the church against false teachings.[99] When we consider that elders must be able to
teach, we must realize that the sermon is not the only means of teaching. Some teaching can be done with short
explanations, or in interactive conversations.
If we study the New Testament
carefully, we see that elders were appointed in the churches, and that there is
no mention of the pendeta figure.
The elders were responsible for caring for the flock. The words ‘bishops’ and ‘elders’ are used to
refer to the same group of people in the New Testament.
Some churches, particularly in the
West where congregational church government is fairly common, a congregation
without a professional pastor will invite a preacher to preach a sermon. If they like his preaching, either the
congregation, or a board, may vote to offer the man the pastorate. A congregational church that doesn’t like
it’s current pastor may vote to have him removed to make way for someone
else. Or the pastor may decide to quite
working at one church and go work for another church that pays better, or that
is in a nicer location.
In some denominations, the
decision to send a professional pastor to a particular church is made by
leaders in the denominational hierarchy.
The pastor may also be reassigned by the same leaders to another
location.
How do these systems compare with
scripture? Paul and Barnabas appointed
elders from within the churches on their first missionary journey. Titus was told to appoint elders in every
city. The elders were older men from
within the Christian community.
Eldership is not suddenly introduced in the New Testament. It is a system of leadership that carried
over from the Old Testament. The nation
of
The body of Christ is a family,
and the local church should function as a family. If we act as the New Testament teaches us to,
and meet as the New Testament teaches us to, then we will have close loving
relationships with other believers. In
this type of environment, some men godly will
emerge as father figures.
Just as in the early church, we
can expect that the Lord will cause men to mature into elders among us. The early churches didn’t hire religious
professionals to come be their pastor temporarily, and to do all the teaching
ministry. Rather, they used their gifts
to edify one another, and in that environment of love, the Lord raised up men
suitable to be elders.
The hired pastor comes into a
church as a stranger. It takes time for
him to get to know others. But the man
who grows up spiritually within the congregation already knows the flock. If we would follow the teachings and patterns
of scripture, a church should always be producing candidates for
eldership.
There are many traditions
regarding the role of elder, pastor, bishop, or pendeta that are
commonly believed, but not taught in the scriptures.
Some Christians believe that a
marriage is only valid if conducted by an elder or pendeta. But if we study the scriptures, we see that
there is not mention of an elder presiding over a marriage ceremony. In the Old Testament, there is no talk of the
tribal or city elders , or even Levitical priests making marriages official. In the Old Testament, fathers would give their
daughters away to men in marriage in exchange for a bride price. The giving of the bride price sealed the
covenant.[100] It was also a custom in that part of the
world to have a feast to commemorate a wedding.[101]
Many Christians think that the
blessing of the pendeta or the stating of vows make the marriage
official, but we see neither of these things in scripture. The ancient pagan Romans had a wedding custom
in which the couple would agree to be wed before a pagan priest. The Romans also had the custom of the bride
wearing an engagement ring on the third finger of her left hand, a custom still
practiced in many countries today. Roman
women also wore veils during their wedding.[102] {cite web address] Many of our wedding customs come from Roman
culture, rather than from the scriptures.
The tradition of having an elder
perform a wedding ceremony is very old, at least to a few hundred years after
Christ. But we need to realize that,
Biblically, an elder is not necessary to make a wedding valid. We can accept marriages performed according
to local cultural traditions without demanding that new converts be
baptized. That is not to say that it is
wrong for an elder to pronounce a blessing over a couple at a wedding. It certainly helps marriages to be considered
socially acceptable. It is appropriate
that at a time of joy like a wedding, the church should support saints as they
marry. As leaders in the Christian
community, it makes sense that Christians have developed customs which include
elders in wedding ceremonies. But we
need to be clear that the Bible does not teach that church elders make weddings
official or legitimate.
Many feel that it is necessary to
have a pendeta or church elder speak at a funeral. Of course, the Bible says nothing about the
need of an elder to speak at a funeral service.
The Old Testament did not require that village or city elders or even
Levitical priests speak at funeral services.
Funeral ceremonies, like wedding ceremonies, are closely tied with our own
culture. There is nothing wrong with an
elder speaking at a funeral, but we need to understand that officiating in such
ceremonies is not a specifically Biblical duty of an elder.
Elders should be able to teach
Gospel truths, but a tradition has developed whereby believers gather to hear
one leader preach one long sermon. I
Corinthians 14:26, Hebrews 10:24-25, and other passages show us that, in early
church meetings, the various members of the body of Christ would use their
gifts to exhort one another in the meetings.
The church meeting is the place for many of the I Corinthians 12 gifts
to be manifested through the body.
The Bible does not teach that the
central focus of a meeting must be one very long sermon. A church meeting may include many short
sermons, prophecies, words of encouragement, and other manifestations of the
Spirit spoken through many members of the body of Christ. An elder should be able to teach, and
many elders may be some of the more active teachers in their congregation, but
this really depends on how the Lord has distributed His gifts in a particular
congregation.
The three-point sermon is not the
only method of teaching. Some are poor
at giving sermons, but are very effective at teaching in an interactive
question-and-answer session. Others are
able to expound on the scriptures verse by verse. There are many methods of teaching and the
tradition of one man preaching a three-point sermon severely limits us from
receiving the ministry of the Spirit in church meetings.
There is a very old traditional
notion that it is proper for elders of the church to baptize new
believers. Tradition placed church
elders in a special role of administrating sacraments. In spite of this, Roman Catholic and Eastern
Orthodox traditions can accept baptisms performed by laymen, but it is still a
strong tradition within Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism that
new believers be baptized by some kind of ordained minister.
Ironically, there is no example in
scripture of a new believer being baptized by a church elder. In the New Testament, we see that the
apostles were sent forth to baptize all nations. Acts and the epistles show that the apostles
did baptize people. Philip baptized men
and women in
Ananias, who baptized Saul of
Tarsus, is not referred to as a bishop or elder. Scripture refers to him as ‘a certain
disciple.’[105] So we see the type of people who baptized in
the New Testament, apostles, a deacon and evangelist, and a disciple.
When we consider the fact that the
Paul and Barnabas left young churches behind in the care of the Holy Ghost, and
only later returned to appoint elders, it stands to reason that, somehow, they
were able to carry on regular church affairs.
It is likely that there were new disciples that needed baptism before
elders were appointed and while the apostles were away. It is reasonable to assume, then, that
regular disciples like Ananias would baptize new converts to the faith.
If an itinerant preacher plants a
new church and leaves it behind for a season to evangelize elsewhere, the
members of that church should be empowered with the knowledge that they can
baptize new converts to the faith. This
may create difficulties if new converts want baptism certificates, but the
growth of the church is more important than government paperwork. We must not allow the tradition that only pendeta
can baptize to slow the spread of the Gospel.
The early Christians met and ate a
meal together to remember the Lord’s death.
There is an ancient notion, especially popular in Roman Catholic and
Eastern Orthodox circles, that the blessing of the elder makes the Lord’s
Supper valid—that the elder turns the bread and wine into the body and blood of
the Lord. As strongly held as this
tradition is, it is not taught in scripture.
In fact, consider the situation
described in scripture, it is likely that churches that did not yet have elders
still practiced the Lord’s Supper. Let
us consider the first church in
Acts 2:41-42
41 Then they that
gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto
them about three thousand souls.
42 And they continued
stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread,
and in prayers.
Many believe that ‘breaking bread’
here refers to the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. If three thousand people were meeting from
house to house in the small homes most would have had in
The
In Acts 13 and 14, we see that
Paul and Barnabas left churches without appointed elders fro a time, as they
went on ministering. If it took Paul and
Barnabas two years to complete their journey, then the first churches planted
would have been without elders for two
years. It is likely that they carried on
with the Christian tradition of breaking bread and drinking wine, even without
elders. These churches were churches
before the elders were appointed. They
had the Lord’s authority in them. Why would
they not have celebrated the Lord’s Supper?
Paul’s letters to the Corinthians
do not salute bishops or elders. Paul
does not identify any of the Corinthians as elders. It is possible that the Corinthians were in
that early stage of growth, before elders had been officially appointed. The Corinthians were attempting to celebrate
communion. Paul gave them instructions
on how to do it properly. His
instructions, the most detailed passage in the epistles that deal with the
topic, say nothing of the need for one of the elders to bless the bread and
wine and turn it into the Lord’s body and blood.
Churches that do not have elders
are still churches, and still have the Lord’s authority, even if they are not
at a mature stage of development.
The modern pendeta system
is very different from the system of eldership described in the New
Testament. Often the Biblical
requirements for overseers are either completely ignored or are given only
secondary consideration. Some churches
think that theological education qualifies a man to be an overseer of the
church. But theological education does
not guarantee godly character and spiritual maturity. Other churches think a man is qualified to be
a church overseer if he is called to preach or gifted at making religious
speeches. But it is possible to be
gifted and called to preach without meeting the qualifications of church
overseer.
It is necessary for the church to
return to the Biblical teachings regarding eldership. On the mission field, church planters should
be on the lookout for men who meet the Biblical qualifications for eldership,
rather than appoint elders based on unscriptural criteria.
Many try to depend on church elder
to do the ministry work that should be done by an entire body of
believers. The saints should use their
gifts to edify one another. Christ ministers
to His body through His body, and not exclusively through the elders and a few
other professional ministers. It is
difficult for one man to perform the work that should be done by a group of
elders, much less the ministry that should be done by the entire body. Understanding the Biblical role of elders in
the body can help new church plants grow into healthy, strong, growing bodies
of believers.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 12
Practical Issues Related to
Appointing Elders in a
When we consider the issue of
appointing elders in new house church plants, particularly in an unreached
area, we need to keep in mind that the example we give may be reproduced by
others. Therefore, we should be careful
to follow the scriptures and we should make sure that what we do is capable of
being reproduced.
Those appointing elders need to be
careful not to quench the work of the Spirit in a new church plant by adding
unscriptural requirements for eldership.
The Lord prepared men from within new church plants in the first century
to tend the flock of God. Not only is He
capable of doing this in modern times, but it is also the example He preserved
for us in the Holy Scriptures.
How Many Elders Should There
Be?
The number of elders in a local
church depends on how many people the Lord has prepared to fill the role. In a new church plant, no one may be
qualified according to I Timothy 3:6, since an overseer must not be a
novice. Over the course of a year or
two, there may be only a few mature saints that meet this description, or there
may be many.
The church in
If an entire city-church were
small enough, it is conceivable that the whole city church might assemble in
one place.[109] But it is likely that other churches followed
the example of
At which of these two ‘levels’ of
church do we see the appointing of elders:
the house church level, or the city level. Let us consider the following verse.
Acts
20:17 And from
Here we see that Paul called for
the elders of the citywide church in
The city-level church should eventually
have a plurality of elders. House
churches should not be secluded. There
should be interaction between churches making up the city church. This includes interaction among the
leadership.
Some local house churches may have
more than one person who is Biblically qualified to be an overseer, and willing
to do so. Other house churches may have
none. In some cases, one elder may need
to visit more than one house church. We
know from scripture that churches can exist before elders mature.
Church planters
should be careful not to try to appoint unqualified people to eldership, simply
so there will be someone to turn the work over to. The tradition that every church must have an
official pastor is a hard one to overcome, even for church planters who know
better. It is better to wait on the Lord
and let future elders slowly mature into their roles, rather than appointing
them as elders before they are ready.
Training New
Elders
The apostle
Paul had spent a lot of time with the elders of
Some church
planters call their method for training new leaders the 2-2-2 method because it
is based on II Timothy 2:2.
And the
things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to
faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
Timothy was
taught the truths of the Gospel. He was
to teach these things to faithful men, who could in turn teach others. By this simple method, the truth of the Gospel
can be taught from generation to generation.
Timothy, a church planter, was to teach these men himself, and not
simply send them off to a theological school.
Teaching these men was a part of his responsibility.
[insert
Biographical information on George Patterson and Galen Currah, especially Galen
Currah.] These men put out an email newsletter called
MentorNet, dedicated to teaching ministers of the Gospel, particularly those
involved in church planting, how to teach others to obey the teachings of Christ
through a mentoring or apprenticeship method.
MentorNet #13 Identifying New Shepherds
Copyright © 2003 by Galen Currah and George Patterson
If your purpose is to multiply churches through cells or small groups and it
ought to be -- then help your church planting apprentices to plan and arrange
to turn over new groups to new shepherds as soon as possible (Acts 14:23; Titus
1:5). That is, do not encourage them to settle into a group and shepherd it
indefinitely. To facilitate this, implement a 2 Timothy 2:2 leadership training
chain reaction from the beginning. Start new groups through apprentice
shepherds, working toward four-level mentoring chains like the one Paul started
with Timothy, who trained 'reliable men', who trained 'others also.'
When we
add man-made requirements to those of Scripture for new leaders, we sinfully
stifle the work of the Holy Spirit and contradict His gifting. We often hear
Western clergy complain, "But there is no one qualified to lead!" Of
course, new believers do not meet the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3:1ff to be
commissioned as a pastor, as they are not yet "proven." But they
certainly can gather their unbelieving friends to hear about Jesus the way
Cornelius, Zacheus and Levi did in the New Testament. They can shepherd their
own families and share Christ with friends, which they normally will do when
someone like
Informal
gathering meetings of these new leaders often develop into a cell group or
church, if we keep the perfectionists and legalists off their backs. Then you
can appoint them as "provisional shepherds." This encourages those
who want to shepherd, and who show an ability to do so. We can recall more than
one church leader expressing diplomatically that they prefer to reserve such
positions of leadership for popular, well-dressed leaders who, as they imagine,
will attract tithe-payers into their congregations.
In other
cultures one seldom sees new cells or churches grow out of groups consisting
primarily of mature believers. Groups led by mature Bible teachers almost never
spawn a new group. Rather new cells and churches normally arise from groups of
new believers led by a novice shepherd who is mentored by a pastor, missionary
or other more experienced leader. Let us understand the potential in zealous,
obedient, new believers who want to be taught and coached!
So, how to
recognize those who will likely make good shepherds now and, maybe, elders
later?
(1) Mike Neumann
reported from
(2) George
Patterson reported from Honduras that the most reliable way to predict which
men would succeed over time as group shepherds and church pastors, were those
who started by shepherding their own household. (See 1Tim. 3:4) About one in
three men who undertook to lead their own household in family prayers and
worship, and heeded a mentor, proved able in time to pastor the resulting
church successfully.
(3) Galen
Currah reported that, in
New shepherds
emerge three ways. Do not overlook any of them. These are 1) converts, 2)
apprentices and 3) self-starters. 1) Help converts to start shepherding their
own families in their own home. Mentor them, and let the grow around them and
mature as their unsaved friends join in. 2) Let apprentice leaders practice
leading your group, then start their own. 3) Open doors for dormant
self-starters who are equipped to lead but have never been offered the
opportunity to start. Light a fire under them!
The promise
of Scripture is clear: "God gave to the church apostles, prophets, evangelists,
pastors and teachers." (Eph. 4:11. Scholars say that the word
"gave" in the original language is a timeless verb, meaning that God
still gives such people to churches.) Therefore, watch for such people. If they
are not there, they soon will be.
When you see
a man or woman responding to the Word of God with faith and obedience, approach
them about leading a new group consisting of their family and friends,
especially the unsaved ones. If they are familiar with the traditional church
they might object, saying that they are not capable, or are unqualified. Offer
to coach them from behind the scenes.
Assure them
that with God's help, they can do it, and that you will be there to meet with
them regularly over several weeks or months.
Often, those who
appoint overseers focus on qualifications not found in the Bible, like the
perceived need for a Bible college or seminary degree, while Biblical
qualifications are overlooked. One of
the qualifications listed in scripture is that a man be able to rule his own
house well. Galen Currah and George
Patterson’s article offers practical instructions for helping men rule their
own houses well and have obedient children:
teach men to disciple their own families at home.
Jesus taught
that if one is faithful with little, he is also faithful with much.[115] In the church, those who would be overseers
should first learn to lead their own houses well, before being entrusted to
lead in the household of faith. Teaching
men how to be faithful in their own houses helps prepare them for the potential
of ministering in church oversight.
[get quote
about 1:1100 marriages where couple prays together breaking up.]
We must also
realize that in the early church, there were some men who were teachers who
were probably not ordained as elders in the local church. At that time, teachers would form close
relationships with their students. Their
students would follow them around to learn from them. The teacher-student relationship was closer
than what we find in many modern classrooms.
Greek philosophy teachers had students that followed them, and so did
Jewish rabbis. Jesus had close
relationships with certain of His disciples, to whom He committed His
teachings.
Church planters
should develop close relationships with believers in new churches. As Paul was with the Ephesian elders, church
planters should get close enough to these saints that they can actually see how
they live their lives, and imitate them.
In the churches
planted through Paul’s ministry, before elders were appointed, certain of the
brethren must have emerged as teachers of the word. Candidates for overseer should have proven
themselves ‘apt to teach’ before being appointed as overseers.[116] Some teachers are overseers in the church,
but not all teachers are overseers. [Find
evidence that Justin Martyr was not an elder.]
In modern house
church plants that do not yet have any appointed leadership, the Lord may raise
up certain members to teach others.
Though many of the saints may share doctrinal teaching in the meetings,
certain of them may be especially gifted as teachers.[117] All may prophesy in the meeting in accordance
with the scriptures, but only certain members will be especially gifted as
prophets.[118]
Appointing
Elders Who Are Already Elders
Many who
believe in a plurality of elders ordained from within the congregation, believe
that the Lord will raise up men from within the congregation who are already
doing the work of eldership, and that these are the men that should be
appointed.
An example of
this principle can be found in the Old Testament. Moses was instructed to gather together men
who were already elders, and the Lord would put the Spirit that was on Moses on
them as well. These men were already
functioning as elders, and the Lord empowered them.
Numbers
11:16-17
16 And the Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me
seventy men of the elders of
17 And I will come down and talk with thee
there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon
them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it
not thyself alone.
Church planting
apostles who are preparing to appoint elders should realize that they are to be
used as instruments of the Lord when they appoint elders. Therefore, they should be sensitive to the
leading of the Holy Spirit. Paul said
that the Ephesian elders that the Holy Ghost had made the elders of the
Ephesian church overseers.[119] When Paul, Timothy, or other apostolic
workers appointed the Ephesian elders, they appointed the men the Holy Ghost
was making overseers.
Church planters
must be able to perceive the grace of God given to those who would be
elders. Paul and Barnabas had received
grace from God to minister to the Gentiles.
Later, when they met with James, Cephas, and John in
When trying to
discern to whom the Lord has given this grace, apostles should be open to
listening to the voice of God through others in the local congregation. The New Testament apostles were not
self-willed autocrats. They functioned
as a part of the body, and the Lord can speak through the least of his saints.
In
Imagine a
church planter who, like Paul, itinerates, preaching the Gospel in new
areas. He and his co-workers plant one
church, stay and disciple new believers, and then move on to preach
elswhere. While these church planters
are gone, the Lord matures certain men within the congregation. Later, on of the church planters returns, and
without consulting the congregation, praying, or seeking the Lord, chooses men
to be elders. Then he says to the congregation, “I know you don’t like these
men, but I am the apostle God sent you and led you to the faith, and so I
choose these men to be your elders.” It
is unlikely that he early apostles made decisions in such a manner. Church planters might be tempted to choose
men according to how they like their personalities, or how well they will
submit to their own apostolic authority.
Instead of relying on these factors, apostolic church planters
appointing elders should instead seek to discern who the Lord has raised up who
fits the qualifications of overseership in scripture.
Paul was a man
who had received great revelation from God.
Yet, when writing to the Corinthians, he did not write, “But I
have the mind of Christ.” Rather he
wrote, “But we have the mind of Christ.”[120] One man along should not presume to have the
mind of Christ all by Himself. But corporately, we can discern the Lord’s will
on a matter. An individual alone is only
a part of the whole body. There is power
and authority in the corporate body of believers. Church planters should, therefore , work with
the assembly to discern the Lord’s will in regard to who should be elders.
Before Paul
took Timothy along with him, the brethren spoke well of the young man.[121] At some time during Timothy’s life, the
elders of the church had prophesied about a gift he had been given, laying
hands on him.[122] The coworker Paul took with him on apostolic
ministry was not merely a man of his own liking, but a man endorsed by the
brethren—a man the Spirit would entrust with a ministry through prophecy. An apostle seeking to appoint elders should
be open to the endorsement of the brethren, as Paul was in the case of Timothy
and as the Twelve were in the appointing of the Seven. He should also be sensitive to what the Holy
Spirit would say, not only to his own heart, but also through the congregation.
If a house
church planting apostle returns to a church he planted there are many practical
things he can do to try to discern who, if any, should be appointed as
elders. If the church has been following
the Biblical instructions for meetings found in I Corinthians 14 and Hebrews
10:25, it will probably be a lot easier to determine who the potential elders
are. At the very least, those who are
‘apt to teach’ will have had an opportunity to emerge.[123] In a church that does not allow this freedom
may have many potential teachers whose gifts has not been used because they
have been sitting quietly according to liturgical tradition.
If the church
already has strong fellowship, and the believers have learned to love one
another and share their lives together, then the church planter will be able to
observe the relationships that have formed.
Some of the older men in the congregation may be acting as father
figures to the rest of the congregation.
Who do the saints go to for advice on spiritual and ethical
matters? If the apostle travels
frequently and knows other brethren who frequently visit the house churches he
planted, then he may already know from experience who in the church is given to hospitality. Those who are given to hospitality may
frequently offer the apostle and other workers to stay in their homes. By staying in different homes on each trip,
an apostle can see how brethren behave in their own home, at least while guests
are around. He may also ask the brethren
who among them is given to hospitality.
By observing these things, the apostle may, in his own mind, begin to
get an idea of who could possibly be a candidate for overseer according to
scripture.
But there are
many things a church planter cannot discern with his natural mind. What if a man puts himself forward as a
teacher, and many come to him for
advice, but secretly he is given to much wine, or beats his wife, or is having
a secret affair? Maybe the man leads a
fairly clean life, but occasionally teaches something strange and confusing,
and doesn’t truly grasp the Gospel. By
talking with other brethren, the apostle can find out who leads among the
church, and who lives a holy life. Yet
this is not enough. The apostle must
pray and seek to discern what the Spirit would say.? The Holy Spirit may also speak through other
brethren.
If the apostle senses
the Lord wants to appoint elders, after seeing who the Lord is using, and
discerning God’s will, he may wish to bring the matter up in a meeting of the church. If saints are allowed to speak in meetings,
according to scripture, they may bring up the issue before the apostle even
mentions it. The apostle can then exhort
the brethren to seek the Lord to reveal who among them fits the Biblical
qualifications for a church overseer.
This might also be an appropriate occasion to teach on what an overseer
should be like, using Acts 20, I Timothy 3, and Titus 1.
The apostle may
then wish to spend some time in prayer as the congregation prays as well. He may be led to begin to speak to those he
believes the Lord has prepared for eldership, and then suggest their names to
the congregation, or he may be led to allow the congregation to suggest men who
they believe the Lord has prepared for eldership. During this time, the church should be open
for the Lord to speak prophetically on the issue.
Naturally, the
apostle would want to avoid a situation in which unqualified men are suggested
as potential elders, but are rejected before the congregation. This could be potentially embarrassing. Hopefully, men who are unqualified would have
the humility and discretion to decline.
But others may feel hurt if their names are suggested and they are
rejected from eldership.
When the
apostle and the congregation have discerned the will of God, then the apostle
can lay hands on the elders of the church.
He may then spend time with them instructing them on their
responsibilities as elders of the church.
Commending
Elders with Prayer and Fasting
When elders of
the church are appointed, it is appropriate for the elders to be commended to
the Lord with prayer and fasting. This
is something that is not taught very much, but we do have a scriptural
precedent for it.
Acts
14:23 And when they had ordained them
elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the
Lord, on whom they believed.
The apostle or
apostles involved in the appointing of elders and the congregation can all
spend some time in prayer and fasting, asking the Lord to use the elders in the
ministry committed to them.
The brethren in
But What If
Our Church Wasn’t Planted by an Apostle?
Some churches
aren’t planted by apostles who start churches by evangelizing unbelievers in
new territory. In some parts of
The church in
Some elder-led
churches in this situation have elders from another church help them select
elders from among their own congregants, and lay hands on them. This seems like a natural decision for a
church that was planted as a collective effort through members of another
church. If the elders of that church
have been closely involved with the work at the new church, it makes sense that
they could help appoint elders. The
elders of the older church are asked to lay hands on the elders of the younger
church.
Americans are
very mobile. Many people move after
several years, finding employment in a
A key factor to
keep in mind is that authority that Jesus taught us the church has.
Matthew 18:19-20
19 Again I say
unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that
they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20 For where two or
three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
[Find
commentator who says ‘shall have already been bound’]
Churches
With Elders Should Still Function According to Biblical Principles
A congregation
that has been following Biblical guidelines for church meetings laid down in
passages like I Corinthians 14 should continue to do so after elders are
appointed. If a house church has been
exposed to the meetings of more traditional churches, some of the members might
be tempted to say, ‘We have elders now.
Why don’t you guys take turns preaching sermons, and let us just sit
here and listen?” Of course, elders
should be ‘apt to teach.’[125] In many churches, the elders may be some of
the strongest teachers.
Church
overseers should not attempt to use their position to silence the gifts of
other church members. Peter taught
elders not to lord over the flock but to serve as ‘ensamples to the flock.’[126] Elders should be examples for others to
follow. If an elder is gifted in
personal evangelism, he should provide a good example of personal evangelism
that others may follow it. An elder
should be excited when others evangelize.
He should not say, “You cannot evangelize without my permission.” An elder strongly gifted in teaching should
provide a good example of how to teach, and how to live up to one’s own
teaching. He should not say, “Excuse me,
sir, but you cannot teach without my permission. I am an elder, and no one else is allowed to
teach without my permission.” Instead,
an elder who teaches should spot those in the congregation with gifts of
teaching, and encourage them to use their gifts.
If an elder is
gifted as a prophet, he should use his prophetic gift in such a way that he is
an example to others. If he spots a
prophet just starting in his gift, he should help nurture that gift, and
encourage him to use it properly. He
should not say to a prophet who is genuinely speaking what he hears from God,
“I am an elder, so no one besides myself and the other elders are allowed to
prophesy in the meeting without our permission.
If you have a prophecy, write it down on a note card, and if I like it,
I’ll let you share it with the congregation, or just share it myself.” No, an elder who is a prophet must follow the
commandments of the Lord for prophets listed in I Corinthians 14. For example, if he is speaking as a prophet
in the assembly, and another receives a revelation, even though he is an elder
he must ‘hold his peace’ and allow another to prophesy, for all may prophesy.[127]
Watchman Nee’s
book, The Normal Christian Church Life contains insightful teachings
related to the role of elders in the church meetings.
Offices
are connected with the management of the church and are held by the elders and
the deacons. Gifts are connected with the ministry of the church and are
exercised by the prophets and teachers (and evangelists). The elders and
deacons are responsible for the management of the church, while the prophets
and teachers concern themselves chiefly with the meetings of the church. Should
the deacons and elders also be prophets and teachers, then they could manage
church affairs and at the same time minister to the church in the meetings. It
should be repeated here that elders as such are appointed for church government
and not for meetings to edify the church. In 1 Cor. 14, where meetings are in
view, elders do not come in at all. Elders, in order to be effective, should
also have the gift of a prophet, teacher, pastor, or evangelist, but it must be
remembered that when they minister in the meetings they do so not in the
capacity of elders but as prophets, or teachers, or other ministers.
[Footnote
chapter 9 ¾ thru chapter.]
Appointing
of Elders as a Part of a Reproducible Pattern of Church Planting
In the New
Testament, we see that elders were ordained by the laying on of hands of the
apostles. Though we do not have a clear
example of overseers laying hands on a newly appointed elder, it has long been
a tradition of the church to do so. We
do see that elders laid hands on Timothy, who labored in apostolic ministry,
and that a gift was imparted to him by prophecy.[128] If elders can lay hands on apostles, couldn’t
they lay hands on new elders, as the Spirit leads?
The methods described
in this chapter for selecting elders are methods that are reproducible. A team of apostles who plant a church and lay
hands on the first group of elders may minister far away for a long period of
time, and eventually die. As a church
grows and elders grow older and die, that church needs new elders to be
appointed. Elders can follow the same
methodology to appoint elders that the apostles who planted the church used
when they were around.
What many
involved in missions would hope to see in the unevangelized areas of
One of the
traditions that can slow down the growth of such a movement is the idea that
church leaders need to be brought in from Bible colleges to churches they were
not a part of. Sending a young person to
Bible college for four years is expensive, slow, and it does not even
necessarily prepare him for the work of the ministry. Even a seminary degree doesn’t make a man an
elder. Theological education is
wonderful. At least parts of it
are. But education should be given in
the church. One generation of people in
the church should educate the next.
Some who see
the importance of elders growing up from within the congregation cannot break
free from the traditional idea that church leaders must go to Bible school, and
so the would send elders from church plants in remote areas to Bible
school. The problem with this is that
the local church suffers. Taking out the
elders, or even one of the emerging teachers from within a tiny house church in
a remote area where there is little Christian witness has the potential to
really hurt a growing church, even if the leader goes for a one-year
program. Elders need to be with their
flocks so they can nurture them.
Theological education for newly emerging elders needs to be brought to
the elders. If a church sends men off
for theological education, why not send younger men in the Lord, who do not
bear the responsibility of eldership. They can return and share the good from
what they have learned with the local church, so that the church can pass it on
to other churches and to the next generation.
Only when they return, they must understand that their education will
not make them elders of the church.
Paul brought theological
education to the churches started through his ministry. Visiting gifted brethren could help
supplement this education. Apollos
greatly strengthened the church in
Believers in
churches need to have good biblical education.
The saints could also benefit from learning about figures in church
history and reading their writings. It
would be good for them to know the cultural background of different passages of
scripture. Theologically educated
ministers either planting house churches or visiting them after they are
planted can take this knowledge to the churches. Even Greek and Hebrew could be taught in the
local church. Many Jewish synagogues
have classes to teach Hebrew to their youth.
Elders in a
house church planting movement need to be committed to persevering a Biblical
pattern of eldership. Elders need to be
raised up to their position of responsibility within the local church. The elders of the church should see to it
that the churches under their care have the ministry needed for the saints to
grow to their full potential in ministry.
Local churches should produce apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors,
teachers and other ministers. If they do
not have these resources, then the elders and the rest of the congregation need
to seek God in prayer to bring these things to them. They can invite other brethren to come and
minister to them. Local churches that
have the Holy Spirit and the Bible have been blessed with quite a bit. They may not need theological education as
much as others may think.
Money,
Elders, and Temptation
One ministry
that teaches church planters who plant house churches was working with a small
church plant among what is considered to be an unreached people group
(UPG). An unreached people group is a suku
in which less than 2% of its members are Christians. Things were finally starting to take off for
this house church. There were two elders
who were the strong members of the house church and did a lot of the teaching
and seemed to be the members that really kept the church going.
A big
denominational church with many cabang in different locations found out
about these elders and asked them to come work for their big ministry as ministers
to this particular unreached people group. The elders were offered salaries.
The two elders left and the house church was without elders or strong leaders..
It is
conceivable that God could want elders to move into other ministries, but
elders of small house churches need to be aware of the temptations that may
await them, even temptations that come through other brethren. If the Holy Ghost has made a man an overseer
in a particular church, he should take that responsibility seriously, and not
leave without direction from the Lord.[133]
Being an elder
in a village house church among unreached peoples is not a glamorous work. Elders are not likely to receive a lot of
money as recognition for their work.
They are unlikely to be famous or to receive a lot of accolades from
men. Their houses may be the first
targets for angry fanatics. But didn’t
first century elders probably face a similar situation? Paul exhorted the elders of
Elders need to
understand the biblical role of elders, and be committed to it. Ministries with money may find out about
their church and offer them money to be used for building buildings, sending
elders to Bible college, or other things that would not truly benefit the
expansion of the kingdom.
An American
lay-missionary in
Foreign or
domestic missions dollars used to support the salaries of local overseers can
cause other problems, too. A church that
receives such funds may become dependant on them. Some missions agencies might even start
pressuring churches to add extraBiblical requirements for their leaders, which
could cause all kinds of problems. If a
missions organization stops sending funds, a dependant church may not know what
to do. Supporting elders from missions
funds is also a model that is not reproducible.
A church planter sent out from a church that does this may think that
when a new church gets ready to have elders, they will need to find a source
for missions funding to support them.
Waiting for missions funds can become another reason for slowing down
appointment of elders and planting new churches. In a fast-exploding house church movement, it
is unlikely that every church will be able to find a source of missions support
funds. Besides that, the members of
local congregations who are receiving ministry from hard-working elders should
learn to be responsible to help their elders out financially.
I heard a
proposal for a plan to start a Bible college.
Those who wanted to be pendeta could sign up to attend. They would go to school at a really nice area
similar to a resort. All tuition would
be paid by foreign dollars. When they
graduated, they could find nice-paying jobs as pendeta. Couldn’t a Bible college run like this
attract the wrong type of people to church leadership? It is good that people want to give to
missions, but money must be spent wisely.
Indonesian
rupiah from wealthy brethren in the cities can also cause problems in the desa. Apostles who plant churches must be careful
to see that overseers who are appointed are not lovers of money. Lovers of money can easily be tempted to
leave what their work for the kingdom to do some other religious employment
that pays better. Elders must also guard
their hearts so as not to become lovers of money.
Appointing
Elders in an Unreached People-Group
Many western
missionaries these days are careful to try to avoid any appearance of
imperialism. They certainly would not want
to return to a situation one might see over a hundred years ago, churches full
of native believers in which many of the leaders are white foreign
missionaries. Western missionaries who
have learned about missiology these days are generally conscious of the need
for churches in newly evangelized to have leader from their own suku.
Those who plant
churches among UPG’s in
On the other
hand, we also need to be careful not to go to the opposite extreme. If a Batak migrant goes to a Batak village
and becomes a part of the community and a
part of the church there, if he is elder
material, why shouldn’t he become an elder?
We should not reject the ministry of a part of the body of Christ simply
to avoid the appearance of cultural imperialism.
Elders
Dealing With Error
When someone
comes into the assembly spouting off false doctrines or causing division, the
elders should be ready to deal with the situation. It may be easier for the elders, in some
ways, to muzzle all the other gifted members of the assembly, and only allow
elders to speak, than it is to allow the gifts to function, and then deal with
all the false teachings and other problems that can arise in the assembly. But bishops are not called to an easy work,
but rather to a good work.[135]
Paul wrote to
Titus concerning elders,
Titus
1:9-11
9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath
been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to
convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers
and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert
whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
If the elders
appointed truly know the word of God, and are apt to teach, they should be
equipped to deal with false teachers that try to work their way into
church. They should be able to deal with
critics of the Gospel that should be bold enough to speak in the church, or
else in some other place.
A church that
does not yet have elders may be able to deal with ‘unruly and vain talkers and
deceivers’ that arise in their midst.
Teachers and others in the assembly may be able to refute their false
teachings, and the church can decide to withdraw from them. But a church that has faithful, Biblically
qualified, mature elders, has a definite advantage in this area. The elders of the church are recognized as
leaders. They are more confident in
their work because their ministries are recognized by the congregation, and
they have been commended to the Lord.
Elders also
bear the weight of responsibility if they allow false teachers to come in and
damage the congregation, and they do nothing.
On the other hand, elders should be careful not to crush believers who
have a different opinion on some non-essential matter of doctrine. There is room for different viewpoints on
many issues in the body of Christ. An
elder should also treat a deceiver who ‘has not the Spirit’[136]
who leads others to deny the Lord different from a weak new believer in the
faith who presents some wrong idea to the assembly. The Lord Jesus knew not to break bruised
reeds, and quench smoking flax.[137] Elders should know when to rebuke and resist
strongly, and when the gently correct.
Elders may find themselves wounding weak brethren if they get into the
habit of strongly rebuking every false doctrine in public. Gentle correction and a conversation with a
brother after the meeting are sometimes the best way to deal with issues.
Elders also
need to realize that they are not infallible by virtue of being elders. Consider Paul’s warning to the Ephesian
elders.
Acts
20:29-31
29 For I know this, that after my departing
shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise,
speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space
of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.
Not only do
elders have to be aware of the wolves from without, but they also have to
beware of the possibility of men from among their own number drawing disciples
away after themselves. This latter
problem is very dangerous. Elders chosen
by God can fall into sin, and try to take the sheep of Christ as their own
personal flock. The other elders must be
prepared to resist if the Devil tries to use a man from among the eldership.
John had a
problem with a certain leader in a church who would not receive the brethren.
III John
1:9-10
9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who
loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.
10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his
deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content
therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them
that would, and casteth them out of the church.
We don’t know
whether Diotrophes was an elder or not, but he had influence in the
congregation, and used that influence against John and others that were sent to
help the church. Even leaders can be
tempted to sin. Elders should be careful
not to sin and abuse their position in this way.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 13
The Law
in Evangelism
Ray Comfort, an evangelist from
Before Comfort realized this, he
preached what he calls ‘the modern Gospel.’
He began to read statistics that show that the vast majority of people
who came forward during invitations to receive Christ were not involved in a
church a year later. [Edit and add
stats]
[Disease before cure. Gronenson’s disease analogy. Parachute analogy]
Ray Comfort is concerned that the
way the Gospel is presented today, it attracts many ‘stony ground hearers,’
rather than true converts to Jesus Christ.
The concept of the ‘stony ground hearer’ comes from the parable of the
sower.
Mark 4:16-17
16 And these are
they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the
word, immediately receive it with gladness;
17 And have no
root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or
persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.
Some unbelievers can easily be
persuaded to go through a ritual of repeating a prayer if they are promised
eternal life just by going through the ritual.
But there are many who repeat these prayers who go back out into the
world and live like unbelievers. Some
repeat a prayer and continue to go to church, but do not live Christian
lives. We should not be so naive as to
believe that someone who repeats a prayer, but does not bring forth good fruit
is a Christian.
John the Baptist said, “Bring
forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance...”[138] Paul taught Jews and Gentiles “that they should repent and turn to God, and do
works meet for repentance.[139] Jesus taught “Even so every good tree
bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.”[140] If repentance is genuine, shouldn’t we expect
the fruits of true repentance?
Let us not
forget the words of Christ:
Matthew 7:21 Not
every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of
heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
If an unbeliever
who is told to repeat a prayer, but who has not truly repented of his sin and
believed in Christ, and is told that he is saved, we may be inoculating him to
the Gospel. An inoculation is an
injection of a weakened or dead form of a bacteria, virus, or other
parasite. A polio vaccine introduces a
small amount of weakened polio into the body.
The polio is usually too weak to actually infect the patient. But the patient’s body uses those germs to
learn how to fight off polio. If the
patient comes in contact with a strong polio virus after receiving the
vaccination, his body usually knows how to fight off the germs.
Some
unbelievers are presented with the Gospel, and asked to quickly repeat a
prayer. If the unbelievers does not
truly repent and believe, but other Christians insist that he is saved, he will
continue in his sin. Some people who
have gone through this experience go back out into the world. Later, when they hear the Gospel preached,
they think “I already tried that, and it didn’t do anything for me.”
Ray Comfort now evangelizes by
focusing on Christ as a means of peace and happiness. Now, Ray Comfort preaches to unbelievers that
they are sinners, justly condemned by a righteous God. After presenting sinners with their just
condemnation and punishment according to the Law of God, he presents Christ as
the solution to their problem. [insert endnote, web page] Paul tells us the purpose of the Law in Romans 3:19-20:
One of Ray Comfort’s methods of
personal evangelism is to take an unbeliever through the Ten Commandments,
confronting him with each commandment.
On the issues of adultery and murder, he refers to Jesus’ teaching on
these two commands. In reference to
murder, Christ taught against calling one’s brother names in anger. On the issue of adultery, Christ warned that
whoever looked on a woman in order to lust after her, he had committed adultery
with her already in his heart. [Endnote
a Ray Comfort sermon from the web.]
Romans 3 shows us one of the purposes of the
Law.
19 Now we know
that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law:
that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before
God.
20 Therefore by
the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the
law is the knowledge of sin.
Those who are led by the Spirit
are not under the Law.[141] But the Law certainly does have power over
sinners.
I Timothy 1:9-10
9 Knowing this,
that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and
disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for
murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For
whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for
liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary
to sound doctrine;
Mark 2 tells of a time when Jesus
was teaching in a house. There was a man
sick with the palsy whose friends opened up the roof and let him down so that
Jesus could heal them. “When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the
sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. Jesus responded to this faith and forgave the
man’s sins.
Luke 7 tells
of a time when Jesus was in a Pharisees house.
While he was eating, a sinful woman wept at his feet, kissing his feet,
and wiping her tears from them with her hair with her hair. Jesus said to this woman “Thy faith hath
saved thee. Go in peace.”
This woman
was obviously aware of her sinful state.
That is probably why she wept at the Lord’s feet. She believed in Jesus enough to go to him in
her sinful condition. Christ responded
in grace with forgiveness.
But not all
sinners are aware of their sinful state.
In fact, some sinners consider themselves to be righteous. Matthew 19 tells of a rich young ruler that
came to Jesus seeking eternal life. Did
Jesus tell this man that the way to salvation was faith in Himself? Jesus told the man, “...if thou wilt enter
into life, keep the commandments.”[142] Jesus listed commandments for the man, “Thou
shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou
shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself.”[143]
The young man was obviously rather
convinced of his own righteousness because he answered Christ, “All these things have I kept from my youth up:
what lack I yet?”[144] Jesus responded by pointing out the sin that
was in the man’s heart, his love of money. “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the
poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”[145]
[Insert quote
about crying and tears from Jonathan Edwards sermon or something from Finney.]
Some who do personal evangelism,
merely seek to have the sinner acknowledge intellectually that he is a
sinner. Some may be able acknowledge
that they are sinners without remorse or guilt.
But an unbeliever who is under strong conviction of his sin will know
deep down to the core of his being that he is guilty of sin before God. This knowledge should bother him. It should affect his emotions. The apostle Paul knew about being convicted
of sin and godly sorrow. As an
unbeliever it was hard for him to ‘kick against the pricks.’[146] After Christ appeared to him, and he wondered
around for three days, he was ready to have his sinned washed away.[147] Paul carried with him throughout life the
knowledge that he was deserving of God’s wrath, and that He had been spared
through Christ. [Insert footnote.] He thought of himself as ‘the chief of
sinners.’ [footnote. Transition about Paul knowing about
Godly sorrow]
II Corinthians 7:10
For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of:
but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
It is good for those who come to
Christ with forgiveness to come, not with an attitude of getting ‘fire
insurance’ just in case the Gospel is true, but rather with a deep sense of
conviction that they are unworthy sinner’s, worthy of Hell, throwing themselves
upon the mercy of Christ.
Jonah was sent by God to preach to
John the Baptist preached a
message to
The desire to flee from the wrath
of God and to seek His mercy is an appropriate motivation for a sinner to seek
to become a Christian. While Christians
do experience peace and joy as genuine
fruits of the Spirit, if we try to convince unbelievers to become Christians
merely for peace and joy, and not because they are motivated to be forgiven
from their sins, we can expect to see a lot of false converts in our
churches. Some try to evangelize the
youth by convincing them that Christianity is cool. [Add Kirk Cameron quote that we don’t
evangelize youth by convincing them that Christianity is cooler than MTV, but
rather by presenting them with their sinfulness according to the Law of God.] It is possible to fill churches through
preaching things that sinners want to hear, and by using secular marketing
techniques. These techniques can
generate false converts that fill churches with high maintenance, low impact
people.
It is appropriate for preachers of
the Gospel to persuade sinners of their sinful state before God and to warn
them to flee from the wrath to come.
Christ preached “Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”[152] Christ also warned sinners of their fate if
they did not repent:
Luke 13:3-5
3 I tell you, Nay:
but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
4 Or those
eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they
were sinners above all men that dwelt in
5 I tell you,
Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
Revelation is something that every
believer in Christ has. Some fear the
idea that Christians receive ‘revelation,’ using the term only to refer to
Scripture. But if we read the Bible, we
see that there is a type of revelation that all believers receive.. All who truly believe in Christ, have
received revelation from the Father.
Christ reveals the Father to His followers.
Peter knew that Jesus was the
Christ, the Son of God by revelation.
Jesus said to him, “no man knoweth
the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and
he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.”[153]Jesus
taught, “no man knoweth the Son, but the
Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever
the Son will reveal him.”[154] John asked “Who hath warned you to flee from
the wrath to come?”[155]
Those who are believers are able
to believe because God has revealed the truth to them. Those who do not believe are blinded from the
light of the Gospel of Christ.[156] But in spite of this, we know that there is
some revelation about that unbelievers are able to perceive. If we can understand what God has revealed to
unbelievers, it can help us present the Gospel to them more effectively.
It is sometimes easier to share
the Gospel with someone with whom we have common ground. For example, it may be much easier to share
the Gospel with a man who acknowledges that there is one God, and who respects
Jesus, than with an animist who does not believe in one supreme God. Paul found common ground that both he and his
audience believed in when he quoted spiritual truths found in the writings of a
pagan poet to an Athenian audience, a poet the Athenians respected. There is revelation that God gives to
unbelievers. By focusing on these things
in evangelizing unbelievers, we can find a kind of common ground with
unbelievers.
In the 1990’s, the study book Experiencing
God was popular with many Christian groups.
[footnote] The book
taught Christians to see what God was doing in their lives, and start
cooperating with what they saw God was doing.
What has God revealed to
unbelievers, and what is God doing in the hearts of unbelievers? Any believer involved in personal evangelism
or in evangelistic preaching would benefit from knowing what God is doing in
the hearts of unbelievers.
Romans 1:18
18 For the wrath
of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of
men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Here we see that there is
revelation from God that has been shown from heaven to the unrighteous: God is angry at them. If an evangelist tells an unbeliever that God
is angry at him, he has a reason to believe it!
God’s wrath is revealed.
Somewhere, somehow, the light of this truth shines from heaven on the
heart of the unbeliever.
The rest of Romans 1 goes on to
explain that the nature of God, including his eternal power and Godhead, are
manifest in creation. Men, when they
knew God, did not glorify Him his God.
Their hearts were darkened and they turned to idolatry and perversion.[157] One who preaches or shares the Gospel must
shine the light of the truth on the darkened heart of the unbeliever.
The reality that there is a God is
manifest in creation. God’s wrath
against ungodliness and unrighteousness is a part of the revelation available
to unbelievers. An evangelist who
preaches on these matters preaches on
revelation that shines on the heart of unbelievers. Many unbelievers choose not to believe or
accept the revelation that shines upon their hearts.
What is the role of the Holy Ghost
in evangelism? How can those who do
evangelism cooperate with the Holy Ghost?
Jesus tells us what the role of the Holy Ghost after His ascension.
John 16:8-11
8 And when he is
come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because
they believe not on me;
10 Of
righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment,
because the prince of this world is judged.
Three things the Holy Spirit
convicts the world of are sin, righteousness, and judgment. If this is the case, then we should expect an
evangelist who is preaching by the power of the Spirit to preach on these three
subjects as well.
It is important to confront
unbelievers with their sin. John the
baptism preached repentance to the people.
Some evangelize by reading through a four-point track. One point of this track is for the sinner to
acknowledge that he is a sinner. It is
so easy to briefly skim over this point.
But a sinner who experiences godly sorrow that leads to repentance has a
deep realization of his sin. It is not
mere intellectual assent. It is possible
for someone witnessing with a track to skip over the issue of sin.
Some unbelievers don’t know what
‘sin’ really means. Some religions do
not have the same concept of sin that Christianity and Judaism does. An evangelist needs to explain what sin is,
and help sinners understand their guilt before God.
The Holy Ghost convicts the world
of righteousness. Many sinners,
accustomed to sin, do not understand what righteousness is. An evangelist can help explain righteousness
by contrasting sin to the law of God. In
personal evangelism, showing a sinner, verse by verse, each of the
commandments, and letting him examine his own righteousness in light of these
commandments may allow him to see clearly his own guilt before God.
The Holy Spirit convicts the world
of judgment. The wrath of God is against
all unrighteousness of men. There is a
coming judgment. It is good for an
evangelist to proclaim this truth. The
Holy Spirit is already convicting the world of this, and the evangelist should
cooperate with the Holy Spirit.
Paul preached on sin, righteousness
and judgment. Notice the reaction of
Felix, the Roman governor, to Paul’s preaching.
Acts 24:24-25
24 And after
certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he
sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.
25 And as he
reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled,
and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will
call for thee.
Paul taught Felix about
righteousness, self-control, and judgment.
Felix, a sinner needed to be taught what sin and righteousness
were. He needed to know that he would be
judged for his sin. Paul was preaching
the same thing the Holy Spirit convicts men about. His message was powerful. There was truth to it, and Felix trembled.
The knowledge of the wrath of God
motivated Paul to persuade men of the truth of the Gospel, and is reflected in
the message Paul preached to others.
Consider Paul’s words to the Corinthians.
II Corinthians 5:10-11
10 For we must all
appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the
things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or
bad.
11 Knowing
therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest
unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
The sinner may hold to a thousand
different religious ideas and philosophies that deny the Biblical truths of
sin, righteousness, and judgment. But
the Holy Spirit is busy convicting him of his sin. Creation testifies to him of the reality of
God. God’s wrath is revealed from heaven
to him. He may deny that revelation and
hold to other religious beliefs and philosophies. But when a man of God comes to him,
proclaiming these truths with the power of the Spirit, he can be cut to the
heart with the truth.
The apostle Paul was a great
evangelist and teacher. He went from
city to city, preaching the Gospel to unbelievers, and instructing new
believers in the faith. In II
Corinthians, Paul uses warfare metaphors to describe his ministry.
II Corinthians 10:3-5
3 For though we
walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 (For the
weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling
down of strong holds;)
5 Casting down
imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge
of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
Some use these verses to argue for
the idea of walking or driving around a city, rebuking evil spirits named after
the city’s sins. But if we read the
verses carefully, we see that Paul talks about ‘imaginations’ and
‘thought.’ Paul warred in the realm of
ideas. In context, Paul is preparing to
address the issue of false apostles deceiving the Corinthians. But we can easily see how Paul’s warfare was
true both in the case of teaching believers about Christ and in the case of
evangelizing unbelievers.
What are the strongholds Paul
writes about in this passage? Wrong
ideas. Paul fought against imaginations
and high things that exalt themselves against the knowledge of Christ. What weapon would Paul have used to overcome
such ideas? In the book of Ephesians,
Paul refers to the “sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God”.[158] From reading Acts and the epistles, we can
see that Paul fought false ideas by preaching and teaching the truth with the
power of the Spirit.
Imagine if you will, a man who
hates light. He builds a stronghold out
of blocks around himself to keep this light out. The light in this analogy is revelation from
God. The blocks are ideas that the man
holds to. On each block of the man’s
fortress is written an idea that he uses to keep himself from dealing with the
truth revealed from God. On each block a
sentence is written. Here are some of
the sentences on the blocks of the stronghold.
“I am basically a good person.”
“I pray five times a day.”
“My good works outweigh my bad
works.”
“I read my religious book every
night.”
“I am more righteous than my
neighbors.”
“I donate food to the poor every
year.”
Every unbeliever’s stronghold will
have different blocks made up of different ideas. But the same weapon is used to tear down
every stronghold. An apostle,
evangelist, or normal everyday Christian can tear down a stronghold like this
using the word of God. Using the Ten
Commandments, the teachings of Christ, and other passages, one can show an
unbeliever that he deserves God’s righteous judgment. Even if he doesn’t accept the Bible as
authoritative, if you knock down his stronghold of ideas with the word of God,
he is left to deal with the conviction of the Holy Spirit.
Some people, to continue with the analogy,
if their stronghold is knocked down, will run from the light and build another
stronghold of ideas. Evildoers do not
love the light.
John 3:20 For
every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest
his deeds should be reproved.
I once asked an Indonesian friend of mine who believed in God and adhered to another religion, if he had ever stolen anything. He said he had stolen batteries as a child. I thought about this comment later on, and prayed for an opportunity to share the Gospel with him. Later, the opportunity arose, and we were able to eat lunch together alone. I asked my friend to put his hand on the table. No knife was available, so I took a fork in my hand and offered to perforate his hand off to help him. I reminded him that, according to his religion, a man who stole deserved to have his hand chopped off. A told him of an oral tradition of a man he considered to be a prophet. The tradition told of a woman who was brought to the man for stealing. She begged him that she might find forgiveness and that her hand might be cut off. This religious leader told her that when her hand was cut off she would be as pure as she was the day she was born.
My friend was familiar with this
oral tradition. I asked him, if he still
had his hand on the day of judgment, how could he have any hope of being
justified on the day of judgment. He
would stand before a holy God who forbade stealing, with the guilt of this
sin. I offered again to stab my friend’s
hand off for him, pretending to be serious.
Of course, he declined my offer, but we did have a very good
conversation which allowed me to present the issues of sin, righteousness,
judgment, and the salvation freely available to sinners through Jesus
Christ. I shared with him from the Ten
Commandments and from Christ’s teaching on righteousness. I wish I could say that he repented and
believed that day, but a seed was planted.
His sin was exposed by the word of God, and the message of salvation through
Christ was presented.
Another man I met had been a
member of this same religion, but became a Christian. This man translated for me at a church I
spoke in on Java, and I got a chance to talk to him a little about his
background. There are few Christians in
his people-group, so I asked the man what obstacles he experienced that he had
to overcome to believe in Christ. I
asked him if the doctrine of the Trinity was difficult for him to believe. He told me that he issue for him was not the
Trinity or some fine point of doctrine.
Some Christians had showed him that he was a sinner. They showed him that Christ, and no other
prophet, could save Him from His sin. He
knew that he had sinned against God, and he wanted to be reconciled. This is what drove him to Christ.
There are many things that we can
focus on in evangelism. The apostle Paul
wrote, “knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, persuade men”.[159] Those who share the Gospel should naturally
try to persuade men. Any ideas that
serve as stumbling blocks to faith can be dealt with using the word of
God. A polytheist will need to be
presented with the truth that there is one God.
One may use Aristotelian logic or other reasonable arguments to help
persuade sinners. But we must realize
that sinners repent because they realize their sinful state before God, and not
merely because of philosophical arguments.
The Holy Spirit convicts of sin, righteousness, and of judgment. We should be sure to hold up the righteous
standard of the Law of God, convince the sinner of his sin, and then present
Jesus as the solution.
[Cite examples
from New Tribes Missions method of teaching Genesis through NT. Explain situation of Paul speaking to
Gentiles, versus to Jews.]
Traditions Added to
Christianity
In Matthew 23, Jesus
confronted scribes and Pharisees who were really concerned with ritual aspects
of the Law, but had forsaken the important aspects of the Law, justice, mercy,
and faith. The scribes Pharisees had
added many traditional man-made requirements to what was required of God’s
people. They followed an elaborate
method of hand washing before they ate.
In Matthew 15, they asked Jesus why His disciples did not wash their
hands before they ate, according to the traditions. Jesus pointed out how their tradition could
cause men to break the commandments of God.
In the history of
Christianity, we can see that there is a tendency to add to what God requires
of men, just as their was in the history of Judaism. Martin Luther was a man who did not
understand salvation. He went to
Many Evangelicals consider
Roman Catholicism to be a system in which men try to earn salvation by doing
good works, and going through certain rituals.
But have evangelicals added any of their own traditions to salvation?
An Experience With an
Altar Call
I attended a certain service
in
The preacher called this
unsuspecting man up to the front. Being
in front of a crowd of over a hundred people, the man complied. The preacher asked him to face the
congregation and repeat a prayer. The
man went along with it and repeated a prayer to receive Christ as his personal
Savior, and sat back down.
I suspected, from looking at
the man, that he had just gotten trapped into repeating that prayer because of
pressure from the crowd. There were no
tears of repentance or other outward signs of contrition. He got in that situation because he didn’t
know the terminology used in the church he was in. The strange thing was that it seemed to me
that no one else there realized what had just happened. Maybe it was my imagination, but I got the
impression that the rest of the crowd thought that man had become a knew
creature in Christ Jesus that night. In
the closing prayer, an assistant pastor [wakil pendeta] thanked the Lord for saving
the man’s soul.
There was no program for
follow-up in place in this church. I
went up to the man after the meeting and asked if he felt anything special had
happened to him that night. He said
no. He explained that he was a Roman
Catholic who had divorced and remarried, and was cut off from Communion in his
own church. He saw an advertisement for
the church meeting that night, and came out of curiosity. He said, politely, that our church was
‘interesting.’ I asked him if he wanted
anyone to pray with him. He did not.
The Ritual of the Altar
Call
Many consider an altar call
to be essential to a church meeting.
Some see going down to a church altar and repeating a prayer as nearly
essential to salvation. In the Bible,
the altar was a place in the temple for burning sacrifices, not a prayer bench
at the front of a church building. Since
many churches met in homes, it is unlikely that there even was an ‘altar.’ [Check out use of ‘altar’ in
Indonesian terminology.]
Keith Green was an American
evangelist and musician who died in a plane crash in the early 1980’s. He wrote many tracts and articles. The following is an excerpt from Keith
Green’s, What’s Wrong with the Gospel?
“Believe it or not, the altar call was invented only about
150 years ago. It was first used by the American evangelist, Charles Finney, as
a means of separating out those who wanted to talk further about the subject of
salvation. Finney called the front pew "the anxious seat" (for those
who were "anxious" about the state of their souls) or "the
mourner's bench." Finney never "led them in a prayer," but he
and a few others would spend a great deal of time praying with and giving
specific instructions to each, one by one, until finally, everyone was sent
home to pray and continue seeking God until "they had broken through and
expressed hope in Christ," as Finney would say.
The early Salvation Army, going a bit further on Finney's
innovation, developed what they called "the penitent form" or
"the mercy seat." After a rousing time of singing and preaching, they
would invite any sinner present who wanted to confess his sins to God and
repent, to come to the front, and they would be prayed for individually. I have
met a few older Christians who used to attend some of these early meetings, and
they said that sometimes people would stay there all night, and on a few
occasions, even a few days, weeping and confessing their sins with broken
hearts. There were always some who would stay right there to instruct them
further, encouraging them to make a clean sweep of sin from their lives.”
This is what the early "altar call" was like. But
gradually, it began to become a fixed part of every meeting, and like all other
traditions, it began to lose its original spirit. The "coming
forward" part started to be more important than the "sorrow,
confession, repentance, and instruction" parts. Eventually, anyone who
would "come down the aisle" was excitedly proclaimed "a new
believer in Christ!" No matter how they felt, they still were told,
"Your sins are forgiven, brother! Rejoice in Christ!" How many a
miserable, defeated, and confused person has come away from a meeting like
this? (Jer. 6:14).”[160]
The Ritual of the Sinner’s
Prayer
One day, I heard a preacher
say from the pulpit that unless a man ‘prayed that prayer to receive Christ’,
he is not a true Christian. Many hold to
this point of view. But is this teaching
Biblical?
The story above shows that it
is possible to repeat a sinner’s prayer without being truly sincere. Many others do repeat a sinner’s prayer
sincerely wanting peace, joy, and ‘fire insurance’ for their souls, but without
a heart of true repentance before God.
There is a passage that tells
of a sinner who was justified after praying a prayer.
Luke 18:10-14
10 Two men went
up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee
stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other
men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice
in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican,
standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote
upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you,
this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one
that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be
exalted.
We must realize that this passage
tells of events that happened before Christ died on the cross. This publican was a Jew who was under the
covenant God made with Moses. But we see
that God forgave this man when he prayed a true prayer of repentance from his
heart. He did not merely repeat a ritual
prayer and consider himself saved.
If the Jews had made a ritual of
lining men up at the temple and having them merely repeat the prayer “God be
merciful on me, a sinner,” would they all have left justified before God? The man was not forgiven for following a
ritual, but because of his sincere repentance.
It is possible for a ‘prayer to
receive Christ’ to be treated as an insincere ritual. Ironically, there are also Christians who do
not accept other Christians as genuine believers if they have never repeated a
‘prayer to receive Christ’ There is no
Biblical example of an apostle or other figure in the New Testament having
someone repeat a prayer to receive Christ.
There is no teaching in the New Testament that the way to receive Christ
is to repeat a prayer? What is there in
the Bible that has led many Christians to evangelize by means of repeating a
prayer?
A typical scripture used when
instructing people to repeat a prayer is Romans 10:9-10.
Romans 10:9-10
9 That if thou
shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart
that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart
man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto
salvation.
Notice that these verses do not
say that the confession that Christ is Lord must take the form of a ‘prayer to
receive Christ.’ The apostles and other
saints we read about in the New Testament confessed Christ as Lord, but it is
unlikely that they ever went through the modern ritual of repeating ‘a prayer
to receive Christ. ‘
Also, if one goes up front during
an altar call and repeats a prayer, there is no guarantee that he has ‘believed
unto righteousness’ in his heart.
I grew up in the ‘Bible Belt’ in
the southern part of the
What happens when a sinner goes up
to an altar, repeats a prayer, but doesn’t repent. What will he say when the Holy Spirit convicts
him that he needs to repent? Might he
not remember the preacher’s words and think he is hearing the Devil speak to
him?
A lot of terminology, concepts and
sayings used in modern evangelism have no basis in scripture. Much of this terminology that is used in
evangelism can actually confuse sinners about our message.
Many preachers, before giving an invitation for people to come forward and repeat a prayer, will tell sinners that they need to “ask Jesus to come into your heart.” Paul did pray that Christ would dwell in the hearts of the Ephesians by faith, but nowhere does the New Testament teach that one becomes a Christian as a result of one asking Christ to come into his heart. Christ can dwell in our hearts through faith if we repent and believe according to the scriptures. But what good will it do for a sinner to pray for Jesus to come into his heart if the sinner does not repent or if the sinner does not believe that Christ died on the cross for His sins, and rose again from the dead? There are preachers who will give ‘sloppy altar calls’ which omit important details like the need to repent from sin, the atonement of the cross, and the resurrection of Christ. This presentation of the Gospel is replaced with the plea to ‘ask Jesus into your heart.’
Where does the idea of accepting Christ to come into ones heart to attain salvation come from? This idea has probably gained such widespread popularity because of sermons preached on the following verse:
Revelation 3:20 Behold, I stand at
the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come
in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
I have heard many preachers preach to sinners using this verse, telling them that Christ stands at the door of a sinners heart, knocking, waiting to come in. Actually, this passage is written to the Laodician church, a church in need of repentance, and not to unbelievers who have never received the Gospel.
Some preachers seem to think that the term ‘receive Christ’ refers to asking Christ to come dwell spiritually in one’s heart. Let us look at the passage from which this concept is taken.
John 1:11-12
11 He came unto
his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
There is nothing about this passage to indicate that ‘receive’ here is specifically a mystical term to refer to receiving a Spirit into one’s heart. If we receive Jesus, we accept and follow His teachings. We are not ashamed to be associated with Him. IF we receive Christ with faith, believing He is Who He claims to be, then we do reap spiritual benefits. The Spirit of Christ comes into our hearts.
Through the
years, evangelical Christianity has developed its own jargon to share the
Gospel. It is possible for the Gospel
message to be so bogged down in jargon that sinner's can barely understand it. One common example of this is the use of the
term ‘Personal Savior.’ Many
English-speaking Christians speak of Christ as their ‘Personal Savior.’
I have heard sermons
that explained that Christ is not only the Savior of the world in a general
sense, but that He is the Savior of individuals who put their faith in
Him. Some people have heard that Christ
is the Savior, but don’t realize that one must repent personally. The term ‘Personal Savior’ was used to
explain the Gospel to people in countries where many claim to be ‘Christian,’
but don’t understand the Gospel.
Unfortunately,
many Christians use the term ‘Personal Savior’ in evangelizing without
explaining what it means. If the reason
for adding ‘personal’ to the word ‘Savior’ is to explain to nominal Christians
that one must personally repent, then why do we feel we must use this
terminology when sharing the Gospel with someone who comes from a completely
non-Christian background?
In English,
the word for ‘pribadi’ in ‘Juru Selamat Pribadi’ is ‘Personal’. We also call home or office computer
terminals ‘personal computers.’ A
personal computer is one I use all by myself.
It isn’t a big computer system that everyone else uses. What is an unbeliever, unfamiliar with the
term ‘Personal Savor’ to make of it?
Maybe he will think that if Christ is his personal Savior, that Christ
belongs to him. We are Christ’s personal
servants. We belong to Him. The term ‘Personal Savior’ can be confusing
if it is not explained.
Keith Green
commented on the use of the term ‘Personal Savior’ in evangelizing:
Would
you ever introduce your sister like this: "This is Sheila, my personal
sister"?! Or would you point to your navel and say, "This is my
personal bellybutton"? Ridiculous! But nevertheless, people solemnly speak
of Christ as the personal Savior, as if they've got Him right there in
their shirt pocket - and as if when He returns, he will not have two, but three
titles written across His thigh: King of Kings, Lord of Lords and
Personal Savior! (See Rev. 19:16) This is only one example of how a
non-biblical term can be elevated to reverence by the Church, as if to say,
"Well even if it isn't in the Bible - it should be!"[161]
Some Christians even consider the use
of the term ‘Personal Savor’ to be a mark of orthodoxy, as if someone who does
not use this phrase is not saved. Some
Christians who try to win sinners to Christ by leading them in a repeated
prayer omit important doctrines like the Lordship, death, and resurrection of
Christ, but are sure to include the phrase ‘Personal Savior.’ In some circles, “Dear Lord Jesus, come into
my heart and be my Personal Savior” would be accepted as an ideal type of
sinner’s prayer.
‘Personal Savior’ is a term that
does not show up in the Bible. The use
of the term should not be used as a test of orthodoxy. Any Christian involved in evangelism, weather
open-air preaching or personal evangelism, should consider the message they
preach. Do we merely repeat religious phrases
we have heard in our church experience?
Does our audience understand our message? If the religious terminology we use makes the
Gospel more difficult to understand, and isn’t even found in scripture, we
should consider changing the terminology we use.
In the past 15 years or so, the
saying in English, “Christianity is not a religion, but a relationship.” (“Kekristinan
bukan agama, tetapi kektrisinan adalah hubungan.”) has become very popular
in Sunday sermons and personal evangelism.
Under influence from
English-language preaching, some Indonesians have started to try to redefine
the word agama to mean something bad.
If Christians don’t feel free to use words like agama or religion
it makes it very difficult to communicate about spiritual things. Why do we feel the need to confuse ourselves
and unbelievers by redefining the meanings of perfectly good words?
Many years ago, I was in a church
in the
I remember thinking what an
unbeliever would think if he heard that.
If I were an unbeliever visiting a church, and heard the preacher say
that religion was a bad thing, I would be totally confused. Why would the preacher be preaching if he
thought religion is a bad thing? Why
wouldn’t a preacher want Christians to be religious? If we fill our presentations of the Gospel
with confusing, nearly meaningless phrases, and new definitions of words that
unbelievers do not know, how do we expect them to understand what we are
saying?
In order to explain the Gospel, we
may need to use terms that are unfamiliar to unbelievers. There are many words and phrases in
Scriptures that unbelievers may not immediately understand. Does this mean we should avoid using
scriptural terminology? Of course
not. We just need to be careful to
explain the meanings of the terms we are using.
One rather direct method of
personal evangelism I’ve seen is for a Christian to come up to a stranger and
say “Are you saved?” Imagine an animist
in the jungle who has never heard of Jesus.
If someone came up to him and asked him if he were saved he might wonder
why he needed to be saved. Was he about
to be killed by a war party from a neighboring village? Had the man seen someone pull him out of the
river and keep him from drowning?
An unbeliever unfamiliar with Christianity might not even understand what sin is. He might not believe in one God. Basic terms like ‘sin,’ ‘saved,’ and ‘Savior’ may need to be explained.
The New Testament contains passages from the Old Testament. Greek-speaking Jews used a translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, which was hundreds of years old. They must have had their own theological terminology in Greek, that would have been a little unfamiliar to Gentile pagans. The early Greek-speaking Christians, using these translations, must have used this same slightly unfamiliar vocabulary. New believers in the first century would have had to learn what the terms and concepts meant. Apostles and teachers would have had to explain the Gospel as they presented it. We should do the same.
Scriptural terminology may be
difficult for some unbelievers to understand at first, so we must explain it
carefully. We need to be careful not to make
the Gospel even more difficult to understand by adding our own jargon that is
difficult to understand and by redefining the meanings of words.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2002
Chapter 14
The Role of Baptism in Evangelism
Many evangelical Christians have accepted
a tradition that men must come to faith in Christ by repeating a certain type
of prayer. But if we examine the
scriptures, we see that this teaching is not found in them. When we read the New Testament, how do we see
people being led to Christ?
In the
Acts
8:12 But when they believed Philip
preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus
Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Acts 16:15 And when she was baptized, and her household,
she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come
into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.
Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night,
and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
Acts 18:8 And Crispus, the chief ruler of the
synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians
hearing believed, and were baptized.
Some say that in the Bible, new
believers were baptized quickly, but if we study examples from the book of
Acts, we can see that people were challenged to be baptized as a response to
the Gospel. Instead of asking people to
come forward toward an altar to accept the Gospel, people were baptized. Consider the following passage.
Acts 2:37-41
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked
in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and
brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of
sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children,
and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40 And with many other words did he testify and
exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41 Then they that gladly received his word were
baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand
souls.
The people heard the Gospel and
wanted to know how to respond. What did
Peter say? Did he tell them to close
their eyes and bow their heads, and raise their hands if they wanted to repent? Did he tell those who wanted to repent to
walk down an isle, or to repeat a prayer?
No, he told them to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.
Certain preachersand
theologians have argued back and forth
about the meaning of “baptism for the remission of sins”. Some have argued that proper baptism does
indeed result in the remission of sins.
Others have argued that baptism for the remission of sins is baptism for
sins that have already been remitted. We
need to consider similar passages in the New Testament in order to understand
this issue.
Let us consider the idea that
‘baptism for the remission of sins’ refers to baptism for sins that have
already been remitted, with the baptism having not effect on the remission of
the sins. Jesus said at the last supper,
“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins.”[162] Was Jesus saying that His blood was shed for
sins that had already been remitted, and that His blood had nothing to do with
the remission of sins? Clearly not.
The baptism practiced by John the
Baptist was a precursor to Christian baptism.
According to Luke 3:3, John “came into all the country about
Jesus clearly endorsed John’s
prophetic ministry. During the time of
John’s ministry, Jesus’ disciples were also baptizing.[164] The Twelve, like John, may have been urging
people to be baptized for the remission of sin during this period of time. Even so, during this period, Jesus declared a
man’s sins forgiven in response to faith, with no mention of water baptism.[165]
According to scripture, Christians
are to be baptized. If we carefully
study the Gospels, it should not surprise us that Peter would call people to
repent and accept the Gospel by being baptized.
One passage in Acts in particular
indicates the connection between baptism and the remission of sins.
Acts 22:12-16
12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to
the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,
13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me,
Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.
14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath
chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest
hear the voice of his mouth.
15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of
what thou hast seen and heard.
16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be
baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
We see that Ananias considered
sins to be washed away during water baptism.
Clearly he held to the view that the sins were remitted through
baptism. Some who find this passage
difficult might want to question whether Ananias was correct in his beliefs on
this matter. In this passage, Paul is
presenting his testimony to a Jewish audience for evangelistic purposes. He presents Ananias in a very positive,
orthodox light. There is no good reason
to doubt that what Ananias says is orthodox Christian doctrine.
The Lord Jesus clearly included a
command to baptize in the Great Commission.
Matthew records the words of Jesus, spoken to the eleven.
Matthew 28:18-20
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying,
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the
end of the world. Amen.
Notice that the Great Commission
does not say to go into all the world and persuade people to walk down an aisle
and repeat a prayer. It does not say to
go into all the world and get people to make decisions, but rather to make
disciples.
It is natural that Peter, after
hearing this commission, would call people to repentance through baptism.
Consider a parallel passage from
the debated portion at the end of the Gospel of Mark,
Mark 16:14-16
14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they
sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart,
because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the
world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Here, baptism is closely tied with
the concept of salvation. If Peter had
these words ‘he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved’ fresh in his
mind on the day of Pentecost, it makes sense that he would tell his eager
listeners to be baptized.
We also see in the book of Acts
that Philip used baptism as a means for people to accept the Gospel.
Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the
things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were
baptized, both men and women.
Consider the case of the Ethiopian
eunuch.
Acts 8:34-38
34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I
pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at
the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto
a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me
to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all
thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ
is the Son of God.
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still:
and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he
baptized him.
Something interesting about this
passage is that the eunuch was the one who suggested that he be baptized. When Philip ‘preached unto him Jesus,’ he
must have mentioned something about baptism.
He may have even quoted the statement of Christ written down later in
the Gospel of Mark, ‘he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.’ Or maybe he related the words of the Great
Commission . Philip, who had lived under
the apostles teaching in
Participating in Christ’s Death
and Resurrection
Some Christians say that baptism
and the Lord’s Supper are only symbols.
This is not the historical view of the church, but some groups have held
the idea that these things are only symbolic since the Reformation. But if we study the New Testament, it is
clear that neither the Lord’s Supper nor baptism is only symbols.
Many of those who say that the
Lord’s Supper is only a symbol are reacting against the Roman Catholic view of
the Lord’s Supper, which they consider to be too magical. Roman Catholics believe that when the priest
blesses the bread, it literally becomes the body of Jesus. Jesus did say, “This is my body.”[166] Some have argued that there is a ‘real
presence’ in the bread and wine. Others
have argued for a spiritual presence.
But whatever the interpretation of this saying of Jesus, it is wrong to
say that the Lord’s Supper is only a symbol, and nothing else.
Consider what Paul wrote to the
Corinthians,
I Corinthians 10:16-17
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not
the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the
communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we being many are one bread, and one
body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
By partaking of the cup and the
bread, we do more than do something purely symbolic. We actually commune with the body of
Christ. We have koinonia with
Christ’s body. Paul goes on to teach
that his one should not partake of the Lord’s Supper and the table of food
offered to idols. He did not want his
readers to have fellowship with demons by participating in such
sacrifices.[167] Notice the contrast in this passage. The Lord’s Supper is fellowship with the
blood and body of Christ. Eating meat
offered to idols can lead to fellowship with demons.
Some people teach that water
baptism is a mere symbol. But this is
not scriptural either. Through baptism,
a believer participates in the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus
Christ. Paul wrote of this in his
epistle to the Romans.
Romans 6:3-5
3
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were
baptized into his death?
4
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as
Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also
should walk in newness of life.
5
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we
shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
As we see in this passage, through
baptism, we are buried with Christ. If
we are buried with Christ, we are able to partake of newness of life, and even
the resurrection of the dead. Romans 6
continues on to tell of the implications of the newness of life on our
Christian walk—not being the servant of sin.
Our ability to overcome sin in this life is related to our being
baptized with Christ. Notice Paul’s
reasoning here, which connects our baptism with the death, and therefore, the
resurrection of Christ. We also see this
same type of reasoning in his epistle to the Colossians.
Colossians
2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein
also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath
raised him from the dead.
Compare this to what Peter wrote
on the subject of baptism.
I Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth
also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the
answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Notice
that Peter says that baptism saves us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The fact that baptism washes the body does
not save us. Union with Christ’s
resurrection, which occurs through our baptism into Christ done with the answer
of a good conscience toward God, does result in salvation. The ‘figure’ Peter speaks of in this verse is
the salvation of Noah and his family during the flood. Paul sees a type of baptism ‘in the cloud and
in the sea’ in the story of the exodus in the Old Testament.[168]
"Bryan", a bible teacher who has ministered in
The commandments to observe the feasts of
herbs. Or like Succot (Feast of Tabernacles) in which Jewish people
were/are required to build flimsy structures like they built during their
ancestors' wilderness wanderings. In reenacting the event, it was/is
believed that they were/are in some sense *participating* in the *original
event*-- those instances when the eternal God broke through into
human history.
It was/is also one of the purposes of covenants and their rituals. The
ceremonies and rituals "collapsed time" so that the past could/can in
some sense be reenacted and experienced in the present. For instance,
Moses said to the generation born in the wilderness that was about to enter the
promised land:
"The LORD our God made a covenant with US at Horeb. It was NOT with our
fathers [those that actually stood at the foot of
made this covenant, but with US, with all of us who are alive here today. The
LORD spoke to YOU face to face out of the fire on the mountain" (Deu.
5:2-4, emphasis mine).
Somehow the covenant-renewal ceremony at the plateau of Moab transcended time
so that what had happened some forty years prior at Mt. Sinai-- to the previous
generation-- could be entered into and appropriated right then and there in the
next generation's "now".
It was/is the same with the Passover ritual. Each successive generation,
according to the liturgy, was/is to say that they themselves were slaves in
transcended/s time and brought/brings the effects of the past covenant
blessings into their present. The ancient deliverance was/is continuously
updated into a current deliverance. A present salvation. So it is with
Paul's description of Christ's death.
What had historically occurred almost two decades before on the cross is
spoken of as if it had just
happened. Furthermore, the person who actually died at
Christ, he himself reenacted Christ's death, burial, and resurrection.
What had occurred in the past became a part of Paul's present (Act. 22:16;
In a covenantal sense. That's also how it is with us. When we, with faith
in Christ (rituals by themselves have no efficacy), are baptized, we too
receive the benefits procured for us by Christ's death, burial and
resurrection. [169]
Repeatedly
we read in the New Testament that salvation comes by faith in Jesus
Christ. Is there a contradiction then
between the idea of salvation by faith and the idea of calling people to faith
and repentance through baptism? Paul
comes to mind as the chief proponent of salvation by faith in the New
Testament. But Paul also sees a
connection between faith and baptism.
Galatians 3:26-27
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith
in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into
Christ have put on Christ.
Notice
that the same people who are children of God by faith have been baptized
into Christ. These are the same
people. In the New Testament, believers
were baptized.
The examples we have in the New
Testament, show that those who were being baptized were responding in
faith. There are no examples of infants
being baptized. There are examples of
household baptism, which some use as a justification for infant baptism.
Lyddia’s household was baptized in
Acts 16:31-34
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus
Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord,
and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night,
and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
34 And when he had brought them into his house,
he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.
Notice, in verse 33 that the
jailer ‘and all his’ were baptized. But
look at verse 34. They all also
believed. Baptism is something that must
be done in faith. How can an infant, who
does not yet understand the Gospel respond with the ‘answer of a good
conscience toward God’ while being baptized?
While infants born to believers are already ‘holy’ by virtue of having a
Christian parent (not infant baptism)[170],
and are an example of greatness in the kingdom of God[171],
they are unable to confess their faith in Christ and respond in baptism with
full understanding of what they are doing.
Some say that baptism is the New
Testament equivalent of circumcision, and since Hebrew boys were to be
circumcised as infants, that Christian children should be circumcised as
infants. Let us examine the passage used
for this argument.
Colossians 2:11-13
11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the
circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the
flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye
are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised
him from the dead.
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the
uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having
forgiven you all trespasses;
What does this passage show us
about this new kind of circumcision?
First of all, we need to realize that Paul says that this circumcision
is ‘made without hands.’ Circumcision of
babies was done with hands. An
eight-day-old infant must be held with hands.
Someone’s hand must hold the knife to circumcise him.
The New Testament circumcision is
something internal. In fact, the Old
Testament mentions a kind of spiritual circumcision, other than the physical
circumcision that God commanded for Abraham.
Jeremiah 4:4 Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away
the foreskins of your heart, ye men of
Paul mentions a spiritual
circumcision in his epistle to the Romans.
Romans 2:28-29
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly;
neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the
heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of
God.
With this in mind, we must be
careful in considering the idea of water baptism as ‘New Testament
circumcision.’ Baptism is involved in
this New Testament circumcision, but Paul says, “Buried with him in baptism,
wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God,
who hath raised him from the dead.” This
process of circumcision also involves faith.
Those who believe must be baptized.
There must also be an answer of a good conscience toward God on the part
of the one being baptized.
Historians say that the Protestant
Reformation started in 1517 when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the
church door in Whittenburg. Martin
Luther lived in a time when it was taught that sins could be forgiven by doing
works of penance. Martin Luther, a monk
who was weighed down under the burden of his own sin, found joy when he
discovered, from reading the book of Romans, that salvation comes by faith in
Jesus Christ. Salvation by faith became
a central doctrine of the Protestant Reformation.
How could an important doctrine
like salvation by faith, be ‘lost’ so to speak.
In Martin Luther’s day, ordinary people could live their whole lives
without reading the scriptures. They
might hear some scripture read in Latin, an ancient language they did not
understand. So, if salvation by faith
were not taught in the church, it is easy to see how they would not hear
it.
If we consider how beliefs about
baptism evolved over time, we can see how an important doctrine of salvation by
faith would be lost. In the New
Testament, those who heard the Gospel were to respond by repentance and
baptism. Baptism was to be done in
faith, as ‘the answer of a good conscience toward God’[172]
on the part of the one being baptized.
The generations following the
apostles saw baptism as the point at which one became a member of the
church. It was after baptism that one
was allowed to participate in breaking bread in church gatherings.
At some point in time, it became a
common practice to baptize infant born to believers. Here we see church practice diverging from
what we see in scripture. In scripture,
baptism was to be done in faith and repentance.
Originally, baptism was to be done for the remission of sins. But for infant baptism, theologians came up
with other explanations that would allow them to consider infant baptism to be
effective for the remission of sins.
Augustine came up with the idea that infant baptism washed away original
sin past down from Adam. [Find this in Augustine’s writings] Instead of baptism being done in faith on the
part of the one being baptized, as the answer of a good conscience toward God,
some teach that infant baptism involves the faith of the parents.
As other doctrines, like the
doctrine of apostolic succession became popular, some began to teach that a
bishop or the priests beneath him had spiritual power to make baptisms valid.
By Martin Luther’s day, many
believed that baptism made a man a Christian.
Since infants were baptized (or actually sprinkled) there was little
emphasis on faith. Those who were born
into Christian homes were baptized.
Being a Christian was viewed as a matter of birth.[173]
The church
of the New Testament is very different from the national churches we see in
In
national churches, those who have been sprinkled, whether they have faith or
not, or whether they attend church meetings or not, can be considered
‘Christians.’ A husband and wife who
were sprinkled as infants, who do not even believe in God, may choose to marry
in a church building because of tradition, and may have their own children
sprinkled as infants. These children may
grow up to do the same with their own children.
Generation after generation of people with no faith in Christ, who don’t
even believe in God can be ‘baptized’ like this, and be considered a part of
the national ‘church.’ It is easy to see how the doctrine of infant baptism has
led to weak national churches.
This is
not the situation we see in the New Testament.
Sprinkling a baby does not turn him into a follower of Jesus
Christ. One must believe to be saved. Water baptism and faith are closely tied
together in the New Testament, and they should be so in the practice of the
church.
[Find some good quotes
about ‘baptizo’—possibly the book at STGBI seminary, or Beresford Job
article Ask Michael M. about source for
going through a pool to get into the
Many Christians believe that only
a pendeta can perform a valid baptism.
Historically, some Christians have believed that baptisms had to be
approved by the authority of a bishop.
The teachings that evolved over time that put the authority to
administer the Lord’s Supper and baptism into the hands of monarchical bishops
and elders probably was probably a reaction to all the heresies in the first
century. Many false churches sprung up
teaching false doctrine during the early centuries of Christianity. By claiming that only bishops or elders with
legitimate apostolic succession were allowed to baptize or administrate the
Lord’s Supper, the church could slow the spread of heresies. But the doctrine of apostolic succession is
not found in scripture. Not allowing
anyone besides local church officials to baptize also hinders the growth of the
church.
Ironically, in the New Testament
scriptures, there is not even one clear example of someone referred to as an
‘elder’ or ‘bishop’ performing baptisms.
The apostles were commanded to baptize.
There is an example of Philip baptizing.
Philip is referred to as an ‘evangelist’ and as ‘one of the Seven.’ The Seven have traditionally been identified
with the role of deacon.
Let us consider the nature of
Philip’s authority for baptizing from the accounts in Acts 8. Philip had been chosen by the church to share
responsibility with other men for the caring of widows. The apostles had laid hands on him. But there is no indication that he was
commissioned at this time to be an evangelist, or to baptize. During a time of persecution and scattering
of the saints, Philip went down to
Scripture refers to the man who
baptized Paul, Ananias, as ‘a certain disciple’[174]
and as ‘a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews
that dwell there.’[175] There is no indication that he was an elder,
apostle, or evangelist. He was probably
what we might call a ‘regular believer.’
Yet Jesus sent him to baptize Paul.
So, in the New Testament, what
categories of believers do we see performing water baptism.
1.
Apostles.
2.
An evangelist (who may also have been a deacon.)
3.
A disciple.
Paul wrote to the Corinthians,
I Corinthians 1:14-16
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but
Crispus and Gaius;
15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in
mine own name.
16 And I baptized also the household of
Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
Many Corinthians were baptized[176]. But Paul only baptized a few of them. It is conceivable that Timothy and Silas
baptized the rest, but the Corinthians had gone for some time without apostles. Probably, the church had grown and taken in
new believers. It is likely that the
Corinthians themselves were baptizing new believers. Just like the churches the apostles left
behind on the ‘First Missionary Journey,’ the Corinthian church had to learn to
take care of it’s own affairs.
Historically, in traditional
churches, baptisms performed by people other than priests or elders have been
recognized. [Cite article on Cyril
and Methodius about pope recognizing baptisms done by lay people and
unbelievers Cite Eusebius on man
baptized in a heresy. Cite example of my
friend considering joining EO church.]
If a regular disciple can baptize,
according to scripture, then the churches in
Some house church movements in the
world today are growing rapidly. A
man-made requirement that only ordained elders can baptize could greatly slow
down the growth of the
Where should new converts to the
faith be baptized? Those who attend an
institutional church that has a building and a baptistery may think that a
baptistery is the appropriate place to baptize new converts. House church congregations generally do not
have fancy church buildings. Where then
can new converts be baptized?
One very Biblical solution is to
baptize in rivers and other natural bodies of water. Those who live in areas with clean rivers,
lakes streams, or clean ocean water may wish to baptize new believers in these
bodies of water. Jesus was baptized
outdoors. Of course, in big cities like
Some institutional churches in big
cities have members who have swimming pools at their houses, and use pools like
this to baptize new believers. If
someone who attends a house church owns a swimming pool, he may wish to offer
his pool as a place to baptize new believers.
He may even choose to allow believers from house churches other than his
own to use his pool for this purpose.
This type of stewardship can be a great blessing to other believers.
Another simple alternative to
natural bodies of water and swimming pools is an oversized bak mandi. Occasionally, a house will be build that has
a bak mandi large enough to baptize an average-sized person. If any participant in a house church who
needs to remodel his bathroom, he could make an oversized bak mandi to
be used for baptisms in the future.
In the early centuries of
Christianity, it became a common practice for those interested in becoming
Christians to be instructed in the faith for about three years before being
baptized with water. [Footnote Ev. In early church] This is not the
example the apostles set, who could baptize people they evangelized the same
day.
But what about those who are
laboring among pagan people groups, for example, who worship idols and do not
yet have Biblical concept of the one true God?
Some missionaries and evangelists do not practice same-day baptism when
working with people from such backgrounds.
Is this justified, in light of the fact that the Bible shows so many
people being baptized the same day they heard the Gospel?
We should also note that many of
the baptisms we see in the New Testament were of people in the Jewish faith putting
their faith in Christ. These people were
already familiar with the3 idea that there is one God. They had been taught not to participate in
idolatry. Through the study of the Law,
they learned divinely revealed morality.
The Law also exposed the sin in their hearts, preparing them for the
reception of the Gospel.
In the first century, there were
ethnic Jews, Gentiles who had become proselytes, and God-fearing Gentiles who
had not gone through the various rituals such as circumcision to be recognized
as proselytes. According to Michael
Green, it is estimated that one out of every eight people in the
Many of the early Gentile converts
to Christianity must have been God-fearers who often listened to the Torah read
at the synagogue. The Lord sent Peter to
minister to Cornelius, who was a God-fearing Gentile who often gave alms to
The Samaritans that Philip
evangelized probably had books of Moses very similar to those used by the
There is no indication that the
Philippian jailer was a God-fearer before he met Paul. Paul was able to baptize he and his household
quickly. The jailer could have been
familiar with Judaism. Maybe he had
heard about the versions of monotheism espoused by ancient philosophers like
Aristotle or Plato. We just don’t
know. Paul was able to sufficiently
evangelize and teach this man’s household so that they could quickly be
baptized.
The key issue is whether or not
the candidate for baptism is ready to be baptized. If someone is baptized one day, and the next
day makes a statue of Jesus to worship, and puts it beside the other idols on
his idol shelf, he probably wasn’t ready to be baptized anyway. Baptizing someone who is not ready to receive
the Gospel is similar to having him repeat a prayer and declaring him
saved. He probably didn’t understand the
Biblical concept of God or the nature of Christ. An animist or pagan may need a lot of
teaching before he is able to know Whom he is putting his faith in. Ideally, we should hope to see a change in
the life of someone who has just accepted the Gospel and been baptized, rather
than a prompt return to sinful ways.
Other unbelievers may understand
that there is one God, and that idolatry is forbidden, but because they are not
willing to submit to the Lordship of Christ, even if it means standing up for
truth amidst persecution from their family, they may not be ready for
baptism. Jesus taught people to count
the cost before becoming His disciple.[178] Some people are ready to be baptized quickly,
like the Philippian jailer or Cornelius.
Others may need time before the Lord finally brings them to a place of
repentance, as in the case of Paul’s conversion.
Making a rule that all who wish to
be baptized must be catechized for three years before their baptism runs
contrary to the example of scripture, and creates an unnatural gap of time
between coming to a knowledge of the truth and water baptism. On the other hand, rushing to baptize too
quickly could lead to filling a church with false converts, or causing
confusion for new believers, who, later in their lives, wish they could
remember a time when they repented of their sins. Those who evangelize must know the scriptures
and be sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit to know when to baptize.
[finish this up. Talk about legit reasons for delaying—like if
the people want to add an idol perceived to be Jesus to an idol shelf—i.e.
don’t understand the Gospel.]
The typical baptismal formula used
y most Christians is to baptize “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost” based on Matthew 28:19.
However, some Pentecostal churches in
We know from scripture that Jesus
is the Son of God. Jesus is the Word of
God. God created the world through His
Word. We see this early in Genesis where
God created light by speaking the Word.
God, the Spirit of God, and the Word of God can be found in the first
three verses of Genesis.[179]
Though the author is uncertain of
how this baptismal formula came to be used, it may be related to a split that
occurred in the early decades of the Pentecostal movement. A preacher got a supposed ‘revelation’ that
everyone had to be baptized with the baptismal formula ‘in the name of
Jesus’. Out of this split came the
oneness Pentecostals. Oneness
Pentecostals deny the trinity. Many of
them believe that in order to be saved, one must speak in tongues to be saved,
in addition to binge baptized with a baptismal formula that mentions Jesus’
name. Oneness Pentecostals are a small
minority among Pentecostals, who do not generally believe that one must speak
in tongues to be saved. Ironically,
there are denominations in
A study of the book of Acts does
repeatedly mention baptism in Jesus’ name.
It is easy to see where the Oneness Pentecostals get their stance on
this issue. Many others interpret baptism in Jesus’ name to refer to baptism in
the authority of Jesus name.
Especially when it comes to
something as important to Christian practice as water baptism, it is important
that we not give new converts any reason to stumble. They should be able to do their baptism in
faith without worrying about their baptism because someone made an unorthodox
statement like “dalam nama Bapak, Anak, dan Roh Kudus, yaitu Tuhan Yesus
Kristus.” On the other hand, if someone
has read about baptism in the name of Jesus throughout the book of Acts, he may
feel his baptism was not valid if the name “Jesus” were not mentioned during
the baptism. Some Trinitarian Christians
believe that baptism should be done with the formula “in the name of
Jesus.” There are repeated references to
baptism in the name of Jesus in Luke, and one reference to baptism “in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”, which is found in
Matthew.
One approach I have heard used to
deal with this issue is to baptize, “in the name of the Father, His Son Jesus,
and the Holy Ghost.” This has the disadvantage
of interrupting the quote from Matthew 28:19, the traditional baptismal
formula. One brother who baptized
several people in a house church in the
The Apostolic Tradition of
Hippolytus was written around 215 AD. Hippolytus was opposed to some of the
innovative practices of the bishops of
Hippolytus records a tradition of
baptism which he considered to have been apostolic tradition. Hippolytus wrote
that baptismal candidates be catechists having studied generally three years.[180]
Those to be baptized were brought to the water of a spring or a flowing body of
water. After this, the candidates were
to remove their jewelry and be anointed with ‘the Oil or Exorcism.’ The candidates would then go down into the
water naked.[181] Hippolytus writes,
When each of
them to be baptized has gone down into the water, the one baptizing shall
lay hands on each of them, asking, "Do you believe in God the Father
Almighty?" And the one being baptized shall answer,
"I believe." He shall then baptize each of them once, laying his
hand upon each of their heads. Then
he shall ask, "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who
was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified under
Pontius Pilate, and died, and rose on the third day living from the dead,
and ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Father,
the one coming to judge the living and the dead?" When each has answered, "I believe,"
he shall baptize a second time. Then he
shall ask, "Do you believe in the Holy Sprit and the
Hippolytus goes on to tell of
candidates being anointed with the ‘Oil of Thanksgiving’, and giving the holy
kiss and partaking of Holy Communion for the first time[183].
If this is an issue in your
ministry, you may wish to prayerfully consider these approaches to the issue of
the baptismal formulae. We certainly
shouldn’t use an unscriptural baptismal formula merely because it is a
denominational tradition that is only several decades old.
In
If a believer has been baptized
into Christ Jesus and is walking in the grace of God, we should accept that
person as a fellow believer, and be willing to accept the ministry of his
spiritual gifts. Some believers may not
have baptism certificates. Those who are
baptized in distant villages by evangelists, who out of obedience to Christ,
baptize unbelievers without denominational backing, should be accepted as
brethren. Foreigners who were baptized
in churches where baptism certificates are not required by law often do not
have baptism certificates. Some
Indonesians have lost their baptism certificates, or they have been destroyed
in fires, floods, or other catastrophes.
If the early Christians did not have baptism certificates, then why should
churches require them now as a prerequisite for ministering?
In the New Testament, we see that
baptism was used as a part of the process of evangelism. Evangelists and apostles called people to
repentance and faith by calling them to be baptized. Modern churches must return to New Testament
practice.
According to some involved in
missions and evangelism, in some cases, those who believe in another religion
may visit Bible studies, and even ‘pray to receive Christ’ and not receive much
persecution. But if it becomes known
that they have been baptized, that is when the persecution often starts. Families kick young people out of the house
after they are baptized. Culturally, in
Matthew 10:32-33
32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before
men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him
will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
Imagine that you are an evangelist
preaching the Gospel in very remote areas in
[quote from Patterson
letter, who should you obey Jesus or church rules?]
Some church planters currently
planting house churches do it using existing denominational structures. In many cases, the leadership structure of
the house churches being planted are not the same as those in most churches
within the denomination. Many
denominational guidelines do not match certain patterns in the New Testament,
and are not suitable for house churches.
For example, one denomination requires 18 people before a group can be
called a church. But if a house church
is labeled as a ‘fellowship’ or ‘evangelism post’ it is still a church, no matter
what denominations label it. Sometimes,
denominational rules may require a church to disobey the teachings of the New
Testament. Obeying Christ always
supercedes following denominational requirements.
There are some in denominational
structures in
If God accepts a fellow believer’s
baptism, we should accept it as well. Unfortunately, some Christians and Christian
organizations in
Since the baptism certificate is
considered to be important among many Indonesian Christians, some house church
Christians may wish to write up letters confirming that a brother or sister has
been baptized. Those present may wish to
sign the paperwork. This paper will have
no legal power in
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 15
Cultural Issues
In some parts of
One Christian man in
Being
All Things to All Men
Paul understood that to make the most of his efforts to
communicate the Gospel, he had to communicate it in a way that his listeners
could relate to. There are many things
that can distract unbelievers from the Gospel.
It is easier for many people to relate to someone who wears their own
traditional kinds of clothing, who uses the same language they use, and who uses
illustrations and explanations that make sense in their own culture.
When Paul preached the Gospel in
Many second century Christian apologists used truths found
in the writings of philosophers to argue for the Gospel. They called this technique ‘spoiling the
Egyptians.’
Relating the Gospel to other people requires more than
finding common truths you believe in as a starting point to argue for the
Gospel. Many cultural issues can
distract listeners from hearing the Gospel.
An evangelist from the city who wears a suit and tie and gold rings may
find that his clothing is a distraction if he preaches the Gospel in a poor,
isolated village where everyone wears traditional clothing. In some parts of the
Consider Paul’s words to the
Corinthians:
I Corinthians 9:19-23
19.
For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto
all, that I might gain the more.
20.
And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them
that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under
the law;
21.
To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to
God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
22.
To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all
things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
23.
And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof
with you.
Here we see that Paul tried to be like the people he
evangelized. This is the Biblical basis
for being ‘contextual’, a term many missionaries and missiologists use to refer
to relating the Gospel in culturally appropriate ways. A church planter has to learn the customs and
culture of the people he is evangelizing, so that he can relate to them. Here, we see that Paul went to great lengths
to be like his listeners. But there were
limits on how far he would go. He was
always to be under the law to Christ.
A church planter should try to eat local foods, use the
local language if possible, and relate his preaching and teaching to his target
audience using examples that make sense to them. But he should not sin against Christ while
doing so. He should not join his unsaved
listeners in bowing down to idols, fornicating, or committing other sins. He may quote from someone his listeners
believe was a prophet or holy man to make a point, but he should not pretend to
believe in a prophet that he does not believe in. He should not create a synchretized version
of the Gospel, causing his listeners to believe in prophets that he himself
does not believe in. Believers should be
taught to confess Christ before men, and be bold about their profession of
faith.[185] We are not required to run to the arena where
they are throwing the Christians to the lions.
The apostles were told “when they persecute you in this city, flee ye
into another”.[186]
There are many customs practiced in
Head
Coverings and Women’s Clothing
Jilbap are getting to be more common in
But wearing a head covering is also a modesty issue in some
cultures. Furthermore, I Corinthians 11:16 is translated in some languages in
such a way that it can be interpreted to say that it was the universal custom
of the churches for women to wear veils.
This is why there are some small communities of Christians around the
world in which women wear head coverings, either in their daily lives, or only
to attend church meetings, and why some other churches encourage women to wear
long hair. At the very least, it is
clear that the Corinthian women covered their heads in some fashion, and this
was not contrary to Christianity. The
decisions of whether or not women in communities where jilbap are the
norm should cover their heads needs to be made by carefully considering the
scriptures and the consciences of all those effected by the decision, under the
leadership of the Holy Spirit.
Whether women ware a jilbap or not, the scriptures
teach that women should dress modestly.
I Timothy 2
9.
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with
shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or
costly array;
10.
But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
Women should wear modest clothes, not showing off their
bodies in a way that would attract undue attention from men. Neither should they wear clothes or jewelry to
show of their wealth. Christian women
need to consider the consciences of unbelievers around them. Women living in a village where the
unbelieving women wear long, loose-fitting dresses from head to toe for the
sake of modesty, who come to faith in Christ, should not go out and buy low-cut
dresses and miniskirts because they are Christians. As Christians, they have a real reason to
dress in an appropriate manner for the sake of the Lord. If Christian women dress in a way that is
considered unethical by the world, what kind of witness is that? The standards of dress may be different in a
Western country from what they are in a mountain village in Irian Jaya, or a
small town in central Java. Wherever
Christians live, they should wear culturally appropriate clothes that do not
bring reproach on the Gospel.
Paul may have addressed women in this passage because women
may have been a bit more likely in his day to be immodest in their
clothing. But this can be a problem for
men, too. In addition to the issue of
showing off too much skin, men can also want to draw attention to themselves by
wearing fancy clothes, gold, and other accessories. Men need to be concerned about modesty as
well.
In addition to modesty, Christians in a predominantly
non-Christian community should wear clothing that is culturally
appropriate. We should dress
modestly. And we should also wear
clothing that makes other people feel comfortable talking to us. We should not put up unnecessary walls
between ourselves and unbelievers by wearing clothing they consider
unusual. We should be good witnesses for
Christ even by the clothing we wear.
Kisses
and Other Greetings
In Jesus day, people would sometimes greet others with a
kiss.[187] Some people believe this may have been a kiss
on the cheek. If this is the case, then
it may be that this was one aspect of Jewish culture that was not extremely
‘contextual’ among Greeks and Romans. Be
that as it may, Paul told Christians to greet one another with a holy kiss.[188] Traditional Arab men sometimes greet one
another with kisses on the cheek as well.
Whether from European sources, or from Arab sources, some Indonesian
cultures have the custom of people greeting one another with a kiss. People who put their faith in Christ in these
cultures can easily practice the instruction to greet one another with a holy
kiss.
Some people in
If
the Lord Wills
In his epistle, James addressing businessmen who boldly
made statements about what they would do in the future, writes: “ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall
live, and do this, or that.”[190] In
Paul also wrote, “…I will come to you shortly, if the Lord
will…”[191]
and “I trust to tarry a while with you, if the Lord permit.”[192]
Using
the Name “Allah”
In recent years, there have been some teachings going
around that “Allah” is not an appropriate name for Christians to use for God
(Tuhan). One line of reasoning used to
support this idea is the fact that “Allah” was the name used for a pagan moon
god in Sabea, on the Arab peninsula, in the 7th century A.D. The crescent moon with a star in the middle
of it was a symbol of this pagan god.
But we have to keep in mind that there are Christians who
speak Arabic that call God “Allah.” What
does “Allah” mean? “Allah” is believed
to be a contraction of “Al-illah.” “Al” is the definite article in Arabic, like
“the” in English. The Arabic word
“illah” is believed to be related to the Hebrew word “el” which is used to
refer to God or a god [Tuhan atau dewa.]
Notice the similarity: “il “
and “el “. Based on the meaning
of the word alone, “Allah” is a suitable word for God in Arabic, and is closely
related to the Hebrew word for God.
The Sabeans worshipped the sun and the moon. They called the moon “Allah” meaning “dewa
itu” and the sun “Allat” meaning “dewi itu”. Some say that the Christians and Jews who
spoke Arabic may also have referred to God as “Allah” meaning “Tuhan itu.” [bagaimana
kalau pakai “Sang Tuhan” atau “Si Tuhan”
daripada “Tuhan itu”?] Does the fact that “Allah” was used to refer
to an idol mean that we can no longer refer to the name?
The word “El” refers to God in the Old Testament, but it is
also used to mean “dewa” to refer to false gods as well. In Abraham’s day, the city of
When the New Testament was written, the apostles continued
using following the translation tradition of the day. The word ‘theos’ could be used to
describe many false gods that the pagans worshipped. But, like the word “El” in Hebrew, “Theos”
could also refer to the true God. The
apostles used “theos” to refer to God.
They didn’t use the Hebrew word “Elohim” in their letters. They just used the word already in use in
Greek to refer to God.
Using the word “Allah” makes it easier in a lot of ways to
relate to unbelievers who also use this word to refer to God. It might have been difficult for Paul to
communicate the Gospel to Greeks if he had used “Elohim” or some other word foreign
to them to refer to God. But since he
used “theos”, they understood what he was saying. He used the word in their own language that
referred to God.
It is ironic that a some Christians would be concerned
about the use of Allah in translations of the Bible, when the Greek word “kurios”
is so poorly translated as “Tuhan.”
“Kurios” is used to translate the personal name of God into Greek. The Jews in the first century did not
generally say God’s name, and instead used a Hebrew word “Adonai.” Both “adonai” and “Kurios” could be used to
refer to men in a position of authority.
In Acts 25:26, Festus refers to King Agrippa as his “korios”. He was not calling him God. Jesus once healed a blind man and asked him,
“Dost thou believe on the Son of God?”
The Indonesian translation has the man ask “Who is he, Lord, that I
might believe on him?”[193]
Clearly, when the healed man called Jesus ‘Kurios’ here, he was not trying to
call him “Tuhan,” but was greeting him with a title of respect. He may have been calling him “Rabbi” if he
were speaking in Hebrew or Aramaic.
“Kurios” in Greek is probably closer to the Indonesian “tuan” than
“Tuhan.” Other attempts at translation
are “Yang Tertinggi” or “Gusti” for Javanese speakers.
Sujud
in the Bible
According to a retired Greek and Latin professor who also
reads Hebrew, Dr. Bill Thurman of Asheville North Carolina, the Greek and
Hebrew word “shachah” and the Greek word “proskuneo” refer to
bowing down Here is his explanation:
“When the original
Hebrew word is a form of shachah or the original Greek word a form of npockuvew
= proscyneo (and this will very often be the fact), then 'sink down onto the
ground to do obeisance or show respect' would come close to stating in English
what the words mean. It could refer to an action like standing in place while
moving the head very low. It never, however, can be shown to have the import of
singing, praying, lifting hands, etc., even though one could do these things
while worshipping as the original words implied.”[194]
The Indonesian translation uses the word “menyembah” to
translate these two Greek words. “Sujud”
might actually be a better translation for these words in a lot of cases,
though it might also have referred to bowing down partially, and not all the way
to the floor. If we understand the meaning
of the Greek words translated as “menyembah” then we can see that the physical
act of bowing down.
In Acts 10:25, when Cornelius “menyembah” Peter, he was not
singing hymns to Peter as if Peter were God. Rather, he was bowing down before
Peter, which Peter considered to be inappropriate.
Jesus told the saints in
There are many Indonesians who are used to bowing down as
they pray. Seventh centuries Jews in
Arabia probably sujud toward
Preserving
the Good
There are many good cultural practices that some
Indonesians leave behind when they become Christians. The holy kiss, sujud, and saying “kalau Tuhan
hendaki” are all good Biblical practices.
There are many other neutral practices that church planters,
evangelists, and teachers should not try to do away with when they evangelize
and teach new converts.
When the Gospel enters a new village, if those who believe
continue to use the same language, wear the same clothes, and eat the same
food, then they can relate better with their unsaved friends and
relatives. Ministers of the Gospel must
win men to Christ, not convert them to western culture or modern culture. New converts in a village can continue to
wear the same kind of clothes as their neighbors, unless there is a good reason
not to. If they ate with their hands
before they came to Christ, they don’t suddenly have to start using a knife and
fork after they are baptized. If they
ate pate and ikan asin before conversion, they don’t have to
start eating cheese and pork after their conversion.
Of course, there are some aspects of culture that
Christians should try to eradicate without apology. In some cultures idolatry, witchcraft,
divorce, and adultery are rampant in the culture. In this respect, Christians in these cultures
should be extremely counter-cultural.
They should take a strong stand against idolatry and other forms of
immorality. But in when it comes to
things that are neutral, Christians can continue in their own cultural norms,
eating their own cultural food, and wearing modest clothes suitable in their
own culture and community.
© Paul L. Hudson,
Jr. 2002
Chapter 16
Motivations
There are many motivations people
have in planting house churches. Many of
these motivations are very good. Other
motivations can actually lead us into error.
Church planters and brethren in churches need to examine their own
motivations and philosophies about the church, to make sure that they conform
to the teachings of Christ.
Many people want to return to the
Biblical principles associated with house church out of a desire to obey the
Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord sent
apostles into the world to teach the nations His teachings. Many house church people desire to obey these
teachings.
The apostle Paul taught churches
to follow the traditions that he left them.
II Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold
the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
I Corinthians 11:1-2
1
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember
me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
Many involved in house churches
seek to follow apostolic traditions. In
addition to obeying direct commands of the apostles, they also try to do things
the way the apostles did, as recorded in the scriptures. They do this because they want to obey the
Lord Jesus Christ, who sent the apostles to preach the Gospel. This is a good motivation. If we love the Lord Jesus, we will obey Him.
John 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Some in
the house church movement see meeting in homes as an apostolic tradition that
we must keep. But the apostles also felt
free to meet in the temple, synagogues[195]
or even a lecture hall[196]. (Synagogues were mainly a venue for
evangelism in the book of Acts, and Tyrannus lecture hall might have been focused
on evangelism.) There are many good
reasons for meeting in homes. Some think
it is essential that the church meet in homes.
Others think it is a good idea, but not binding on the church.
But
there are other teachings and practices associated with house churches that are
clearly New Testament practices for all Christians. For example, the instructions for church
meetings as described in I Corinthians 14 are described as “the commandments of
the Lord.”[197] Churches should definitely obey these
commandments.
The philosophy of pragmatism can
be described as follows: “If it works,
do it.” Many Christians have a pragmatic
attitude when it comes to church practices.
Does a church practice promote having larger congregations? A pragmatist who wants to have a large
congregation will seek to promote church practices that cause a congregation to
grow. If someone’s motivation is
evangelism, he will seek to follow church practices that promote evangelist.
A pragmatist mindset can lead to many
problems. There are many theories for
church growth that spring up every so many years. A new book comes out, many church leaders buy
it, and convince their churches to follow the strategies described in the
book. Some of these strategies are perfectly
valid. But it is also possible to follow
strategies that promote outward church growth, but do not greatly help the
The desire to evangelize the world
is a noble one. The desire for the
Gospel to be preached to all nations is in the heart of the Lord. It is also the Lord’s desire that the nations
be disciples of Christ, and obey His teachings.[199] Evangelism is not merely about love for
unbelievers, though that is a good motivation.
It is also about loving Christ.
The church presented to Christ must be a chaste virgin, a suitable bride
for her Husband. God wants to demonstrate
His wisdom to principalities and powers in heavenly places through the church.[200] Saints who are evangelized must become a part
of the church. The church must function
according to God’s design. This is all
part of God’s plan.
‘The house church model’ of church
planting has started to become more popular among missionaries and church
growth strategists. This is a good
thing, because it turns many people are exploring Biblical patterns of church
growth and evangelism. Many ‘house
church’ doctrines and practices are simply New Testament doctrines and
practices that many churches have neglected throughout the centuries. Every church should follow New Testament
doctrine and practice.
Beresford Job, an elder in
Chigwell Christian Fellowship, a house church in
Isn't it
fascinating the way that biblical church practise is automatically the best in
every cultural setting? But of course it is, the Lord precisely designed it to
be universal! I have had missionaries … countries attend teaching I have done
in this same regard and they tell me it's just perfect for their
context. I always reply that it is just perfect for every context and
setting and is, according to scripture, the only way we should do
things or should ever have done things. However, I also make it clear to them
that to just be doing the biblical thing because it works, as opposed
to doing it because it is what the Lord commands, always leads
ultimately to something other than what the Bible actually teaches
and corrupts it in some fundamental way. And it is usually by introducing,
even if through the back door, hierarchical leadership of some kind.[201]
The New Testament patterns and
teachings on evangelism and church planting are very effective. By following these practices, the church grew
rapidly in the earliest centuries of Christianity. Churches in
But following the teachings and
patterns of the New Testament are not always easy. The pragmatist who decides to follow New
Testament teachings described as ‘the house church model’ only because it works
may decide to leave it behind, and move on to a more popular model when he
encounters difficulties with church planting the Biblical way. The following illustration is also borrowed
from Beresford Job’s message to the 2003 South Eastern Conference: Why did Jesus forbid divorce? If marriage were never difficult, why would
Jesus have to forbid divorce. People
would stay married if marriage were easy.
It is because marriages are sometimes difficult that Jesus forbade
divorce. The commands of Christ keep
married Christians married. Those of us
who are practice Biblical church must be committed to doing church the way the
Bible teaches. Biblical church practices
are not always easy.[202]
Using the ‘house church model’
merely as a tool for church growth and evangelism can also lead to other
problems. Putting pressure on new
believers to evangelize, so that their house churches will double every six
months, or other similar strategies can damage these new believers. Not every believer is gifted to be an
evangelist. New believers in a newly
planted house church need to learn to function together as a Biblical
church. They need to learn to love one
another, to live in Christian community, and to obey the commands of
Christ. If these things are neglected,
and these young believers are used as a tool to produce more numbers, their
churches may not act as true churches, but rather as an arm of an evangelistic
ministry. New believers who are
evangelized and form new house churches need to be nurtured and discipled in a
Biblical church environment. As they
mature in their faith, they will mature in evangelism as well.[203]
[George
Patterson/Galen Currah put together a list of x number of things that could
destroy small groups. One of the items
on their/his list was to force a group to split after a certain period of
time.]
There are times when God moves in
a certain area, adding great numbers of people to the church. House churches in this environment may
naturally grow. As houses fill to
capacity, naturally, house churches will split peacefully due to church
growth. There is a place for evangelists
and evangelistic strategists in the body of Christ to encourage the saints to
win souls. The Lord may move new
churches to evangelize the lost in great numbers. We should not discourage such things. But we must not neglect the health of newly
planted churches in the interest of pushing people to produce more numbers. Biblical church practices are not merely a
tool for church growth. They are the
Lord’s plan for His church.
There are some who think that the
only proper motivation for practicing the Biblical principles associated with
house church is because this is what the Bible teaches. There are many who people get involved in
house church for various reasons, who do not think, when they get involved in
house church “I am doing this because this is what the Bible teaches.”
Some get involved in house church because they see the lack of fellowship in institutional church, and they want to be a part of a community where the brethren know and love one another. They want to love their brethren, and to have fellowship. These people are motivated by a desire for something the Bible teaches. Their hearts desire to obey Biblical teachings about loving one another or fellowship.
Others get involved in house
church because they have a desire in their heart to use their spiritual gifts,
and institutional churches do not allow them much freedom to use their
gifts. This can be a very good
motivation. Their hearts want to obey
the command of scripture to be good stewards of the grace of God.[204]
The desire to evangelize
unbelievers is also a good, Biblical motivation. God can use many motivations like this to
draw His saints back to a more Biblical way of having church.
In the
While some house church people are
very much focused on obeying the Lord’s commands, others seem to be focused
more on not being like the institutional church than they are on doing what the
Bible teaches. Fortunately, the house
church movement in the
House churches will naturally
serve as a haven for believers who have been wounded by unbiblical practices of
institutional churches. It is easy for
wounded believers to have an ‘anti-attitude.’
That is they are against anything that resembles the practices of
institutional churches. If our
motivation is to not be like institutional churches, we can fall into
error. There are many practices of
institutional churches that are good and Biblical. We should be focused on obeying the
Lord. If we obey the Lord, then we will
refrain from certain unbiblical practices found in many modern churches, but we
will continue with the good practices also found in institutional churches.
One of the problems some house church people have seen in institutional churches is that many of them are too programmed and organized. The organizational structures of many denominations often have little or no basis in the scriptures. Church bureaucracy can be ridiculously complicated. Poor people wanting help from some large churches may have to present a denominational membership card. There can be so many rules and regulations that people don’t feel like they are being treated like people. It can be almost like dealing with the government.
Many institutional churches wear
their members out with activity after activity.
Instead of spending time studying the Bible with their families, or
talking about the Lord with their fellow church members, believers spend time
organizing events, painting backdrops for Easter plays, spending hours
rehearsing how the deacons will walk down the rows in their uniforms to collect
an offering and how the musicians will play their songs. Many churches seem to emphasize having events
and keeping people busy, rather than church life and fellowship.
As a reaction to this, some house
church people have a negative attitude toward being organized. We need to be careful not to have not being
organized as one of our main motivations.
If we think it is wrong to be organized, we can miss out on a lot of
ministry opportunities. Some missions
efforts require a degree of organization.
The
‘Religion’ has been a good, positive word for many years. Unfortunately, in recent years, some evangelical preachers have tried to make the word ‘religion’ into a bad thing. This makes it difficult for us to communicate to unbelievers. If believers make decisions about what to do in church based on trying not to be religious, this can lead to a number of problems.
The Bible does not command Christians not to be religious. The book of James encourages pure religion, and warns against vain religion.
James 1:26-27
26 If any man
among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his
own heart, this man's religion is vain.
27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and
the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and
to keep himself unspotted from the world.
We see here that ‘religion’ is not a bad things. Pure religion is a good thing. The outward show of genuine faith in Christ, which manifests itself in good deeds, is good and positive. It should be a part of every Christian life. Trying to appear religious while not living a moral life is a bad thing. Jesus warned against performing religious behaviors to receive honor from men.[206] He also warned against traditions of men that are considered to be holy, but are contrary to the word of God.[207] These are things we should be concerned about, hypocritically doing religious observances to gain favor from men, and traditions of men that violate the word of God.
There are many things that Jesus did that were
religious. He prayed all night
long. He went to the temple in
Some Christians think that if we are led by the Spirit, we will not deliberately plan anything, and we will be spontaneous about everything we do. For example, some think that we should not have a regular habit of praying at certain times of the day, but instead we should pray whenever we feel led. If someone who holds to this belief always feels led of the Spirit to pray, and spends 8 hours straight praying every day, this might work for him. But a man who seldom prays, and is therefore not sensitive to impressions from the Spirit might benefit from a habit of regular prayer at set times. Paul speaks of being led of the Spirit in contexts that refer to mortifying the deeds of the body, and not fulfilling the lusts of the flesh.[208] Religious disciplines can be a good thing. Sometimes we have to obey God when our flesh doesn’t really feel like it. Not all obedience will be spontaneous. We have to bring our body under subjection.[209] Setting regular times of prayer for ourselves, setting aside times for family prayer and Bible study, and other such ‘religious’ habits can strengthen us in the Lord.
If teachers in the body teach that ‘not being religious’ is one of our main goals, it can lead to all kinds of problems. House church influenced by this philosophy can consider informality and being relaxed a mark of spirituality. Informal house church meetings can turn into meetings full of the kind of chatting you might find in a coffee shop, with little spiritually edifying content. While testimonies and confession of sin may be legitimate things to share in a house church setting, informal ‘sharing’ with no solid scriptural teaching, prophecy, or ministry of the other gifts can lead to meetings with little nutritional content for the spirit. Some house church Christians who are taught to be informal and unreligious apply these principles by becoming lazy and undisciplined. This can result in people spending meeting time playing or chatting in small informal groups, without having the discipline to come together and use their gifts to minister to one another and study the word of God as a group. Telling people that religion is bad is confusing, and can lead to lack of discipline and laziness.
Some Christians have a negative attitude toward repeating memorized prayers. They feel that this practice is religious. Some teachers have even gone to the extreme of teaching against reciting the Lord’s prayer as a memorized prayer. This is ironic. These same teachers will sing prayers to God as congregational songs, and emphasize the importance of reminding God of His promises in the scriptures, but teach against the idea of praying a prayer from the scriptures to the Lord. Repeating memorized prayers, if done with understanding, sincerely, and from the heart, can be a great benefit to many believers. Prayers from the scriptures can be particularly powerful. Believers from liturgical backgrounds may find memorized prayers to be of great benefit to themselves. We need to be careful to allow other brethren freedom, and not look down on spiritual practices that are edifying to them.
There are those who believe that we should only eat the Lord’s Supper when we feel specifically led to do so, out of fear that the Lord’s Supper turn into ‘a religious thing.’ The Lord’s Supper is already a religious observance. The Bible never teaches us to be motivated by a fear of becoming too religious. If we eat the Lord’s Supper in an appropriate manner, properly regarding the Lord’s body, then we do not need to fear. Eating the Lord’s Supper often gives us a chance to ‘show forth the Lord’s death’ on a regular basis.[210] If we understand our need for being holy during the supper, partaking of it regularly can also motivate us to reconcile our relationships with other believers and to confess our sins.
Some Christians who are motivated by not being religious have a negative attitude toward old hymns, thinking that newer songs are more spiritual. Why would a song be more spiritual just because it is new? Many of the very old hymns, though they sound quite religious, are very powerful, edifying songs. We should appreciate old music like this. If believers in our assemblies are edified by old hymns, we should allow them to be sung in our meetings. Some may consider these songs to be ‘religious.’ But we must remember that our goal as Christians should not be trying to be ‘unreligious.’ Rather, we should seek to obey Christ’s and His apostle’s teachings. The New Testament teaches us that all things we do in our meetings must be done ‘unto edifying.’[211] If old hymns build up the body of Christ, we should not forbid them simply because they are old. If new songs build up the body of Christ, we should not forbid them merely because they are new.
Some house church Christians think that everything done in a church meeting must be done spontaneously, without any planning, under the instantaneous direction of the Holy Spirit. Is this what the Bible teaches? I Corinthians 14:29-31 lays down certain guidelines for prophesying in church meetings. These guidelines require a certain measure of spontaneity. In order to follow these commandments, the Spirit has to move on members of the body to prophesy. Prophets must be silent and let another sitting by speak when he receives a revelation.[212] Following these rules allow all to prophesy in an edifying manner.[213]
These commandments for prophesying tell us how to conduct our meetings when the Spirit is giving revelations to the saints in the assembly.[214] But I Corinthians 14:26 lists other things that the saints can share with one another to build up the church, including songs and teachings. The chapter does not specifically tell us how to organize times of teaching in our meetings. Churches have a measure of freedom regarding how the teaching is conducted in the meetings, and should be sensitive to the leading of the Spirit.
There are house church that have meetings that consist of free and open sharing. If many in the assembly regularly study the word of God, and are gifted to teach, this type of sharing may be very beneficial, and the saints may be well fed. While completely spontaneous sharing of teaching may work well for many house church meetings, the Bible does not specify that all teaching must be completely unplanned and spontaneous.
There are advantages to having organized, planned Bible study, designed so that large passages of scripture are covered over a certain period of time. The synagogues of Jesus’ day had a regular schedule for reading through the Pentateuch and other sections of the Old Testament. Jesus and apostles like Paul participated in such meetings. Later, churches that adapted a highly liturgical format would incorporate scheduled scripture readings into their meetings. This is a religious, planned, organized practice, but it is one that has a lot of spiritual benefits. We should not reject this type of planned teaching merely because it is religious or because it is organized or planned. If something is common in liturgical churches, we should not reject it merely because of its association with liturgy. While disobeying the commandments of the Lord for church meetings in I Corinthians 14 and only performing liturgies in church is wrong, that does not mean that anything associated with liturgy or a liturgical church is to be rejected.
Paul’s epistles were designed to be read in churches. It is an ancient church practice to read through the epistles in church meetings. Paul even left specific instructions that certain of his epistles be read in churches.[215] Based on the content of the letters, we can conclude that the letters the Lord told John letters to the angels of the seven churches were to be read to these churches.[216] The reading of the scriptures in our meetings should be a part of our church practice. Apparently, the epistles of Paul were to be read in their entirety to congregations. This may not seem especially spontaneous, but it is a Biblical church practice.
It is possible to be led by the Spirit and still plan certain activities. Though the Holy Spirit does direct us individually and as congregations, left us plenty of instructions in the scriptures that we are to follow. Following these Biblical principles willfully is not contrary to the principle of being led by the Spirit.
Motivations for Ministry
It is natural for people to desire to see success in their work. This especially seems to be true of men. Many men who seek to become professional pendeta or evangelists, are the ‘alpha male’ type who like to lead. Usually, men like this are a bit ambitious, and sometimes even competitive.
The desire to see success in one’s work is natural. Ecclesiastes talks about this natural desire. It is a good thing. Paul was very much concerned about his labor. He was concerned that he might have wasted all his hard work with the Galatians.[217] Paul compared his life as a Christian to a runner trying to win a prize. He encouraged the Corinthians to run so that they might receive the prize.[218] As a minister of the Gospel, Paul was concerned about the reward for His ministry.[219] The teachings of Jesus and the epistles show us that it is proper for Christians to care about our future rewards for what we do in this age.[220]
There is a proper place for ministers of the Gospel, and all Christians in general to be ambitious about their work for the Lord. By obeying the Lord to use our gifts faithfully, we can earn rewards in the future age, which we will enjoy. We should work out of our love for the Lord, but the Lord told us about future rewards to encourage us.
Paul was ambitious about using his gifts to spread the
Gospel. For example, he wanted to go to
Ambition to build something for God should be done according to the teaching of the Lord and the apostles. The ambitious traditional calon pendeta may dream of someday having a large congregation in a huge fancy cathedral with medieval European architecture. He may imagine a huge network of cabang churches under his mother church, with himself at the head. The huge organization will produce large amounts of money, which will provide for his own salary, and the upkeep of his huge organization. Just think of the prestige a pendeta in charge of a huge organization has, especially if his followers hang on every word he says, accepting it unquestioningly. He will have a great name in the earth. This, the calon pendeta, in our scenario, considers to be great ministry. This type of ambition is all too common in ministry today.
The problem with this type of thinking is not that the one who engages in it wants to do great things in ministry. The problem is that what he considers to be ‘great’ ministry is not the type of great ministry we see in the Bible. The apostle Paul won many people to Christ through his preaching. Many churches were started through his preaching. But notice that Paul did not start his own church organization. Paul planted the word of God, and the churches that resulted were the churches of God, not his own churches. Paul had a fatherly role with the churches founded through his ministry. But his letters indicate that he did not have the role of a dictator in these churches. In fact, in his letters to the Corinthians and the Galatians, he had to persuade them to listen to what he had to say.
Paul didn’t set up the new churches so that he would have
a nice, comfortable financial support network, which would make later ministry
easy and comfortable. Paul worked to
support himself in
We never see the apostles or their followers constructing church buildings. There is also no teaching from the Lord or His apostles to do so. We can conclude that building church buildings is not a high priority for the Lord. The apostles and the early church functioned well meeting in existing structures like the temple, and especially in homes. Yet, many ministers of the Gospel have an ambition to build church buildings. Instead of focusing their attention on the Lord’s building, made up of the ‘living stones,’[223] which are the saints, they focus on financial proposals and building projects. Huge sums of money that could be put toward Biblical priorities like feeding ‘widows indeed’ and other poor people, or providing for those who preach the Gospel are spent on church buildings. This focus on buildings can also slow the spread of the Gospel.
Ministers of the gospel have to be especially careful about motivations the scriptures warn us about like receiving honor from men[224], and the motivation to make money from their ministry. The elders are forbidden from doing their ministry out of a motivation for ‘filthy lucre.’[225] Yet it is so common for those in ministry to make ministerial decisions based on financial considerations. Bible college graduates may choose to work at one church or another based on the salary, for example. Balaam, and his greed for wages, serve as a type of the false teachers described in the New Testament.[226] Ministers of the Gospel, and indeed all saints, should guard their hearts against greed. The church should be on the lookout for those who greedily use ministry as a pretense to get money from us.
Though some false teachers in the early centuries of Christianity were able to take advantage of the house church communities of their day, house church ministry may provide less of a temptation for those tempted by greed than institutional churches. House church planters, elders, and teachers sometimes have to keep their secular jobs to earn a living while working in house church. Some receive gifts given by the saints, but also work on the side. Those who are called by God to leave their work behind can trust the Lord to provide for them through others without having to pressure anyone to give them money.
Church planters who leave behind churches that are able to administrate their own affairs, and eventually produce elders may eventually become well known for their ministry. Paul was apparently well-known enough for others to be envious of him.[227] But in spite of his reputation in some circles, he was still a wondering migrant, going from place to place, living on faith, being beaten, shipwrecked, and undergoing all kinds of hardships. He did not minister in such a way as to build a huge organization that would take care of him and make his life comfortable. House church planters who plant Biblical house churches should keep Paul’s example in mind. It is refreshing to see that many house church planters in this day and age are willing to work second jobs to support their work or to live on faith. Many are working to build up Christ’s kingdom, and not their own network of churches.
Competition between ministers trying to build up their
own kingdoms by attracting members from one another’s organizations is not
healthy for the church, and it is not a good witness to the world. Elders who pastor the
The ambition to do great things for God by using one’s gifts faithfully is a good one. We just need to be careful that our ambitions to do God’s will. Ambition can lead men to build monuments to themselves, to build their own kingdoms, or simply to strive to be ‘successful’ in unbiblical ways.
Conclusion
We must be careful to evaluate our motivations and the philosophies we hold to. If we are pragmatic, and only do what works, then we may be tempted to forsake the Lord’s commands when the results of our obedience are not obvious.
We must also be careful to be motivated to obey the Lord. If we are motivated by other philosophies like the idea that we should not be religious, we may reject many good things the Lord would have us do. We should seek to do what the Lord commands, rather than seeking to avoid practices of churches that we do not agree with. Being ‘pro’ Christ’s commands is a lot more effective than being ‘anti’ the practice of traditional churches. Our motivations as Christians should be to obey the Lord. If we love Him, we will obey Him. Our obedience should include obeying the teachings of the Lord and His apostles on church practice.
If we are motivated to serve the Lord, we must serve Him in the way that He has revealed He wants to be served. If we build anything in the Lord’s house, we must build according to the way He wants it built, and not according to our own ideas or according to human traditions. The key here is that our motivations be subjected to the teaching of Christ, and that we learn to be motivated to do the things that He commands.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
The Church as a Family or a
Business?
The New Testament consistently uses family metaphors to describe
believers in Christ. We are all
brethren. God is called the Father. Women are referred to as ‘sisters.’ The New Testament is full of family
language. The church is a family, and it
is supposed to seem like a family. But
many local churches don’t seem much like families. What do churches sometimes seem like?
Church
as a Big Corporation
Some churches seem like big businesses. The church meeting may sometimes feel like a
training seminar put on to train the employees, or even a stockholders meeting. The pendeta functions as a big
CEO. Instead of being an approachable,
fatherly figure you know personally and go to for advice, he seems more like
the big boss in a corporation. The big boss
doesn’t know the lower-level employees well.
He may gain a great name for himself as a businessman, and a corporate
leader. He has executives around him
that he spends time with, and he passes orders down the ladder. He devises strategies to make his own
corporation larger. In many
corporations, it is unthinkable that one could work his way up through the
ranks to become the CEO. Only those who
graduate from certain schools when they are young and become executives can
become CEO. Occasionally, a ‘regular
worker’ might become an executive, but the company does not seem to focus much
effort on training regular workers to be the CEO.
Similarly, in many churches, while the leaders hope ‘lay
people’ are trained to do more ministry, the leaders don’t see it as their role
to train ‘regular believers’ to take over the higher positions of
leadership. They leave that to special
schools. Some churches seem very
impersonal like big corporations. The
top leaders may be distant and unapproachable to other people, unlike an
ancient shepherd who would know if that one hundredth sheep is missing. Some church leaders actually try to imitate
business leaders. They try to dress in
nice, expensive suits, and look ‘professional’ (and unapproachable to regular
believers). They may try to avoid
spending time with anyone but their group of assistant pendeta and key
workers who are deemed to be spiritual important. Sometimes, many of the people in such
churches greatly respect their leader, but have no relationship with him.
Some leaders in these large churches may not have a strong
pastoral gift in the first place, and may be very talented or gifted as
administrators. Others leaders who are
gifted as pastors find themselves at the top of large organizations. A leader with the pastoral gift who becomes
the lead of a large megachurch or religious organization may find himself in a
difficult situation. Many people come to
the Lord through his ministry and, following the examples of church
organization he has been exposed to, he forms a large organization. He then finds himself feeling
frustrated. He longs to minister to form
relationships with other believers, and disciple them in the faith. But because of the demands on his time for
administrating the large organization, he is unable to find time to minister to
others. He may even feel compelled to
use secretaries and other leaders to keep people away from himself so that he
can finish his paperwork, planning, and sermon preparation.
Church
as a Family-Run Business
Some smaller churches still feel like businesses, but more
like smaller, family owned businesses.
In a small, family-owned business, people know each other better, but it
is still a business. The boss may even
know them by name. If the wife works at
the business, she may have a lot of say in what goes on there. The son may choose to work for his
father. If he does, the business will
likely go to him when his father retires or passes away. After all, the business is his inheritance.
Some churches are run similar to this. The pendeta’s family runs the church
affairs. Eventually, the pendeta’s
son takes over the church, and the financial resources there.
Biblically, we should think in terms of overseers/elders,
rather than pendeta. Is it
unscriptural for the son of an elder to become an elder? Of course not, as long as the son has truly
matured into an ‘older man’ who has the spiritual qualifications to be an
overseer. If an elder rules his house
well, and his children are believers who obey him with the proper respect, as
the Bible teaches, then naturally, we should expect that some elders will have
sons who will mature into godly older men who fit the qualifications for
eldership, and not an immature man who inherits a high position in a church
when he graduates Bible college, just by virtue of his relationship with his
father. It is good for sons to serve
with his father, but that does not mean the son should be made an overseer in
the church before he is mature enough to meet the Biblical requirements.
In the Bible, however, we see that the apostles appointed a
plurality of elders, and not one senior pastor.
This type of team leadership does not resemble the business where a son
takes over his father’s business, since there is a team of leadership. If the elders in a church community are truly
older men, then we could see a 50-year-old man being appointed as an elder
while his 70-year-old father is still ministering in the capacity of an
elder. The fact that a man’s father is
an elder certainly should not prevent him from serving God in the same capacity
The
Church as a Theater
Sometimes churches seem like a big show. Unlike the instructions we see in the New
Testament, in which believers are to take turns using their spiritual gifts to
edify one another, many church meetings tend to be more like watching a show in
a theater. One concern of many believers
these days is that some church meetings seem to be geared more toward
entertainment than edification of the saints.
It is possible to fall into the trap of putting on a good show
for the congregation. The pendeta,
worship leaders, worship team, and various others who are active in the church
work really hard to put on a good church service. Every note in the music is practiced, so that
the music sounds just right, just like in a professional musical drama. Members of the music team have to wear
matching outfits. Deacons and
deaconesses have matching clothes tailor-made so that they look good when they
go up to take the offering. Isn’t this
similar to the costumes those giving a musical drama might wear?
Any good theater needs a sign out front to advertise the
name of the show. So many churches these
days put a sign out front with the name of the speaker for that day or that
particular service. Those who wish to
attend a church service in a big city like Jakarta can go to a mall that
contains two rooms rented for church services, find out which preacher they
want to hear, find out the time that speaker speaks, and then join that
particular meeting. They can go from
church to church, hearing their favorite speakers, or choose the church that
has the best meetings and the best costumes.
Competing
to Expand
In many ways, denominational churches can function like
businesses. Businesses compete with one
another. In
Churches that are run as businesses are similar. One of the easiest ways to grow a mega-church
is to attract believers away from other churches. In the
More people in a church means more money. This money can go to increase salaries for
staff, hire more staff, and implement more programs to keep the whole machine
going. Better programs may draw more
Christians to the church, which will allow for more and more branches to be
started. A church can branch off like
McDonald’s or some other chain restaurant.
This is very much like the way businesses grow.
Competition
Among Churches and Leaders
One problem with churches growing as businesses is that churches
aren’t supposed to be competing against one another. In the New Testament we see a pattern that
there is one church in a city.
Christians aren’t supposed to say “I am of Paul” and “I am of
Apollos.” We all belong to Christ.[228]
In the New Testament, do we see a positive example of
churches competing with one another for members? The elders of the church in a city are to
work together as a team. They should be
concerned with tending to the flock of God, not with competing over who gets to
take care of the largest number of sheep.
It is natural for people, especially men, to want to accomplish
something with their work. But if we
think in terms of success in local church ministry as building up a huge
denominational empire beneath oneself, composed largely of believers who came
from other churches to follow us, is that a scriptural goal?
Church Meetings
versus Christian Radio
Around the year 1900 a book was
written about life around the year 2000.
The book Looking Backward was actually a political tract
promoting socialism, disguised as a novel.
In the story, a man had fallen asleep around 1900 and awoke in the year
2000. [Clean this section up with correct details] He was taken into the home of the man who
discovered him. His host showed him many
of the remarkable improvements over life around 1900. Instead of going to church, many modern
people simply chose to listen to a sermon by telephone. The main character of the story went into the
telephone room of his hosts home, and listened to the sermon. Of course [author’s name] wrote
this story before the invention of the radio, but after the invention of the
telephone.
What do you think of the idea of
simply ‘going to church’ by listening to preaching on the radio? Is that appropriate for believers who are
able to meet together? Does simply
listening to radio or television preaching replace going to church? Of course not. The Bible teaches us not to forsake
assembling together, but rather to exhort one another.[229]
If we listen to good Bible
teaching on the radio or television, we can learn and be encouraged in the
Lord, but we can’t exhort one another by all listening to the same radio
program across a city or region. How can
we ‘partake of one loaf’ during communion by listening to the radio?[230] The New Testament teaches us that fellowship
is an important aspect of church life.
How can we have fellowship with other listeners by listening to the
radio?
From the New Testament wee see
that fellowship is very important. Acts
2:42 lists ‘fellowship’ among important aspects of church life like continuing
in the apostles’ doctrine, breaking bread, and prayers. I John 1:7 says, “If we walk in the light, as
He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus
Christ cleanses us from all sin.” If one
is not in fellowship with other believers, is he walking in the light?
Now, let us consider the following
question: How is going to a traditional
church meeting which ignores the teaching of the New Testament different from
listening to teaching on the radio?
Let’s suppose a particular church meeting does not celebrate
communion. When you go to this meeting,
you do not speak to anyone, and no one speaks to you except the usher at the
door. You are not given an opportunity
to ‘exhort one another’ and if you want to exercise a speaking gift like
teaching or even prophecy, you will be escorted out the door. If this church offers no cell groups or other
opportunities for mutual exchange or fellowship, how is attending such a
service different from listening to teaching on the radio?
Maybe there is some miniscule
aspect of fellowship present in such a meeting, but certainly below the
standards we see in scripture. You could
accidentally meet someone through such a church meeting who you could develop a
relationship with and edify one another in the Lord. A time of congregational singing is also
superior to listening to singing on the radio, since you are actually singing
with others there with you. There may be
room for a meeting like this in the overall diet of a believer, but if this
type of meeting is all that believers are getting, how can they be healthy if
this is their whole spiritual diet?
Many modern churches lack a sense
of community. How can a church be a
community if its members don’t know each other?
What kind of fellowship can we really have if all we do is shake hands
with one another at the door? Even in
some small churches, it can be difficult to really get to know other
people. But in very large congregations
it is easy to get lost in the crowd. The
cell church movement has been a step toward correcting this problem.
One of the problems some cell
churches face is that a large percentage of people in their church simply
choose not to participate in a cell group.
They choose to go to the large meeting.
Some cell group meetings, while they allow some opportunity for light
social fellowship, do not allow for the open expression of spiritual gifts that
we see commanded in I Corinthians 14. It
is possible to have cell group meeting which is just a smaller traditional
meeting in which one person speaks, and others listen quietly with little
opportunity to build anyone else up. In
this type of situation, it is possible to develop close relationships with
other believers, but there is a different level of spiritual relationship which
comes from actually ministering to one another in the Lord.
In a church meeting that follows
the instructions laid down in I Corinthians 14, believers use their gift to
edify one another. This builds up
relationship. A fellow believer in this
type of meeting is no longer “that Javanese man with white hair whose wife is
Chinese who sits in the back.” Instead
of knowing him merely by the way he looks, you will know him as the man who
knows a lot about justification by faith.
You learn what he is interested in, what he likes, what his struggles
are, as he shares these things with the congregation while he uses his
gift. He hears or sees you use your
gift, and learns to value that. While
you eat together during the meeting, you get a chance to know one another.
House churches tend to be smaller
than large modern congregational churches.
The early church met in homes as well, and many of their homes may have
been somewhat small. In the small,
intimate environment of a home church, you can know one another’s names. You get an opportunity to share prayer
requests, and to pray for one another.
The structure of an interactive meeting lends itself to developing
closer relationship.
The pulpit and pew setup does not
necessarily foster close relationship. A
pendeta speaking to a large congregation can expound on Biblical truths
without being honest and open. You might
never go to his house and see how he behaves with his children. You might never get to spend time with him,
and see how he lives his life. You might
never talk to him over a cup of coffee.
In the intimate fellowship of a
home, you can have the opportunity to eat with an elder or a visiting apostle
or evangelist. At some time, when the
teaching and prophesying has ended, people may speak with one another.
Some participates in house
churches make a conscious effort to help one another. Jesus taught us to love one another. Shouldn’t we show our love for one another in
tangible ways. I spoke with a house
church planter named Tim in the
Now, Tim is involved in planting
house churches, and ministering to prostitutes, drug addicts, and homeless
people. He said, he seen more cars given
away in house churches than he did at that mega-church where he worked at as a
youth pastor. Due to the lack of public
transportation in the
One house church my family was a
part of in the
I Timothy 5:1-3
1
Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as
brethren;
2
The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.
3
Honour widows that are widows indeed.
In a family, if one member is sick
and in the hospital, then relatives who are close to him will usually come
visit. Who usually sits up at night with
a sick person in the hospital? Family
members. Who makes sure the IV bag
doesn’t run out, and start sucking blood out of the sick patient’s body? Family members. And the family members are usually the most
concerned guests in the hospital waiting room.
Shouldn’t the body of Christ be
like this? If one member is suffering,
shouldn’t the other members care deeply?
I Corinthians 12:25-26
25 That there should be no schism in the body;
but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26 And whether one member suffer, all the
members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with
it.
Christians are members of one
body. We are a part of one another as
the body of Christ. If this is the case,
shouldn’t we have close relationships?
Shouldn’t we care if another member of the body is hurting? Shouldn’t we rejoice if another member of the
body is honored? It is much easier to
experience this kind of empathy if we really know one another. If we spend time talking to one another,
asking advice from one another, praying for one another, helping one another
out, and praying for one another, then we can have that family-type atmosphere
when we come together. There is
something specially about joining in a church meeting in which the participants
have this deep familial love one for another.
Some Indonesians gladly receive
any relatives that are traveling through their city into their homes. Relatives may come stay with them for a long
time. Christians should also be ‘given
to hospitality’ and should ‘show hospitality without grudging.’[232]
Many new believers who come to
Christ out of other religions face persecution from their communities, but
especially, from their own families.
Young people often face the most difficult persecution. From talking to church planters from
different religious backgrounds and cultures, a common pattern emerges. Many of those who come to Christ are young
people, who have not yet learned a trade, and don’t yet have their own
house. Their parents are upset with them
about following Jesus, and may even kick them out of the house. The church planter has a church with a number
of young people with no jobs, who have no place to stay of their own.
Caring persecuted believers in
this situation can be a great blessing.
We should honor those who boldly face persecution for the sake of
Christ. If we were in the military,
fighting in a war, we would respect those who had received medals of honor for
their bravery in battle? As Christians,
we should respect those who are wounded or spoken evil of for Christ’s sake.
One practical way to minister to
believers who have been kicked out of their homes is to take them into one’s
own home, at least until they find another place to stay. The day a young person gets kicked out of his
parents house for telling them he is following Jesus, just think of the comfort
he will have knowing that he can go to the house of a Christian family who will
love him, give him a place to stay, and food to eat.
One young man faced persecution from
his father for refusing to burn incense candles in a pagan ceremony. He went to a church that followed the pendeta
system. As a young man, he was still
living in his father’s home, eating food provided by his father. When the son refused to burn incense, his
father reminded his son that he was providing him food. He asked his son, “Will your pendeta
feed you?”
Just imagine the great comfort a
new, persecuted believer will have when his parents ask him, “Will your church
feed you? Will your church give you a
place to stay?” In his mind, he thinks,
“Yes they will.” Facing persecution from
one’s parents while living under their own roof is very difficult. One must take a stand for Christ, and obey
God in all things, and at the same time honor one’s parents, and be submissive
to them. They need the support of the
church, in prayer, financially, and emotionally.
I met a disciple of Christ who was
from an unreached people group. He knew
how to make rattan baskets and furniture.
He knew a few other young men from his own suku who had been
kicked out of their homes when they became Christians. He taught them how to make things out of
rattan, and they all worked together.
In addition to these natural
concerns, persecuted believers need emotional support and nurturing. I met one young woman at a church I visited
who believed in Jesus, converting from another religion. Her father was angry about it, but didn’t
kick her out of the house. Instead, he
argued with her. She told of how he had
smacked her in the face for her testimony about Jesus. Imagine how difficult it must be to have a
family that seems to care about you, but the moment they find out that you have
reconciled with God, they persecute you?
The members of the body of Christ should comfort someone in this
situation. In her church, she should
find a new family. The older women can
spend time comforting her, acting as mothers to her. She should find brothers to protect her, and
sisters to share her heart with. The
older men in the church should be to her as fathers or grandfathers.
The overseers of the church are to
be men who rule their families well, with faithful children. Overseeing one’s house well is a prerequisite
to overseeing the household of faith. A
new believer will likely tend to look up to the elders of the church. The church recognizes the elders’ spiritual
maturity and the fact that God has entrusted them with the care of the
church.
Acts 14:23 says that Paul and
Barnabas appointed elders in every church.
In Titus 1:5, Paul tells Titus to appoint elders in every city. In a mature church that has been around for a
long time, we should expect that there would be elders at the city level of the
church. These elders are responsible for
the saints in their own city. However,
some small house churches may not have elders.
Imagine a large city that has only a few believers, and that many of the
believers are young people living on a university campus. They meet together as a church, breaking
bread together, but they are all young.
None of them has lived long enough to demonstrate an ability to rule his
own house well. There are plenty of
younger men who are gifted brothers. The
saints should not rush to try to name one of their members as an elder if none
are scripturally qualified yet. Elders
must have certain qualities. A church
must not try to find anyone just to fill the position. A church can still be a church even if there
are not elders appointed to oversee it yet.[233]
House churches composed of young
people need father figures. It benefits
the young to learn from the old. It
benefits the old to be encouraged and strengthened by the young. The Bible does not teach that each house
church must be completely autonomous. It
is possible for house churches to ‘share’ the same elders. An elder in a city may be able to minister to
various house churches in that city, and have fatherly relationships in all
those places. A new church plant full of
young people can really benefit not only from meeting with elders, but also
with meeting with older sisters and other mature Christians. Prophets, teachers, and evangelists can
really bless a new house church. House
churches should not cut themselves off from ministry from the rest of the local
body of Christ within the city.
I Peter 5:2 tells elders to
shepherd the flock of God “which is among you.”
The elders have a responsibility, collectively, to care for the church
in the city. Who must an individual
elder care for? An individual elder
should care for the sheep who are around him:
fellow believers he comes into contact with. God puts us all in different locations and
spheres of influence. God may put many
people in the life of an elders that he wants them to care for. An elder should certainly pay attention to
care for the sheep he meets with regularly, but he should be open to the idea
that God wants him to use his care-taking skills with other people that come
across his path as well.
In a family, a father can have a
strong influence over the life of his children if he has a close relationship
with them. A father who spends little
time with his children may have difficulty related to his children, and they
may be less likely to listen his advice when they are grown. Elders of the church can have a greater
impact on those they have a relationship with: the sheep among them: the other
believers they know.
Elders should make tending the
flock of God a priority. Elders may need
to be involved in collecting funds or other administrative duties.[234] But if administrative duties prevent elders
from preaching, teaching and tending to the flock of God, the church should
prayerfully consider whether they need to appoint more deacons to handle
administrative matters.[235]
The elders of the church are
assistant shepherds working under the Lord, the chief Shepherd.[236] Elders don’t own any of the sheep. They merely care for the Lord’s sheep. Imagine a large herd of sheep following one
chief Shepherd, with assistant shepherds spread out amongst the herd. There should be no sheep stealing in the
heard. If one assistant shepherd begins
to care for a sheep that another assistant shepherd used to care for, how is
this sheep stealing? The sheep belong to
Jesus. Assistant shepherds should treat
one another with respect, but always remember that the sheep belong to Jesus. If one of the assistant shepherds decided he
wanted some sheep for himself and took them off in a different direction from
the rest of the flock, which is following the Lord, so that they could follow
him, that would be sheep stealing.
If the assistant shepherds are
working together well, as a team, they will pay attention for sheep that are
uncared for within the heard. Some sheep
on the edges of the heard may wish to go off in the wrong direction. The shepherds need to watch for sheep like
this, to help keep them on the right path.
A sheep that strays may tempt other sheep to follow him. Assistant shepherds need to make sure that
they keep following the Lord themselves, and not stray from the right
path. Even elders of the church are not
above temptation.[237]
Elders should try to grow in the area
of having a father’s heart, and a fatherly attitude toward others in the
faith. The young, new believer who gets
kicked out of his home the day after his baptism has emotional needs and
spiritual needs. If an elder can form a
close relationship with him, nurturing him as a father as he teaches him the
word of God. The elder can obey the
Biblical charge to pastor the flock of God by actually getting to know the
sheep.[238] This is very different from the idea of the
‘pastor’ as a big CEO of a corporation who passes orders down the ranks, but
doesn’t really get to know the sheep.
Some elders may have influence over a large number of people, but they
also need to have the one-on-one caregiver type ministry.
Being like fathers and older
brothers is not limited only to the elders of the church. Any believer can nurture another
believer. Regular believers who aren’t
elders of the church can study the Bible with a new believer and teach him to
pray. In fact, learning to be like an
older brother or a father can help prepare someone to be an elder later in
life. It is also a great blessing to
have women who acts as mothers and older sisters in the faith in the
faith. The older women should be active
in teaching the younger women.
Titus 2:3-5
3
The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness,
not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
4
That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands,
to love their children,
5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good,
obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
Older women should teach younger
women the practical aspects of walking out the Christian faith. Notice Paul’s emphasis on teaching about
family life. This is an area that has
been lacking in many churches, practical teaching on marriage. Some institutional churches in the
In a family church environment,
this type of mentoring sometimes takes place without having to start a special
program. If believers in these churches
hear the word of God which tells them to exhort one another, and read passages
like the one from Titus 2, above, then they see that they are supposed to be
helping one another out in these areas.
In
Normally, we can learn how to
raise our children by asking advice from our own parents. But think about the new believer with
unbelieving parents. How can he ask his
parents for advice about raising Godly children? They don’t know how because they are not in
the faith. But he could ask a mature
couple in his house church for advice.
There are many Christians whose
parents did not cut off their relationship with their children when they become
Christians who did not have a good childhood.
Some had fathers or mothers who did not care for them as parents
should. There are many who grew up never
knowing their fathers. These people
should be able to find a new family in the body of Christ.
True love and family life in the
church can also draw people to Christ.
Jesus said to his disciples, “By this shall all men know that ye are my
disciples, if ye have love one to another.”[239] Jesus prayed that the believers may be made
perfect in one, that the world may know that the Father sent Jesus.[240]
Let us think of the nation of
The tribes of
The elders of
The New Testament never introduces
the concept of elders. We don’t read in the
book of Acts where the apostles decided that there should be elders in every
church. Instead, elders just show
up. It was as if everyone assumed that
there would be elders. Why is this? Elders just carried over from the Old
Testament. In the Old Testament, there
were elders in the tribes of
Now let us consider what the
church must have been like in the first century. There were Christian families within the
church. These were natural families who
were a part of the family of God. There
were also disciples whose families did not join them in believing in
Christ. Individuals and families would
meet together and partake of the love feast, breaking bread together. They would learn the apostles’ doctrine,
pray, prophecy, and fellowship with one another. This group was like a spiritual extended
family.
These larger extended families all
together made up the larger tribe or clan that is the church in the city. The city churches were related to one another
spiritually, like the nation of
When I was a boy in the mountains of
I have seen the same thing here in
Let’s compare this to the type of
church meetings we see in the Bible.
The early church met in homes, as we see in the scriptures. This spiritual extended family would eat a meal
together. This meal, referred to in
scripture as ‘breaking bread,’ the ‘love feast,’ or ‘the Lord’s Supper’ was an
actual meal, eaten together, just as Jesus had eaten the Last Supper with His
disciples. A difference between this
meal and the meal at many family gatherings is that this meal has great spiritual
significance, and is done to remember Christ.
In a large family gathering, the
family members may take turns talking.
If a decision has to be made, the older people may have more influence,
but often the younger people are allowed to speak as well. A family discussion may involve telling funny
stories, or remembering old times. But
often, the family takes turns talking.
Children can sit on the floor and listen to their parents talk. If they make a little noise, the family
tolerates it. They aren’t sent away to a
special family meeting only for small children, because the family wants to get
to know the children.
In the New Testament, we see that
church meetings were to involve mutual participate. There was to be turn-taking. Those with the gift of teaching could
teach. Those who could sing psalms could
sing psalms in the meeting. Prophets
could speak according to certain guidelines, and if someone else got a
revelation, the prophet was to allow that other person to speak. Children, sitting in a pew listening to one
man give a long speech, may find it difficult to concentrate, but even young
children can be taught to behave during a time like this. In a family gathering, where people take
turns talking, it seems that children can sometimes pay attention a little
better, and as they grow older, learn to participate meaningfully to the
conversation.
This type of interactive meeting
does not resemble small group of people putting on a religious show for a
crowd. In a family gathering, everyone
can participate. Some bring stories to
tell. Others cook food. Some hold their relatives babies, giving the
parents a break. In church meetings and
in the church community as a whole, we all have gifts to use to edify the body
of Christ. Some are gifted with speaking
gifts like prophecy, teaching, or exhortation.
Others are gifted at giving to the needs in the community. Some are leaders. And of course, we still need people to help
others by holding babies and cooking food.
Beresford Job, an elder at
Chigwell Christian Fellowship, a house church in England, has noted that after
teaching on Biblical house church at conferences, has had missionaries come up
to him and talk about how what he is teaching fits perfectly with the people
they are reaching. Beresford Job
comments,
“Isn't it fascinating the way that
biblical church practise is automatically the best in every cultural setting?
But of course it is, the Lord precisely designed it to be universal!”[241]
The family is universal in all
cultures. Since the church is supposed
to function as a big family, and the family is universal, the way the church is
to meet and function, according to the New Testament, is something we should
all understand.
All throughout
Some people think you have to dress
up really nice to go to church to please God.
But if we look in the New Testament, we don’t find this idea at
all. In fact, the Twelve apostles were
sent out to preach repentance with only one set of clothes apiece. Imagine these apostles, walking around in the
hot sun, sweating, wearing the same set of clothes possibly for days. They were human beings like us. What do you think they smelled like? After walking the dusty roads of
Think how Paul must have looked
traveling overland for days, arriving in a
Consider Jesus’ words about John
the Baptist,
Matthew 11:8 But what went ye out for to see? A man
clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings'
houses.
If John could wear camel’s hair,
instead of fine clothes, to prophesy in, must we wear fancy clothes to go to
church? Those who are taught that one
must dress up to please God may fall into the sin described in the book of
James.
James 2:1-4
1
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of
glory, with respect of persons.
2
For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly
apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
3
And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto
him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or
sit here under my footstool:
4
Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil
thoughts?
The bureaucratic practice of
requiring a dress code to do any type of ministry in church could also lead to
sin. The poorest brethren who come to
Christ may wish to minister, but don’t have the resources to buy a white dress
shirt, black pants, and a necktie could be rejected from ministry as a result
of their lack of financial resources to buy clothes. These clothes might seem unnatural to those
from a village who never wear such clothes.
Many of us feel
free to wear normal clothes to go to our parents’ house. A prince or princess who does not know his or
her father well might feel obligated to dress up each time he meets him. But most of us are a little more comfortable
with our parents. I don’t feel obligated
to put on a tie when I visit my brother or sisters house. Why should I dress different from everyday
life to meet with my brothers and sisters in Christ.
Insisting on dressing up to go to
church can encourage the problem of fakeness.
Some people try to look really spiritual when they go to church. They wouldn’t dare show themselves as frail
humans, depending on God’s mercy to make it through every day. Even some church leaders put up a wall
between themselves and the flock of God, trying to look professional. By distancing themselves from their brethren,
they can make themselves seem more spiritual and unapproachable.
Shouldn’t shepherds be close to the sheep?
Shouldn’t brothers and sisters know one another very well? Then shouldn’t we be natural with one
another? Why not just allow believers to
wear normal clothes to gathers.
The concern we should have about
clothing is that they be decent. One new
believer converted to Christ from a religious and cultural background in which
women carefully covered their bodies, and did not sit with men in religious
activities. He decided to follow Christ,
and then went to a church meeting for the first time—an institutional church
meeting. He sat down in a chair. Next to him sat a young woman with a short
skirt. When she sat down, he could see
her thigh. He got up and left the church
meeting.
Jesus taught us not to cause
others to stumble—that is to tempt them to sin.
Exposing ones body by wearing provocative clothing can tempt others to
look with lust.
This is an area where older women
can help out. The older women can gently
teach younger women who have not yet learned about modestly, to wear modest clothing
that covers their bodies. Men should
also be careful to wear appropriate clothing.
Another aspect of modesty relates
to wearing clothing that shows off one’s wealth. Both Paul and Peter wrote about the need for
women to dress modestly.
I Timothy 2:9-10
9
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with
shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or
costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing
godliness) with good works.
I Peter 3:3-4
3
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair,
and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in
that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit,
which is in the sight of God of great price.
These instructions apply to the
daily lives of women, and not only to church meetings. But they certainly apply to how believers
dress in church meetings as well. Some
think one must dress fancy to go to church.
If a woman dresses up in fancy clothes, covering herself with gold,
pearls, and expensive stones, hoping to show off her wealth to others, is this
pleasing to God?
In many modern churches, someone
who came in wearing plain work clothes might not feel as if he is dressed
appropriately, while someone dressing up in fancy clothes with gold and silver
jewelry might be well accepted. Church
meetings should not be a place for people to attract attention to themselves by
wearing expensive clothing and jewelry.
Let’s think back to the person in
a big mall in
But she looked forward to meeting
in the house church. We still studied
the Bible, but the format was more interactive.
Also, in the small intimate group of a few families, we could really
focus on the needs of others within the group with what we studied. It was a real blessing when we came together
and it seemed like the Lord had a certain theme he was teaching us through
different members of the body. We knew
and loved one another.
In this type of environment, the
speaker is not so important. Many people
in house church look forward to meeting to share what God has showed them, and
to be encouraged by other believers.
Spending time eating together, and then one-on-one fellowship after the
meeting is also enjoyable, like a big family gathering. This type of environment is a good place to
learn to love others practically. It is
easier to love someone you know. It
easier to help someone financially if you know him and you know his needs.
Jesus said something very
interesting to His disciples:
Mark 10:28-30
28 Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have
left all, and have followed thee.
29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say
unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father,
or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in
this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and
lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
This verse has gotten a lot of
attention in recent years among those who emphasize financial prosperity. Notice that, in verse 30, Jesus told His
disciples that they would receive a hundredfold now in this time. This was a promise about the current age.
Was Jesus saying that the apostles
would be wealthy men, or that all Christians should be wealthy, owning huge
amounts of land? How should we interpret
the part about losing a wife and receiving a hundredfold? The apostles were not polygamous. Notice that Jesus also says here that those
who lost brothers, sisters, fathers, or mothers would be compensated in this
age.
Jesus here is talking to his
disciples. In Matthew’s account, Jesus
speaks of ‘twelve thrones’ which seems to indicate that He was addressing the
twelve disciples in particular.[242] If this promise of the hundredfold return was
fulfilled in their lifetime, we might expect to see how it was fulfilled later
on in scripture.
In Acts, we see that thousands of
people came to Christ. On the day of
Pentecost alone, 3000 people were baptized.
The
What about lands? If Jesus promised a hundredfold return on any
lands they had lost for his sake, how did they receive them?
Acts 4:32-35
32 And the multitude of them that believed were
of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things
which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.
33 And with great power gave the apostles
witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them
all.
34 Neither was there any among them that lacked:
for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the
prices of the things that were sold,
35 And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and
distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
Jesus promised the disciples a
hundredfold return on the lands they had lost.
Several years later, they found themselves with access to the proceeds
of lands and houses of possibly thousands of people. Of course, the apostles understood Christ’s
teachings well enough not to keep these proceeds for themselves. They had a huge family to share them with.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 18
Tongues and Prophecies in Church
Meetings
We have already
considered the importance of mutually-edifying meetings in which regular
members of the congregation speak as it relates to the ability of the apostles
to plant churches rapidly. Since regular
believers could speak in meetings, it was not necessary for the apostles to
ordain elders in a church to lead the meetings before leaving it behind to
start another work. This resulted in
quicker church planting.
We also know that elders and other
ministers in the early church rose up from among the regular believers. They grew in the faith in the local church community. Some young men with ministry gifts received
training from older, itinerant ministers, following them from place to
place. The meetings of the early church
were a good training ground for emerging teachers, prophets, and
evangelists. By speaking in the
meetings they gained experience and practice.
As they were faithful with the gifts they had been given, they could
expect God to give them more.[243]
There are many benefits to the
regular believers in a congregation faithfully using their gifts in church
gatherings, as opposed to the traditional system of having meetings where the
congregation members are primarily spectators.
Churches that function in this way are able to produce new leaders and
ministers, which is essential for a rapidly expanding church planting
movement. The church meeting is
essential to church planting from the perspective of evangelistic or missions
strategy. But aside from the practical
and strategic benefits, church planters should teach churches to have Biblical
meetings out of obedience to the Lord. A
church planter should teach new churches to observe the commandments of Christ
and to hold to the doctrine of the apostles.
Even if we cannot see the immediate pragmatic benefits to obeying the
apostolic commandments and traditions related to church meetings in scripture,
we must still teach people to obey and follow these commandments and
traditions, because this is what the Lord desires.
The scriptures contain
instructions, and even commands, concerning what to do in church meetings. It would be unwise for a church planter to
work hard at coming up with ideas of things to do in church meetings, while
ignoring the teaching of scripture on the matter. As Samuel said to Saul, “To obey is better
than sacrifice.”[244]
A natural place in the scriptures
to learn about church meetings is I Corinthians 14. This passage is the longest passage that
gives instructions regarding what to do in church meetings. Paul identified the instructions he gave as
the commandments of the Lord, so we must take them very seriously.[245] The arguments Paul made to the Corinthians
indicate that he was giving them instructions that applied to all churches, and
not merely for the Corinthian church only.[246] These facts should serve as a warning for
those who would want to disregard the commandments of the Lord in I Corinthians
as something that applied only to
This chapter is difficult for many
Christians to understand. So many modern
believers try to interpret the passage through their own church
experience. One who does this might
imagine that all the instructions Paul gave concerning church meetings should
be carried out in the context of a traditional meeting, complete with a pulpit
and a lengthy Sunday morning sermon.
One of the most striking aspects
of the chapter is that it does not mention many of the aspects of a modern
Sunday morning meeting. There is no
mention in the passage of a pendeta leading the meeting and giving a
long address. There is no mention of
three songs before the pendeta speaks, and three songs after. There is no mention of a pulpit and
pews. The Corinthians met in homes. We must not interpret the passage through our
own church experience, but rather evaluate the validity of our own church
practices in light of the scriptures.
In I Corinthians 14:26, Paul points out that every one of
the Corinthians “hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a
revelation, hath an interpretation.” A
modern Christian accustomed to traditional meetings might give the Corinthians
the following advice, “Sit down, be quiet, and listen to the preacher.” But these are not the instructions that Paul
gave. He wrote, “Let all things be done
unto edifying.” The Corinthians were
allowed to speak, but in an orderly, edifying manner.
Many in the Charismatic movement have heard a lot of
teaching about the spiritual gifts listed in I Corinthians 12, which are given
to profit the whole body. As we can see
in I Corinthians 14, the primarily place to use these spiritual gifts is in
church gathering. This makes perfect
sense. The gifts are given to edify the
body of Christ, so naturally we should use them in gatherings of the body of
Christ.
Paul instructed the Corinthians to “Let all things be done
decently and in order.”[247] Some who read this verse bring their own
ideas of order with them. Many
Christians think that an orderly church meeting is one in which there is no
surprises and everything follows the order written down in the bulletin. But this is not the idea of order Paul
presents here in this chapter. The first
part of this verse tells us to “let everything be done….” Paul’s idea of order allows for those who had
teachings to share to teach the congregation.
It allowed for all to prophesy in the meeting.[248] The divine order requires a prophet to yield
the floor to allow another sitting by to share a revelation.[249] The rules for order in this chapter are quite
foreign to many of us who grew up in more traditional church meetings. We should read them with careful and
prayerful consideration.
Though Paul’s
teaching to the Corinthians has universal application, he did address certain
problems with the way the Corinthians were conducting their meetings. Much of the chapter deals with this
issue. The Corinthians were apparently
using the gift of tongues in an inappropriate manner by speaking in tongues in
the assembly without an interpretation.
Paul explained
to the Corinthians that speaking in tongues had a positive effect, even without
interpretation. It built up the one who
did it.[250] By praying in tongues, one’s spirit is able
to pray.[251] But without an interpretation, speaking in
tongues in a church gathering does not build up others present.[252] Speaking in tongues without interpretation is
inappropriate for group prayer in a church gathering. If someone stands and speaks in tongues to
give thanks, how can others say ‘amen’ to agree with the prayer if they don’t
know what he is saying?[253] Paul warned that if the whole Corinthian
church came together and all spoke in tongues, an unbeliever or unlearned
person present in the gathering might think that they were all mad. This principle of the effect of tongues to
produce unbelief could be seen in a prophecy concerning speaking in tongues in
the Old Testament.[254] Paul explained that, in the church gathering,
it was better to speak five words with the understanding than 10,000 with an
unknown tongue.[255] He instructed the one who would speak in
tongues without an interpreter present to refrain from speaking out in the
church, and instead speak to himself and to God.[256]
Some think the
Corinthian problem with tongues was that all were standing and speaking in
tongues at the same time. This is a
possible interpretation, but it is also possible that the Corinthians might
have taken turns speaking out in tongues without interpretation, one by one,
before Paul wrote this epistle. After,
Paul does give an example of an individual praying in tongues in the assembly
without interpretation.[257] The principles Paul taught in the passage
would certainly argue against the practice of all praying in tongues or singing
in tongues at the same time in a church meeting.
The Charismatic
and Pentecostal movements tend to emphasize the importance of speaking in
tongues. There are churches in these
movements that try to follow Paul’s directive for people in the congregation
not to speak out in tongues unless there is an interpreter present. Unfortunately, other churches encourage the
congregation to all speak out in tongues at the same time, or to sing in
tongues at the same time. Those who do
this may only be familiar with certain verses they have been taught about the
importance of speaking in tongues, for example I Corinthians 14:14, which
teaches that when one prays in tongues his spirit prays. They may not have read the entire chapter
carefully, particularly the teachings against speaking in tongues without
interpretation. If you look on the
faces of unbelievers or those unfamiliar with speaking in tongues who come to
such meetings, you can see that many of them seem to think that the people in the
church are crazy, just as Paul predicted.
Like so many other Christians who do not apply
the commandments of the Lord in our meetings, those who practice group speaking
in tongues in meetings without interpretation are often just imitating the church
practices they have seen in their experience without questioning them. It is essential that Christians study what
the Bible has to say about church meetings in order to know what to do in them. If we know what to do in church meetings,
then we should be responsible to obey the Lord and do it.
Practical
Application for Speaking in Tongues in House Churches
Some
Pentecostal and Charismatic churches allow for members to speak out messages in
tongues, and for other members of the body to speak out interpretations. In many churches, this may occur during the
music time. These types of churches
often have long periods of singing.
Sometimes, one song will end, and before a song leader begins another
one, there is a moment of silence, or a musical interlude with no singing. In many churches, members of the congregation
may speak out messages in tongues and interpretations, during this time. Some who interpret tongues in this type of
situation find that sometimes they will have an interpretation to a tongue
spoken out in a meeting, but someone else will give the same interpretation
before they have a chance to speak.
The Bible
requires the one to speak in tongues to keep quiet unless there is no
interpretation. I Corinthians 14:28
requires that the speaker in tongues be silent if there is no interpreter in
the congregation. In the Pentecostal or
Charismatic format for prophecy just described, it may be difficult for the
speaker in tongues to know if someone is present who can interpret. He feels
moved to speak out a message in tongues, and just waits for someone else to
interpret. This format requires that the
speaker in tongues not only receive a message in tongues, but also receive a
revelation concerning whether or not an interpreter is present.
In an
interactive house church format where there is more freedom to speak, a speaker
in tongues who doesn’t know for sure if another will be able to interpret might
even want to ask if someone who can interpret is in the meeting. If interpreters find that sometimes they are
given an interpretation, and other times they are not, the one who wishes to
speak in tongues may ask a potential interpreter beforehand if he senses
whether or not the Spirit will give the interpretation.
We must keep in
mind that Paul does not have a negative attitude toward speaking in tongues in
this passage. In fact, Paul points out
that he spoke in tongues more than all the Corinthians, though in the church he
would rather speak five words with his understanding than 10,000 words with an
unknown tongues.[258] Paul thought of prophesying in the church as
superior to speaking in tongues without interpretation.[259] With all of Paul’s instructions limiting the
use of tongues, it is possible that some of the Corinthians might have been tempted to have a negative attitude
toward tongues or to forbid them altogether.
Paul included the commandment we find in verse 39 to “forbid not to
speak with tongues.” Modern believers
must realize that we must abide by the limitations for tongues and the
provisions for tongues in our meetings.
We err if we disobey the commandments of the Lord by willfully speaking
in tongues in the meeting without interpretation. But it is also wrong to disobey the
commandments of the Lord by forbidding speaking in tongues done properly
according to the instructions of scripture.
The commandments of the Lord concerning tongues are given to us in the
scriptures for our own good. We must
obey them.
The
Superiority of Prophesying to Speaking in Tongues without Interpretation
One of the main
points Paul makes in I Corinthians 14 is that prophesying in the meeting is
superior to speaking in tongues without interpretation. Paul even says that the one who prophesies is
greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, that the
church might be edified.[260] It may seem strange to us that Paul says the
person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues. But we must remember that some are greater
than others in the kingdom. Jesus taught
that the greatest in the kingdom is the servant of all. The greatest among us is the one who is the
lowest and humblest servant. The one who
prophesies in the congregation is serving the congregation. His prophecy edifies the church.[261] The one who prophesies is serving the church,
while the one who speaks in tongues without an interpretation is only serving
his own spiritual interests. The one who
prophesies is therefore greater because he is functioning as a greater servant.
The importance
of edifying others is an important theme in I Corinthians 14. As verse 12 says, “Even so ye, forasmuch as
ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of
the church.” It is clear from the
passage that prophesying is one of the gifts that is good at edifying the
church. Paul’s attitude toward prophecy
in the passage is extremely positive. He
presents a positive scenario of church meeting in which all prophesy, and an
unbeliever falling down and confessing ‘God is in you of a truth.’[262] Paul taught that ‘ye may all prophesy’[263],
and gave instructions on how to do so in an orderly fashion. Toward the end of his instructions on church
meetings, he urges the Corinthians.
Paul’s instructions on church meetings in this chapter start and end
with strongly urging the saints to seek to prophesy.
I Corinthians 14:1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual
gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
I Corinthians 14:39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and
forbid not to speak with tongues.
Just imagine
the reaction of many modern Christians if you were to tell them, “I know of a
church where the congregation does not have one preacher who preaches a sermon
every week. Instead, the members of the
congregation take turns standing up and prophesying to the whole
congregation.” Some Christians might
think the church you speak of is heretical or strange. This is ironic, since this describes the type
of church meeting Paul would have loved to be a part of.
If the Lord,
speaking through Paul, commanded us to desire to prophesy, we should take His
commandment seriously. If there is a
lack of the gift of prophecy in our church meetings, we can pray for the Lord
to gift members of the body with prophesying.
Each of us individual can pray that the Lord would move us to
prophesy. Just as one can pray to be
able to interpret tongues, one can pray to be able to prophesy.[264]
What is
Prophesying?
In I
Corinthians 14, Paul encourages the saints to prophesy. But what does it mean to prophesy? Some modern Bible commentators consider
prophesying to be teaching and explaining the scriptures. But is this what the word means in scripture?
Paul makes a
distinction between the gifts prophecy and the gift of teaching.[265] He lists prophets and teachers as different categories
of ministers in the body, ranking prophets before teachers.[266] From Paul’s usage, it is clear that he sees a
difference between prophesying and teaching.
Paul’s
understanding of prophecy is consistent with the Old Testament. In the Old Testament scriptures, we read that
the Levites were to teach the people.[267] But the Lord also raised up prophets among
the people to prophesy His will.
Jesus told the
scribes and Pharisees that He was sending prophets, wise men, and scribes to
them.[268] The scribes and Pharisees were familiar with
the prophets mentioned in the Old Testament scriptures. When we read about the prophets the Lord
established in the church after the resurrection, we need to keep in mind what
a prophet is all throughout scripture. The Old Testament ‘naviy’ are referred
to in the New Testament as ‘prophetes.’
It stands to reason that ‘prophets’ in the church are more or less the
same type of minister as prophets in the Old Testament. Peter gives us a valuable insight into the
nature of Old Testament prophecy when he says that “holy men of God spake as
they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”[269]
Generally,
prophesying is speaking as carried along by the Holy Ghost. It is possible to prophesy on a musical
instrument.[270] A prophet might also communicate his message
partly through physical actions, like burning his hair, or wearing an yoke, or
tying up someone’s hands with a belt.[271]
Many of the Old
Testament prophets would begin their prophecies with statements like “Thus
saith the LORD.” In the New Testament
book of Acts, we read that a prophet started a prophecy in a very similar way,
“Thus saith the Holy Ghost.”[272] As in Old Testament times, New Testament
prophets speak as moved by the Holy Ghost.
In addition, we see that some Old Testament prophesying consisted of
retelling visions or dreams.[273]
Prophecy can be
about many things. Some of Moses’
prophesying looks very much like teaching.
Other Old Testament prophetic books retell visions that are full of
metaphors. Some prophecies sound very
much like words of encouragement. Not
all prophecies predict the future, but some may. What kind of
prophecy is given depends on what the Lord wants to say.
The Lord is
able to speak through men in sin, like Balaam and Caiaphas. He even spoke through the soothsayer Balaam,
who was a type of the ministry of false teachers that deceive the people of God[274]. Caiaphas, the high priest, prophesied about
the death of Jesus while he was plotting with other leaders to kill the
Lord. He probably didn’t even realize
that he was prophesying.[275]
In a church
meeting, prophets can prophesy. But we
also see that ‘…ye may all prophesy….”[276]
The passage even gives instructions about how the prophecies are to be
given.
Instructions
for Tongues and Prophesying
Paul was in
favor of all believers prophesying in a church meeting, and also saw a place
for tongues accompanied by interpretation.
In fact, he gives instructions for how prophecies and tongues are to be
shared in the assembly.
Unfortunately,
many participants in modern churches are so caught up with their own
traditional order of service, that they do not pay attention to the
instructions given in this chapter. Some
Pentecostal and Charismatic churches make an attempt to incorporate principles
from this passage in their church meetings, though some ignore the passage
altogether.
Let us consider
Paul’s instructions concerning tongues:
I Corinthians 14:27-28
27
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most
by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no
interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself,
and to God.
Bill Thurman, a
retired professor of Classics, a scholar of Latin and Greek, serves as an elder
and teaches in a Messianic meeting in
“Contrary to almost all English translations I think 'two or
three' does not refer to those who speak in tongues or to prophets, but to
statements (logoi).”
Dr. Thurman
proceeded to explain in detail the reasoning behind his opinion. Please see endnotes for a detailed
explanation.[277] Bill Thurman’s argument is based on the fact
that verse 27 speaks of ‘one’ [seorang] speaking in tongues. Even the verb for ‘speak’ is in the
singular. Therefore, ‘two, or at the
most three’ cannot refer to the number of speakers, but rather refers to the
number of things spoken by the speaker in tongues. Verse 28 specifies that one person must
interpret, and in verse 29, we see that if there is no interpreter, the speaker
in tongues must not speak in the church.
Paul’s instructions
on prophesying seem parallel to his instructions on speaking in tongues. Paul specifies that ‘one’ speak in tongues
(v. 26), though he mentions ‘prophets’ (plural) speaking in verse 29. Maybe this is because he emphasized the
importance of prophecy over tongues.
Paul stipulates that tongues be spoke two or three (v. 27), and he
specifies that prophets speak two or three (v.31). Tongues must be interpreted (v. 28), and
prophecies must be weighed. Verse 28
tells circumstances under which the speaker in tongues must be silent, while
verse 30 specifies that a prophet should hold his peace if another sitting by
receives a revelation.
Now let us
consider the instructions to prophets.
I Corinthians 14:29 Let the
prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
According to
Bill Thurman, unlike in verse 26, it is possible, according to Greek grammar,
that ‘two or three’ refers to the number of prophets who speak. But considering the parallel nature of Paul’s
instructions concerning tongues and prophecy, it is possible that Paul has in
mind prophets speaking two or three prophetic utterances, which are then
judged.
To summarize,
verse 27 may be saying that if anyone speak in tongues, let him speak two or
three messages in tongues, one after another, and one person should
interpret. Verse 29 may be saying to let
the prophets speak two or three prophetic messages, and to let the other weigh
the messages.
Order for
Prophecies
Let us take a
closer look at the instructions for the gift of prophecy.
I Corinthians 14:29-31
29
Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30
If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold
his peace.
31
For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
Some
Pentecostals and Charismatics interpret verse 29 to say that there can only be
a maximum of two or three prophecies per church meeting. However, this interpretation contradicts
verse 31, which says that all may prophesy one by one. The Corinthian church clearly had more than
three members, so if all prophesied, how could there be only two or three
prophecies per meeting. In verses 23-25,
Paul already presented the idea of all prophesying in a meeting of the whole
church to be a good thing.
If one
interprets ‘two or three’ here to refer to the number of prophets, as many
translators do, it is clear from the passage that Paul does not limit the
number of prophetic speakers who can speak to two or three, because he says ‘ye
may all prophesy’ in verse 31. It might
be helpful to think of “Let the prophets
speak two or three and let the other judge” as a process that can be repeated
over and over again in a certain meeting, as long as the Holy Spirit is
providing the church with prophecies.
One possible
interpretation of verse 29 is that the prophets should present two or three
prophetic words, and then there should be a time of weighing the words. Another interpretation, predicated on the
idea that ‘two or three’ refers to the prophets, rather than to the words they
speak, is that two or three prophets can be given an opportunity to speak in a
church meeting, but that others be allowed to prophesy in the meeting as well.
Verse 30 shows
us that a prophet should be silent if another sitting by receives a
revelation. By following this rule, all
may prophesy one by one. (v. 31.) Unfortunately, even among churches that
believe in prophecy and have the gift in operation, it is rare to find churches
that follow these commands of scripture in many parts of the world.
Let us consider
what a church meeting might look like, that followed these commands for church
meetings. To help us imagine it, let us
consider the following hypothetical scenario mentioned in the chapter.
I Corinthians 14:23-25
23
If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all
speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers,
will they not say that ye are mad?
24
But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one
unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
25
And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down
on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
Let us imagine
a pagan who has heard the Gospel from a Christian neighbor and who is under
conviction. He feels guilty about
worshipping idols, and always has his guilt before God on his mind. As he asks his neighbor more about the
Gospel, he is invited to attend a Christian meeting. He comes into the meeting, where the whole
assembly is prophesying. It is as though
God has one really long message He wants to say, but He gives pieces of it to
the different believers in the assembly.
One young prophet stands and prophesies.
An older gentleman receives a revelation. He stands to indicate he has a revelation,
and the prophet becomes silent and sits down.
The older gentleman continues the same prophetic message. This long message goes from person to
message. The pagan guest is amazed because
the message is about him! The Lord
speaks to him about the secrets of his own heart through a congregation of
saints who speak as they are moved by the Spirit. Naturally, he falls down and says, “God is
truly in you.” and falls on his face to worship the true God who just spoke
through the saints. The man is impressed
that God is not merely in one individual, but in a whole congregation of people
who take turns serving as the Lord’s mouthpiece.
Judging
Prophecies.
I Corinthians 14:29
29 Let the prophets speak
two or three, and let the other judge.
Tongues must be
interpreted, but prophecies must be weighed carefully. There are many interpretations of who ‘the
other’ refers to in this verse. Some
believe’ the other’ refers to other prophets.
One interpretation the author has read is that ‘the other’ in verse 29
and ‘another’ in verse 30 refer to an overseer seated in the congregation. A third view is that ‘the other’ refers to
the saints in the congregation. Other
scripture indicates that it is the responsibility of the church to evaluate
prophecies and teachings spoken in the assembly. This third view is will be discussed in this
section.
If one
interprets verses I Corinthians 14: 29 to refer to the prophets, or even a
specific leader, judging prophecies, this should not prevent gifted brethren in
the assembly from evaluating prophets and teachings. In addition to prophesying, brethren should
be allowed to use their gifts. If the
flow of prophecy stops in the assembly, there may be an opportunity for
teachers or those gifted to discern between Spirits to share something related
to the prophecies the church has heard.
It might be appropriate to discuss how to apply what a prophet has
shared. In Acts 11:27-30, one of the
prophets from
Some believe
that weighing a genuine prophecy can be done in the form of a congregational
discussion about the prophecy—what it means, how it helped us, how we can apply
it. In discussing a prophecy, teachers
may want to use their gifts to relate the prophecy to teachings of scripture.
Having a time
to weigh prophecies after every two or three prophetic words (or after two or
three prophets have spoken) can also protect the flock against false
prophecy. Unfortunately, in some
churches that regularly allow prophesying, there is no forum in which to
challenge damaging false prophecies. One
reason for the lack of testing of prophecies is the culture and traditions
related to church meetings. Many of us
were raised to think of church meetings as a venue where only a specifically
designated speaker can speak. If we
realize that the Bible teaches us to have church meetings in which the
congregation uses its gifts to build one another up, then we can understand how
the congregation can test prophecies in a meeting.
If a false
prophecy is spoken out in the congregation, a prophet may receive a revelation
that the other prophecy is false, and share this with the congregation. Someone with the gift of discerning of
spirits may share his input based on his gift.
Teachers may challenge prophecies that contradict the doctrine of
Christ.
Testing
prophecies needs to be done with great care.
Sometimes, the Holy Spirit says things that we do not understand. A brash person who thinks he knows the Bible
well could presumptuously speak against a genuine prophecy that is actually in
line with scripture. A genuine prophecy
can go totally against the beliefs of a sincere Christian.
If someone
disagrees with a prophecy, he should be careful what he says. One should be especially careful of saying
that a prophecy came from a demon. Jesus
warned the Pharisees about the unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy
Spirit after they said that He cast out demons by the prince of Devils. He was actually casting out demons by the
Holy Spirit. So if the Pharisees were guilty
of or in danger of committing the sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit by accusing
the Spirit Jesus ministered by of being an evil spirit, shouldn’t Christians be
careful not to accuse those who speak by the Holy Spirit of speaking by
demons? The author of the Didache,
a document from the late first or early second century, believed that one could
commit the unpardonable sin by trying or discerning a prophet speaking in the
Spirit.[278]
False
Criteria for Rejecting Prophecies.
In assemblies
that believe that the brethren in the church should judge prophecies, one problem
that may arise is that
If one is
unsure about a prophecy he has heard, and feels compelled to share it with the
assembly, he can share his concerns about the prophecy with the assembly in a
very careful manner. Some are so proud
and confident of their knowledge of the Bible that they assume that their
opinions are gospel truth. It is
dangerous to have this attitude when the assembly is evaluating a true
prophecy. Those who are bold enough to
declare a prophecy false or accuse the spirit behind a prophecy must have good
grounds to do so. One must be very
certain of a revelation that the prophecy is false, or the prophecy must
clearly violate an important teaching of the faith. For example, a prophecy that curses Christ,
and says that He did not come in the flesh or rise from the dead is a false
prophecy. A prophecy to worship Hindu
idols, for example, is a false prophecy that must be rejected. But boldly rejecting a prophecy because it
hints at a slightly different view of predestination than your own is not good
grounds for rejecting a prophecy.
Some reject prophecies that do not make
them feel good. Many people use the
following verse to argue their point.
I Corinthians 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to
edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
For example,
some Christians think that a prophetic word of judgment does not fit the
description of I Corinthians 14:3, and should therefore be disregarded. This is neither logical nor scriptural. Exhortations are not always happy. A prophecy can be painful to hear, and still
edify us in the Lord. Just imagine how
the churches in
Other Christians
think that all prophecies given by the Lord must be harsh rebukes, or demands
that God’s people repent. The Old
Testament has plenty of prophecies like this.
But that doesn’t mean that all prophecies must be harsh. The content and tone of a prophecy depends on
what the Lord wants to say. Not all
prophecies in the Bible, even in the Old Testament, are harsh rebukes. If the brethren in a church are redeemed by
Christ’s blood and walking in holiness, then why should we surprised if a
prophecy to them is not a harsh rebuke?
The fact that
prophecies need to be tested is taught in other books besides I
Corinthians. Paul wrote to the
Thessalonians, who may have faced a lot of difficulty with false prophecies and
predictions:
I Thessalonians 5:19-21
19
Quench not the Spirit.
20
Despise not prophesyings.
21 Prove all things; hold
fast that which is good.
The
Thessalonians were not to go to the extreme of not allowing the gifts of the
Spirit to operate, and therefore quench the Spirit. They were not to despise prophesyings, even
if they had heard many false prophecies in the past. But even so, they weren’t to accept all
prophecies without testing them. They
were to prove all things.
I John 4:1 Beloved, believe
not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many
false prophets are gone out into the world.
Here we see
that John tells believers to try the spirits.
We as believers are obligated to test prophecies. It is not right to allow false prophecies to
be spoken out in assemblies without any correction if we know they are
false. Leaders should lead in dealing
with false prophecies.
A community
that tests prophecies is an intimidating place for false prophets and
teachers. False prophets and teachers who can deceive people without
having to deal with the judgment of the church have an easy time. But in a church that is diligent to obey the
teachings of Christ and the apostles, they have more difficulty deceiving the
saints.
The principle of
scripture to ‘prove all things’ applies to various aspects of church life. It applies to teaching as well as
prophesying. While leaders have an
obligation to lead the church in holding fast to the truth, the whole church
has a responsibility to prove, test, and judge.
It is possible
to have far too critical of an attitude toward prophecies. Some Christians are looking for any
opportunity they can get to discredit anyone who claims to prophecy. Sometimes, this is borne out of the false
belief that gifts like prophecy are not for today. People who have taught this, or who have
spent many years associating with those who believed this way and had a very
negative attitude toward prophecy, might be inclined to be overly critical when
faced with a genuine prophecy from the Lord.
There are some Christians who believe in genuine prophecy, but who have
hurt by false prophecies in the past or by disagreements with genuine
prophets. There are even some
Pentecostals and Charismatics who have a skeptical attitude toward prophecy
because they have little experience with it, and it seems unnatural to them for
there to be a lot of prophesying in a church meeting. Some unscriptural teachings about prophecy
have gained popularity in some Pentecostal and Charismatic circles. For example, some teach that God cannot lead
others through prophecy, or that true prophecies to an individual are always
confirmations of something the Lord has already spoken to that individual, or
that God does not give personal prophecies.
Some of these teachings, though they have basis in scripture, are
probably a reaction against abuses of prophetic ministry and false prophecy of
past generations.
Some believers
think that any prediction of the future made by a Christian religious leader is
a prophecy, and if it doesn’t come to pass, that leader is a false
prophet. For example, Bible prophecy
teachers who misunderstand the Bible and predict the future wrongly are
sometimes accused of being false prophets.
We need to keep in mind that there is a difference between predicting
the future based on intellectual understanding of the Bible, and claiming that
God gave oneself a prophetic message that predicts the future. It is a bad thing when sensationalist Bible
prophecy teachers predict the future wrongly by misusing the Bible,
particularly if they set a date for Christ’s return. A Bible prophecy teacher who does this is not
necessarily a false prophet, even if he does wrongly predict the future. This can hurt people in the body of Christ,
but there is a difference between this and giving a false prophecy that
pretends to be a quote from God Himself given under the moving of the Holy
Spirit.
Some people are
overly critical of prophets. If a
Christian who is not a prophet says “It will rain tomorrow” and it does not
rain, no one criticizes him. But if a
prophet makes a human prediction, like anyone else, “It will rain tomorrow” and
it does not, some might accuse him of being a false prophet. Prophets can predict the future wrongly
without prophesying falsely. If a
prophet makes a prediction like anyone else, and it doesn’t come to pass, that
doesn’t make him a false prophet. There
is a difference between saying, “It will rain tomorrow” and saying, “The Lord
says it will rain tomorrow.” We should
not accuse a man of being a false prophet if he makes a prediction without
making any kind of claim that he is speaking a prophecy.
Encouraging
True Prophecy
In recent
decades, some church leaders, in an attempt to encourage people to prophesy
have taught that it is okay to make mistakes while prophesying. The idea is that babies mess their diapers,
and that we should expect baby believers to make similar messes in the church
with prophecy and other gifts.
Is the idea
that false prophecy from sincere believers nothing serious Biblical? Let us consider what the Old Testament has to
say on this issue.
Deuteronomy 18:18-22
18
I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto
thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that
I shall command him.
19
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words
which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
20
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I
have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods,
even that prophet shall die.
21
And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the
Lord hath not spoken?
22
When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow
not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but
the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Here we see
that
Those who
believe that false prophecies from sincere believers are not a big problem are
quick to point out that these scriptures are from the Old Testament. Some think that now that we are under grace,
that prophets are free to make mistakes.
But does it make sense to say, “Under the old covenant, prophecies had
to be error free, but under the better covenant, prophecy can be full of
mistakes and it is okay.”[279] It does not make sense that prophecy under a
better covenant would be of a lower standard than under the old covenant.
In the Old
Testament, speaking a prophecy falsely in the name of the Lord was a death
penalty crime. So was adultery, murder,
and many other crimes. The New Testament
does not teach the church to stone adulterers or members who prophesy
falsely. But shouldn’t an adultery, or
one who prophecies falsely be cut off from fellowship if they refuse to
repent? The man in
Those who argue
that it is normative for Christian prophets to make mistakes often use the
scripture: “for we know in part and we
prophesy in part”[280]
to justify their claims. We need to keep
in mind that Old Testament prophets knew in part as well, but they were still
to be held to a high standard of accuracy. Old Testament prophecies that
predicted Christ, for example, were very accurate. But they were also difficult to understand. These prophecies did not clearly explain
every detail of Christ’s life. If a
prophecy is ‘in part’, that does not mean that it is in error.
A map of
When discerning
prophecies, we need to be careful not to be more critical of prophets among us
than we are of Biblical prophets. For
example, Jeremiah prophesied that if a nation that God had made a pronouncement
against repented to pull it down and destroy it, would repent, God would repent
of His plan for that city. If God made a
declaration to build and to plant a nation or kingdom, and that nation or
kingdom turns to evil that God would repent of the good planned for that
nation.[281] Jonah prophesied to
Prophesying
According to the Proportion of Faith
Paul wrote to
Romans who had the gift of prophecy to “prophesy according to the proportion of
faith.”[283] Those with the gift of prophecy should be
obedient to this teaching and prophesy.
But this verse also puts a limitation on prophecy. It must be done according to faith.
Romans 14:23
teaches us that ‘whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” The issue in that chapter was that of
Christians not being able to eat meat with a clean conscience. Perhaps they thought that meat sold in the
markets might have been offered to an idol, and therefore could not eat in
faith. Prophesying must be done in
faith. If “whatsoever is not of faith is
sin”, then prophesying should be done in faith.
If someone who wants to prophesy doesn’t have any faith that the message
is from the Lord, he shouldn’t speak in the name of the Lord.
Saying “Thus
Saith the LORD”
Some teachers
who teach on the gift of prophecy discourage Christians from saying, “Thus
saith the Lord” before a prophecy. Some
teachers encourage people to introduce a prophecy with little confidence, as
follows, “I think, maybe, the Lord might possibly be saying to me…” [“saya memikir bahwa mungkin bisa jadi
Allah bilang ini kepada saya…”]
Some of those
who teach Christians to introduce their prophecies with a great deal of
uncertainty do so with good motivations.
They have seen believers who have been manipulated or abused by someone
posing as a prophet who gave authoritative words that hurt other people. But is the solution to this problem teaching
people to sound unconfident when introducing a prophecy? Is there a single example of a prophet in the
Bible who gave such a weak sounding introduction to his prophecy? Many Old Testament prophets repeatedly
introduced their prophecies with “Thus saith the LORD.” On one occasion, Moses even said that if his
prediction of the future did not come to pass that the LORD had not sent him.[284] Other prophets like Elijah and Elisha had a
lot of faith in God, and believed that they had real gifts from God. If prophets are genuinely prophesying
according to the proportion of faith, they should have some faith in the words
they are sharing.
If a man gives
a false prophecy introduced with, “I think God might possibly saying something
to me…maybe” will he be any less guilty of prophesying falsely in the name of
the LORD than a man who says, “Thus saith the Lord”? Both wrongly attribute a prophecy to the
Lord. The less confident introduction of
a false prophecy might be less deceiving and less harmful to a believer or
church that hears it.
But think about
the effect a weak introduction to a prophecy might have if the prophecy is
true. Can you imagine John the Baptist
saying “I’m not sure, but think God might possibly
saying…maybe…uh….well….uh…Repent.”
Couldn’t teaching prophets to introduce prophecies in a weak manner have
the effect of undermining the authority of true words from God? Introducing true messages from God in an
unconfident manner is not humility. If a
prophet is confident about his prophecy, naturally
He will want to
speak it boldly. Since there is no
scriptural precedent for teaching prophets to give prophecies in an unconfident
manner, and plenty of scripture in favor of giving prophecies boldly, we
shouldn’t try to inhibit the legitimate boldness of faith-filled prophets.
Of course,
prophecy does require a lot of faith, especially for those who realize that
false prophecy is a serious matter. Any
believer taking first steps in ministry may have fears to overcome, as he
learns to walk in faith. Even the
prophet Samuel needed to learn to recognize the word of the Lord when he first
started out.[285] Some people who prophesy might feel more
comfortable not saying, “Thus saith the Lord” or attributing their words to the
Lord. Depending on the content of the
word, this is sometimes possible.
Sometimes, people prophesy without realizing it, as Caiaphas probably
did when he prophesied the death of Christ.[286]
But at other
times, prophets should say “Thus saith the Lord.” How can a prophet know when to say “Thus
saith the Lord’ and when not to say it?
One approach to
this issue is for the prophet to say what the Lord tells him to say. Consider this verse from the book of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel 11:5 And the Spirit of the Lord fell upon me, and
said unto me, Speak; Thus saith the Lord; Thus have ye said, O house of Israel:
for I know the things that come into your mind, every one of them.
This is only
one of many examples in the book of Ezekiel in which God gave the prophet a
message in which “Thus saith the Lord” as a part of the prophecy. God told Ezekiel to say “Thus saith the Lord”
and he said it. It was a part of the
prophecy. A prophet is not required to
say “Thus saith the Lord” if the Lord does not give that to him as a part of
the message he is to say.
The Spirits of the Prophets are Subject to the Prophets
After giving the Corinthians instructions regarding prophesying recorded
in I Corinthians 14, Paul wrote in verse 32, “And the spirits of the prophets
are subject to the prophets.”
The pagan Greek prophets, who prophesied in the name of the false
gods, were believed to lose control of themselves, overwhelmed by the spirit
prophesying through them. Since some
pagans who prophesied may have been kerasukan setan [demonized]
this should not be surprising.
But Christian prophets are not like those who are controlled by
demons. The prophets are in control of
the gifts the Lord has entrusted to them.
Some people may think that prophets cannot stop prophesying if the
‘anointing’ is on them. People who hold
to this view might be inclined not to obey Paul’s instruction in verse that a
prophet hold his peace when another receive a revelation. But prophets need to know when to stop
prophesying so that the Lord can use others in the assembly to prophesy as
well. Since the spirits of the prophets
are subject to the prophets, prophets can follow the instructions concerning
prophesying in this passage.
If prophets are able to stop prophesying so that they can obey the
commandments of the Lord concerning prophesying, then it stands to reason that
those who speak in tongues by the Spirit can also stop speaking in tongues to
obey the commandments of the Lord for church meetings.
Chapter 19
Teaching
Teaching is
central to the mission of church planters and the church in general. Christ sent the Twelve apostles into the
world after His resurrection, instructing them to preach the Gospel to all
nations, baptizing them, and “teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I
have commanded you.” The teaching of the
Lord Jesus Christ, given through His apostles, must have a prominent place in our
churches.[287]
Teaching
Them to Obey
Notice that the
Lord did not merely instruct the apostles to teach the nations to know what He
taught, or to memorize it. They were to
observe His teachings. Christ teachings
are to be obeyed. It is not enough to
have a correct understanding of doctrine. James warned his readers, “But be ye doers of
the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.”[288] There are those who do not obey the word of
God, but think that they are doing right because they hear the word of God, or
even know the word of God. But our Lord
wants us to obey Him, and not merely hear what He says.
Doctrine is
important, but teaching in the church should also be directed toward
action. A house church setting in which
the brethren are free to exhort one another, in which the saints have close
relationship and hold one another accountable is a good setting for learning to
obey the teachings of Christ and His apostles.
If the church learns about Jesus’ teaching that we must forgive others,
then the saints can be challenged to forgive others from the heart. Those who have broken relationships can be
urged to obey Christ’s commands. They
can return to later meetings with testimonies of their obedience to Christ to
share in meetings. If a church studies
about how the early Jerusalem church sold their goods to give to the poor and
fed widows, then the church can also discuss what it can do to help those in
need, pray, and take action. The
teaching in our meetings should teach people to obey, and not merely teach them
information to memorize.
The
Importance of the Word
The word of God
is essential to spiritual growth. Peter
instructed his readers to be “As newborn
babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby….”[289] If believers want to grow in the Lord, they
need the word of God. If house church
meetings focus only on relationships, and participants sit around and chat, but
no one shares the word of God, we cannot expect there to be much growth as a
result of the meetings. Believers grow
as they learn and obey the word of God.
It is no wonder that Paul ranked apostles, prophets, and teachers higher
than many of the other ministries, since these ministers minister the word of
God to others.[290] Apostles bring the Gospel to new areas and
unreached people. Prophets share the
word that God puts on their hearts.
Teachers teach and explain the word of God that has already been
revealed. These ministries should have
an important role in church meetings, and churches should help train those
called to these ministries.
Learning the
word of God has a powerful effect on us.
The Psalmest wrote “ Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not
sin against thee.”[291] Studying, meditating on, and memorizing
scripture can help keep us from sin. The
word of God lets us know what to do and what not to do, and it strengthens us
spiritually. If members of our church
study and memorize the word, they can grow stronger spiritually, and we can
expect for more strong teachers to grow up in our midst. Even if a house church has no teachers, we
have the writings of the apostles and prophets.
We can open our Bibles and read them, and hear the prophecies of the
prophets, and teachings of the Lord and His apostles.
Teaching
Through Sermons?
Many who grew up
in traditional churches are used to one dominant method of teaching—long
sermons. The three-point sermon, with
its conclusion, three important points, and conclusion, is considered by many
to be the best method of teaching.
Ironically, when we look at the Gospels, the epistles, sermons in Acts,
and Old Testament writings, we do not find these writings organized according
to the pattern of the three- point sermon.
The three-point speech was a method of speaking taught by Greek
philosophers. Aristotle had taught it
hundreds of years before the birth of Christ.
This pattern was also used in writing.
As the Gospel was preached among the Greeks, certain teachers would
organize their teachings according to the format that was considered proper in
their culture. Now, many centuries
later, seminaries teach this Greek method of organization as a proper method
for presenting sermons.
The three-point
sermon is a very organized method for presenting a 30 to 45 minute
message. But if we look in the Bible, we
can see evidence that the church meeting was not always focused on one
extremely long, uninterrupted speech. I
Corinthians 14:26 shows us that many saints shared in meetings. Hebrews 10:24-25 shows us that the saints
were to exhort one another in meetings.
Many of these meetings may have had many saints doing a little speaking,
rather than one saint doing almost all the speaking.
If many saints
take turns teaching in the meetings, then there is no need for one of the
saints to prepare a carefully organized 45-minute sermon. Many potential elders of the church who are
‘apt to teach’ may not be able to give good 45-minute sermons. Putting the expectation on new converts that someone
in their house church meeting must give a long sermon every week can stifle a
new church. A church planter who
preaches great sermons may find other believers hesitant to take on
responsibility to teach in a house church if they feel they must preach
45-minute sermons. He may have to change
his own teaching style in order to provide a model that the other members of a
house church feel comfortable with.
The expectation
to preach a 45-minute sermon can hinder the growth of churches. As house churches outgrow their meeting
places and grow and divide into more house churches, they need to have more and
more leaders. We must be sure to allow
God to raise up leaders within these congregations. We need to recognize their ministries, and
cooperate with the Lord. The Lord may
raise up a number of qualified elders in a church who are not able to preach
long sermons well. Putting unbiblical
expectations on potential leaders—like that of giving long sermons—may inhibit
them from taking up their responsibilities as leaders.
Babies usually
learn to crawl before they can walk. They
learn to walk before they can run. Some
new believers are gifted early on with a gift of teaching. But because of their limited knowledge of the
word, they cannot teach for a very long time.
These believers need an opportunity to use their gift up to the level
they are able. If we require anyone who
wishes to speak to give a long sermon, those who have 2-minute or 5-minute
messages have no opportunity to use their gift.
Even mature teachers may have very short messages to give. We should not limit the expression of the
gift of teaching in our meetings by imposing a requirement that anyone who
teaches must speak for a very long time.
Though Jesus
did not follow the three-point sermon organizational pattern in His teachings,
the Gospels do record some lengthy teachings that He gave. Sometimes, brethren in our assemblies may
have long teachings to give. We should
allow this to occur if the Spirit leads the meeting in this direction. Those with lengthy teachings need to be
considerate as well, making sure their teachings are edifying, and allowing an
opportunity for other brethren to speak.
Jesus did not
only teach through long sermons. He also
taught by discussions he held with people over meals, and by asking and
answering questions.
Discussion
and Teaching
In Acts 20:7-11
we read that Paul taught brethren all night long. Paul may have taught them by means of having
a discussion with them. The word for
‘preach’ [ use Indonesian Bible word berbicera dengan atau apa aja dalam
terjemahin resmi] here is a form of the Greek dialegomai. Forms of this word are often used in the book
of Acts to refer to Paul’s discussions with the Jews in their synagogue, for it
was their custom to discuss or debate the teaching presented in the synagogues[292]. Paul’s teaching about Christ sometimes met
with strong opposition during these discussions. Mark
9:34 uses a form of dialegomai to refer to the argument the
apostles had among themselves regarding who was the greatest. Paul uses a form of the word in Acts 24:12
when he states that he was not found arguing with any man in the temple. The word can refer to interactive
discussions. Acts 20:11 uses a form of
the Greek word homileo to refer to Paul’s teaching. Some assume from this that Paul was preaching
a long, uninterrupted sermon, because ‘homeletics’ [kalau homoletika kata
B. Indo. Pakai itu aja. Kalau tidak,
tamah kata ‘dalam bahasa Ingrris.’] is now used to refer to the art of
preaching sermons. However, it is clear
from the New Testament that the word homileo did not refer to
uninterrupted speeches in the first century.
Luke 24:14 uses a form of the word to refer to a discussion between two
disciples on the road to Emmaus.
It is likely
that Paul was engaged in a lively discussion through which he taught the
disciples. It must have been rather
interesting to keep most of the group awake all night. During this time, however, someone fell
asleep and fell out of the window. But
this passage should not be used as justification for preaching long, uninterrupted
sermons for so many hours that the listeners fall asleep.
The book of
Romans contains questions that he presents and answers. Paul may have been accustomed to using these
kinds of techniques as he taught. The
Greeks did give us the three-point speech, but this was not their only method
of teaching. They also learned through
asking questions and by discussion. So
did the Hebrews as we see from the example of Christ in the Gospel. Jesus taught through telling stories,
parables, that is, to communicate His message to those with ears to
understand.
Discussion is a
method of learning that is especially helpful in a house church. If a church has already chosen a passage of
scripture to discuss in a given meeting, all the saints can prepare for the
discussion the following week. They can
pray, read the Bible, and bring their knowledge to share as they discuss the
scriptures. There does not necessarily
have to be one person assigned the task of teaching a particular text. Having one lead teacher, or even a few
teachers taking the lead, in a discussion is an option. It depends on the gifts present in the
meeting. If all members of a house
church are new believers, none may be ready to lead a teaching. But they can all learn by reading what the
Bible has to say, discussing what the passage means, discussing how to apply
it, and then making efforts to apply what they learn in their own lives.
Robert Fitts,
the author of The Church in the House recommends a method of Bible
teaching called discussion Bible study.
A group of believers commit to study the entire Bible through in a
year. They read sections of the Old
Testament at home, and gather together to read allotted portions of the New
Testament together as a group.
Participants may sit in a circle.
One person reads a few verses.
When he stops, anyone in the group is free to offer a comment or
question on the verses read. The person
sitting beside the last reader then reads more verses. If this person is shy, he may decline to read
and let the next person read. On and on
the group reads, offering comments, and questions. Sometimes the conversation may go so far off
track that an elder, teacher or other brother in the group may have to suggest
that everyone get back to the passage being discussed. If the group is shy or has little to say,
then the activity is still good because everyone is still reading and listening
to the Bible. This method of Bible study
is effective even when only one person in the group owns a Bible. He can pass his Bible around the group to let
all read.
There are many
advantages to systematic Bible study conducted through a simple discussion when
compared to teaching through sermons. A
group discussion has the potential to hold the attention of the group better. Group conversation is something that people
from every country in the world can relate to.
In every country, people sit around and talk. It is much more natural to the sermon.
Participants in the discussion may find that group discussion is much more
applicable to themselves. They can ask
questions about the passage, and discuss how to apply the passage to their own
lives.
Uneducated
elders who work as farmers, fishermen, or laborers would find the burden of
organizing a long speech to be an intimidating task. But leading a group discussion of a passage
of scripture is much less intimidating.
One man does not have to speak for half an hour in front of a crowd,
non-stop. He doesn’t have to worry that
his message will be irrelevant to the group.
In a discussion, participants are free to ask questions about their own
lives that relate to the passage. A
teacher does not have to carefully plan out what he will say in a sermon,
trying to figure out how to organize his message and which point to say
first. The structure of his message is
already laid out for him in the Bible.
After reading verse one, the group will read verse 2. The group will study what the author said in
the order he said it. Teachers’ gifts
will be apparent in the meeting as people share their insights into the
passage. All the believers can prepare
for the discussion, if the topic to be discussed is planned in advance. Those who have commentaries can read them at
home. They can study relevant scriptures
before the meeting. Those who have gifts
of exhortation can pray about what to say in the next discussion.
If one is talented as a public speaker,
preaching sermons may actually be a very comfortable and ‘safe’ form of
preaching. The preacher, giving his sermon
to a group, may not know what their problems are. He doesn’t have to face difficult ethical
questions from the congregation about how to apply the word of God in their own
lives. In many churches, a teacher is
free to choose any text he wishes, or else he may be assigned a topic he knows
little about. A teacher who likes to be
comfortable and safe may neglect to teach on passages of scripture that are
controversial. How often do most
churches teach on Jesus’ teaching on divorce, or the issue of someone with a
weak conscious, or many other topics?
When a group systematically discusses a book of scripture, the entire
book gets covered, even the parts that don’t seem interesting or comfortable to
someone who has to come up with a well-organized sermon.
Men gifted as
teachers often have a lot more knowledge about some subjects than others. One man may be able to teach a great deal
about church structure, the issue of a weak conscious, or some other subject,
but may know little about the period of time Isaiah lived in. Another brother in the assembly may have
spent years in Isaiah, and may be better suited to teach. A group discussion allows an opportunity for
the saints in an assembly to offer the best they have to edify the body.
An alternative
method of teaching, which some might not classify is discussion, is to allow
teachers several minutes to offer ‘mini-sermons.’ This may take a form that is slightly more
formal than a group discussion. One man
may stand and give a teaching and sit down.
Then another brother may stand and give another mini-sermon. Some of the differences between this and the
discussion method of teaching are that the mini-sermon may be a little more
lengthy than a turn someone takes in a conversation, others may not feel as
free to interrupt with questions and comments, and the style of the meeting may
be a little more formal. Every house
church will develop it’s own style of teaching.
Our methods of teaching do need to conform with what we learn about
church meetings from the scriptures, and what the Holy Spirit leads our
individual assembly to do.
Many churches
suffer from a lack of male ministry and leadership. While a lot of traditional churches seem to
have more men working as pendeta, women may dominate some of the other
ministry positions in the organization.
Some involved in house churches theorize that the traditional church
set-up, with the pendeta speaking and everyone else listening, attracts
women rather than men. Many men like to
be active, and even lead at times. The
Jewish synagogue of the first century allowed for the regular Jewish man to
give a teaching in a synagogue. After
the teaching, the Jewish men could comment on the sermon, and even disagree
with it. The synagogue system of this
time did not generally have the problem of a lack of male participation. In fact it was male dominated. Many men learn to enjoy discussing scripture
with one another, and learning.
Boys who grow
up watching their fathers studying and discussing scripture with the other men
learn that this is what a man is supposed to do, learn and discuss the
scriptures. If he sees his father
obeying the Lord’s teachings, then he has a good role model to follow. As he matures in the Lord, and studies
through the whole Bible in church the child learns to participate in church
meetings, and may grow up with a deep knowledge of the word of God. He is a great asset to the church.
Christians who
are accustomed to discussing the scriptures have an advantage when it comes to
witnessing. They are accustomed to
actively speaking about God, rather than passively listening. It is easier for people with this experience
to talk about God in their daily lives.
If one is accustomed to speaking about the word of God with the brethren
in church, it is easier for him to form a habit of speaking the word of God at
home, including teaching his children the word when he rises, when he sits down
to eat with them, and when he goes to bed at night.
Fathers and
mothers who sit in a traditional church listening to sermons may learn the
scriptures, but they have not seen an example of how to teach the scriptures to
their own children. Many men would not
even think of trying to preach a 30-minute sermon, like the pendeta
does, to their own children at home during a family devotion. If they did, the smaller children would
probably lose interest after a few minutes.
But fathers and mothers who learn the word through discussing it with
others verse by verse have a simple model they can follow at home with their
own children.
A group
discussion of a passage can provide an excellent opportunity for brethren
gifted with the gift of teaching to exercise their gifts. Those who will eventually mature into
teachers may have little to share in meetings at first, but as their knowledge
grows, they will have more to share.
Teachers can grow and mature in an environment like this.
Wise,
Educated People
Discussing the
Bible, meditating on the word of God, wrestling with difficult issues, and
applying the word to our lives can make us smarter and wiser. We see this principle in the Old Testament:
Psalms 119:98-100
98
Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for
they are ever with me.
99
I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are
my meditation.
100
I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.
Here we see
that meditating on the Law made the author of this Psalm wiser than all his
teacher. Keeping the Lord’s precepts
made him wiser than the ancients.
Meditating on God’s word and obeying it makes people wise.
Proverbs 1:2-6
2
To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;
3
To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity;
4 To
give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.
5
A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of
understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:
6
To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise,
and their dark sayings.
Look at what we
can gain from reading the book of Proverbs.
The word of God can transform our minds.
It gives us wisdom and understanding that show up in our day to day
life. Those who meditate on the word of
God and obey it become educated and wise.
What should a Christian do if he considers himself to be wise,
uneducated, or if he has a low IQ. Here
we see that the proverbs give subtilty to the simple. The following Psalm contains great promises
for the simple.
Psalms 19:7-8
7
The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of
the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
8
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment
of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.
The law of the
Lord has the power to make the simple wise.
If a child has a low IQ, have him start memorizing scripture and
meditating on it, and see what happens to him.
Aside from all the spiritual benefits of studying, meditating on, and
obeying the word of God, we also gain many other benefits in this world. A church full of people who know the word of
God, who study it continually, will be educated. Some say that one can graduate SMA [high
school] and college without being truly educated. An educated person not only recites facts
back and answers multiple choice tests.
He knows how to reason and how to apply the knowledge he has
learned. Someone who only goes through
SMP who spends his youth memorizing, meditating on, and applying the scriptures
to his life may actually be much more educated than some who gets a
degree. Besides the witness of good
works that comes from obeying the teaching of Christ and His apostles,
unbelievers can also see that believers who know and follow the word of God
have a wisdom that is not of this world.
Some of them will figure out that, if they have a problem or need
guidance, they can go to Christians to help them. This is a good witness for the Gospel.
People who
spend time memorizing, meditating on, and discussing the word of God, and
putting it into practice, may sometimes be asked this question, “Where did you
go to Bible college?” The early church
did not have Bible colleges. Teachers
were trained within their own church communities. They learned from other teachers, including
traveling apostles. If our churches take
teaching and learning the Bible seriously, and diligently study, teach, and
meditate on the word of God, then we can expect that God will raise up
knowledgeable teachers in our midst, who know the word as well, and sometimes
even better, than most Bible college students.
Bible college students may know more Christian history and theology, but
what is profitable from these subjects can be taught in the context of the
church community as well.
Questions in
Teaching
Jesus answered
questions that His disciples asked him.
For example, Jesus’ teachings in Matthew 24 were in response to His
disciples’ questions. He answered
questions from His friends and disciples alike.
Our Lord’s opponents tries to trip Him up with difficult theological
questions, but He answered them so well, and asked them questions so difficult
that his opponents did not dare to ask Him any more questions. [293] Jesus amazed those who saw Him when He
questioned the teachers of the Law in the temple at the age of twelve.[294] Asking and answering questions was a part of
learning in those days. A knowledgeable
Jewish teacher had to be able to answer tough questions and ask tough
questions.
Asking and
answering questions are good tools in the learning process. One of the weaknesses of preaching sermons is
that listeners are not free to ask questions about the parts that they do not
understand. If the speaker appears to be
teaching serious error, they are not free to question him about it. Many people sit in traditional churches, and
while the preacher preaches, their minds wander. Some even go to sleep. Discussions that involve asking questions
often hold peoples’ attention better. It
makes little sense to teach exclusively through sermons in a small church in
which there is plenty of time to answer questions.
In the
synagogue of Jesus day, there was a time to comment on the teaching that was
given. No wonder Paul got into so many
arguments and discussions in the synagogues.
He probably answered a lot of questions.
The book of Romans contains many questions from an imaginary person Paul
seems to be presenting his message to.
Paul was probably used to answering questions from unbelievers and
Christians alike. He may have answered
those questions in the book of Romans many times in his own experience.
The teachers in
the time of Christ and the apostles not only answered questions, but they also
asked them. The Greek word katekeo [check
spelling and get a source] was a method of teaching and testing
students. A teacher would thoroughly
question a student to see that he understood a topic. The ‘catechism’ comes from this Greek word. We may think of a ‘catechism’ as a book with
text meant to be memorized word for word, and recited back word for word in
response to questions. But originally,
this was not the catechal method of education.
The student is to show in-depth comprehension, and not merely recite quoted
material without truly understanding it.
Some teachers who use a catechal approach still understand this. Catechism is an ancient method of education,
in use before they had catechism books. [Cite
source,Understanding Cathechism]
This is a tool that can be used in teaching, especially one on one or in
very small groups.
Questioning
Teachers and Judging Teachings
In many
traditional churches, no attempt is made to evaluate the validity of the
teachings brought before the congregation.
If the local pendeta teaches false doctrine members who disagree
remain silent during the meetings. Those
who disagree might confront the pendeta later, or talk about the issue
with others after the meeting is over, or leave the church silently, or do
nothing about it. If a guest speaker
comes to a church and speaks outright blasphemy, many congregations would
remain completely silent until the meeting is over. Some pendeta would even allow the
guest speaker to finish his sermon, and then not give any commentary on it
before dismissing the meeting.
Is this
Biblical? Does the Bible teach us to
allow serious doctrinal error to be taught in our meetings without confronting
it? Many modern Christians think that
they are supposed to be silent during church meetings, and that the speaker
alone is to talk. The idea of a regular
layman speaking during the teaching time is considered by some to be
irreverent. Of course, we know that the
early church had meetings in which regular believers exhorted one another. It is unlikely that a church behaving
responsibly, having been started by the apostles, would allow serious doctrinal
error in the meeting to go by unconfronted.
Acts 15:1-2
1
And certain men which came down from
2 When
therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them,
they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up
to
Here we see
that some men taught false doctrine about salvation, and Paul and Barnabas
confronted them. It is possible that
Paul and Barnabas confronted them in the very meeting in which they taught this
doctrine. Clearly, the other brethren
knew of the dispute, because they decided Paul and Barnabas and others should
go to
The false
doctrine taught in
The New Testament is full of warnings about false
teachers. II Peter 2 contains an
extensive teaching on this subject. The
book of Jude contains a very similar teaching.
These men were characterized by financial and sexual corruption. Jude calls these men spots on his readers’
love feasts.[297] Peter says of them ‘spots and blemishes they
are, sporting themselves with their own decievings while they feast with you.[298] The churches should not have been fellowshipping
with such men, and eating the Lord’s Supper with them. If we read these passages carefully, we
should be aware that we, in our own time period, are required to be on the
lookout for false teachers. These
passages are very beneficial to us. We
need to be careful of teachers who teach people that they may participate in
sexual immorality and idolatry. We must
beware of those who preach motivated by greed.
There are also those who would attack the basic beliefs of the Christian
faith.
The letters to the churches in the book of Revelation
address the problem of the false teachers.
These churches faced different types of false teachers. The Lord Jesus rebuked one church for having those
that held to the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, and another for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitans. The Lord rebuked them that held to the
doctrine of Balaam, and addressed the problem of someone he called ‘that woman
Jezebel’ who seduced His servants to commit fornication and to eat things
offered to idols. The problems in these
churches, as in II Peter and Jude, involved teachers of false doctrine who were
promoting sexual immorality and idolatry.
The churches were commended for not tolerating those who taught this
doctrine, and rebuked for having those in their midst who held to it.[299] Paul wrote to the church in
It is interesting that scripture puts responsibility on
local congregations for not dealing with false teachers. A local church is responsible to keep out
false teachers. There are still plenty
of wolves who teach false doctrine, try to lead sheep away after themselves,
preach and teach motivated by greed, teach believers not to trust in Christ for
salvation, or teach people to be sexually immoral or idolatrous. The Bible warns us to beware of these things
in the last days, and we need to take these warnings seriously.
If a leader falls into error, the church is responsible not
to listen to him, and to confront the error.
If a visiting speaker preaches grave error in the congregation, the
church must confront it. Otherwise, the
weak may be tempted to follow his doctrine.
Christ may not have had to rebuke churches for tolerating them that
taught the doctrine of Balaam, the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, and the woman
identified as ‘Jezebel’ if the churches had cut off false teachers and their
sexually immoral followers from fellowship as other scripture commands. The saints Jude and Peter addressed should
not have allowed false teachers to be spots on their love feasts. The procedures outlined in I Corinthians 5
and Matthew 18 can be applied to the case of false teachings that lead others
to sin. The Corinthians were to deliver
the sinful man over to Satan, and Paul also delivered Hymenaeus and Alexander
for shipwrecking the faith of many and blasphemy. [301] We see in another epistle that a man named
Hymenaeus was teaching that the resurrection of the dead had already taken
place, and had overthrown the faith of some.
He had erred from the truth. Paul
may have delivered this man over to Satan because of teaching false doctrine on
the resurrection, a central doctrine of the Christian faith which is related to
our salvation.[302]
In the
denominational realm, Charismatic churches seem to attract more false prophets
than churches that teach against the use of the Biblical gifts of the
Spirit. Fortunately, the Bible gives use
safeguards against false prophecies, like judging prophecies in assemblies,
instructions on testing the Spirits, and other teachings of scripture. It is a dangerous of a church that allows
prophecy to disregard warning against false prophets and to neglect to judge
prophecies. The churches that reject the
gift of prophecy can miss out on blessings from God and needed direction from
the Lord. Some critics of Charismatic
churches point to examples of false prophecies in an attempt to argue against
the use of the gift of the Spirits. The
early church had genuine prophets, but it also faced the problem of false
prophets.
In addition to
false teachers who are actually false brethren, wolves in sheep clothing, there
is also the issue of well-meaning brethren teaching their wrong interpretations
of scripture and strange ideas. Even
gifted teachers can be wrong on various issues.
We need to deal with this problem with love in our assemblies. One practical way of dealing with false
teaching is to allow the body to discuss and evaluate the teachings given,
right there in the meeting. If the
church is having a discussion of a passage of scripture, wrong ideas can be put
down without hurting feelings in the context of a discussion. For teachers who give longer teachings, a
practical way of making sure teaching is tested is to make a regular practice
of asking questions and commenting after he presents his teaching. Those who do not understand, or who want
further teaching on a point raised during the teaching may ask questions. The teacher has a chance to explain
himself. Others in the assembly may
comment and add additional insight into the teaching.
Just as
churches that follow scriptural teaching by allowing prophecies have to face
the challenge of false prophecies and false prophets, churches that following
scriptural teaching and allow the brethren to teach in the meeting face the
problem of false teachers, and well meaning-brethren who teach false
doctrine. We must judge teaching in our
midst. If we are silent while serious
error is taught, brethren can fall into error.
The body has a responsibility to guard against deception.
While we need
to beware of false doctrine and deal with it if it arises, we also need to
realize that Christians can have different viewpoints on many doctrinal issues
and still fellowship with one another.
In Romans 14, Paul addresses the fact that some only ate vegetables and
others ate meat. Some honored one day above
another, and others honored every day alike.
These issues were not only behavioral issues, they were also doctrinal
issues. Some may have been afraid that
meat sold in the markets might be offered to idols. There may have been different views on how to
regard the Sabbath, the first day of the week, or other holy days. There are many issues we can disagree on and
still remain in fellowship. Serious
doctrines that should lead us to break fellowship are doctrines that can keep
people from salvation or lead them into sin.
Teaching that Christ is not the Son of God, did not come in the flesh,
die on the cross, or rise from the dead attack the heart of the Gospel. Teaching people that they may engage in
sexual immorality is also a dangerous teaching.
Those who hold
to different views on predestination or eternal security can still fellowship
with one another and love one another.
Sometimes, someone who holds to a particular doctrine has a weak
conscience on that issue, and the rest of the brethren need to make concessions
for the sake of his conscience and for the sake of unity. For example, a church has communion using
yeast bread one week. All partake except
for one family. The head of the family
says that he does not believe in celebrating the Lord’s Supper with yeast
bread, but that unleavened bread must be used.
The rest of the brethren disagree with him, but out of respect for his
conscience, they decide to use unleavened bread. If the man who insists on unleavened bread
brings the bread whenever they have communion, then there should be no problem
at all. Or whoever buys or makes the
bread can make it without leaven. Even
if the other brethren feel the man has a weak conscience in regard to what kind
of bread to use, if no one feels it is a sin to use unleavened bread, then
there is no reason not to yield to the man with the minority opinion out of
love, a desire to keep the man’s heart pure before God, and a desire for
unity. Disagreements of this sort need
to be handled with love, humility, and prayer.
In some parts
of the world, such as the
Men, in
particular, who start to learn the scriptures and doctrine may begin to greatly
enjoy discussing and even debating the scriptures. On the one hand, this is a good thing, but on
the other, it can lead to problems if it gets out of hand. Wives and children have a great blessing if
the head of the household knows the scriptures.
But we must be careful not to allow church to become a mere intellectual
exercise of discussing and debating the scriptures. We must also obey what the scripture
teaches. Many of the teachers of the Law
in Jesus’ day loved debating the scriptures, and some of them were probably
good at it. None of them were as good at
it as the Lord. One of the problems
Jesus saw with many of the teachers of the Law is that they were hypocrites. They were teaching the Law, but not obeying
the law. We need to be careful not to
allow church meetings to become just an intellectual exercise in discussing and
debating the scriptures.
Men who like
debate the scriptures need to be careful to do so with love. The men in the congregation should be careful
not to humiliating a young man who brings his first teaching to the church
because of a very minor error he makes by asking dozens of questions he cannot
answer. Young teachers need to be
nurtured and treated carefully.
Well-meaning brethren who teach doctrinal error need to be corrected
lovingly. When a church is newly formed,
having an interactive meeting in which teachers are held accountable may be
awkward. But as people get to know one
another well, being corrected is not as scary.
Most of us are not nervous about a loving family correcting a small
mistake we make in front of our other family members. Why not?
It is because we have close relationships. Close relationships in the assembly can help
prevent debating in an unloving manner.
It is hard to be disrespectful or harsh to someone who helps you fix
your motorcycle, or who helped you pay your electric bill when you lost your
job. Love and community promotes good
meetings. Brethren can learn to
interact, and even disagree, in a loving manner.
Another problem
men who debate the scriptures have to watch out for is whether or not their
debate is edifying the body. Church
meetings are supposed to be about edifying the body of Christ. Two men taking turns sharing scriptures and
offering short teachings on two sides of the same issue, attempting to come to
a balanced understanding of the truth, may actually edify the assembly by their
discussion. The saints are learning
about the word of God, and how to apply it to their lives. But sometimes, men may get into an extensive
debate about an issue. The rest of the
congregation does not understand what they are talking about. The conversation is not applicable to their
lives, and may even lead to confusion.
They are not being edified very much.
Instead, they spend the meeting listening to a few men proudly showing
off their knowledge of scripture, or entertaining themselves with intellectual
discussion. The men in church need to
pay attention to what they are saying.
They need to continually ask themselves questions like this, “Is what I
am saying building up the church? Does
it add to their knowledge? Does it
encourage them to be pure before God? Does
it comfort them? Can they apply this to
their lives?” If a discussion is no
longer edifying, one of the elders or other brethren in the assembly can
suggest going on to something else. The
men engaged in the conversation can continue it after the meeting has broken
up.
Leaders
Dealing with Error
When men taught
false doctrine in
But if an
apostle travels he is not always there to ask.
The apostles appointed elders to tend the
Titus 1:9 says
that an elder must hold fast to the pure word he has been taught, so that he
might be able to ‘exhort and convince the gainsayers.’ It is an elder’s responsibility to stand up
against deceivers with the truth of the Gospel.[304] In an organic, Biblical church, the elders
will usually be some of the most mature, doctrinally sound men in the
assembly. Naturally, they will normally
take the lead against error.
But it is not the exclusive responsibility of an elder to reject error. The New Testament repeatedly tells churches
to hold to true doctrine and reject error.
If an elder does not correct false doctrine, the brethren should. Many brethren are not bold enough to correct
even major doctrinal error if the elders remain silent. Elders need to be aware of this, and see it
as their responsibility to keep the church’s doctrine pure. Sometimes churches have gifted teachers who
are not elders of the church who are able to correct false doctrine more
quickly than the elders are. Elders
should recognize and appreciate gifted brethren who correct error, and not
forbid them from using their gifts.
Elders are
human beings. Some people see pastors,
evangelists, and other workers as supermen.
There is a temptation for the leaders of a church to think that they
have to act like they know everything.
An honest and sincere elder should not be afraid of saying “I don’t
know.” Babes in Christ who realize that
their elders do not know everything, and see them constantly looking in the
scriptures and spending time in prayer for answers learn a lesson: to trust in God rather than men. In a church community with strong loving
relationships, the brethren should know the elders well enough to realize that
they are human beings, and not all-knowing supermen. An elder should not demand that demand that
every believer in the assembly agree with him on every point of doctrine. One church can have elders with different
views on certain doctrinal issues, and still function well in love and
unity. A brother in an assembly may not
agree with the elders on every issue.
Women and
Teaching
It is clear from scripture that there is a Biblical role
for women in teaching. Paul wrote to
Titus about the role of older women teaching the younger women.
Titus 2:4-5
4 That they may teach the young women to be
sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
5
To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own
husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
Not all
teaching in a Christian community will be given in the actual church
meeting. Other teachings are given as a
few people meet together with other Christians every day. Parents should teach their children at home. SMP and SMA students and mahasiswa may
meet each other and informally discuss the scriptures or spiritual things over
a meal. Older women can teach younger
women in each other’s houses, as they visit one another, cook together, and
live their lives.
But what about
women teaching in the church? Paul wrote
about the issue of women teaching men in an epistle to Timothy.
I Timothy 2:11-15
11
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man,
but to be in silence.
13
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the
transgression.
15
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in
faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
Based on this
verse, many house churches do not have women bring teachings before the
congregation. There are a great variety
of beliefs among house churches in regard to a woman’s role in the
assembly. Some believe in nearly
absolute silence, with women remaining silent except in group singing of hymns,
bringing prayer requests, and discussion during informal times after the formal
part of the meeting in over. Some house
churches have men and women participating equally. Other house churches have only men bring
formal teachings, while women are allowed to participate in the discussion.
One
interpretation of I Corinthians 14:34-35 is that the women were asking critical
questions of the prophets, or possibly of their own husbands who were
prophesying in the meeting. I
Corinthians 11:5 mentions women prophesying with their heads uncovered. Acts 2:17 and 21:9 mention women
prophesying. Some house church
Christians believe that women should only prophesy outside of the
assembly. Others think that Paul’s
instructions in I Corinthians 14 applied to a specific situation.
A discussion of
the role of women in church is beyond the scope of this book. But any church that is serious about
returning to scriptural patterns for church meetings must consider the
scriptures on this matter. Nearly every
house church will have to deal with this issue, especially if the brethren make
a practice of reading through the scriptures together.
Letting the
Spirit Move in Our Meetings
As our churches
seek to have good, solid, Bible teaching, we need to remember not to plan our
meetings so much that we do not leave room for the Spirit to operate. If we place so much focus on our time of Bible
teaching, that we do not allow the saints to sing songs, to use their gifts of
prophecy, tongues and interpretation, and other gifts of the Spirit in the
meetings, then we err. We must still
obey the commandments of the Lord for church meetings, which require a lot of
dependence on the Lord. God’s order for
prophesying in the meetings is very dependant on the Spirit giving the message
to prophesy. We cannot plan in advance
everything that will happen during a time of prophecy: who will speak, and in what order, because
these things must occur as the Spirit directs in the meeting.
Even in regard
to our teaching, we must be flexible. If
a house church is scheduled study the book of Leviticus, and some chapters
about the sacrificial system are scheduled, there should still be freedom for a
teacher to bring a teaching on another subject.
The Holy Spirit may give a teacher a message to share with the saints
that does not come from the scheduled scripture reading. A need or problem may arise in the congregation
that has to be addressed by a teacher in the meeting. An elder, or anyone with a pastoral gift, may
have needed correction or advice to share that relates to specific problems. For example, if there are broken
relationships between members of the congregation, or the poor are being
neglected, or the saints have been facing hardship, they may need to hear a
word directed toward their problem. A
church should not limit the saints to only speak on the topics that have been
chosen beforehand. Some believers may
have a word of exhortation that is not clearly from a specific passage in the
Bible. We should allow them to use their
gifts.
Some house
churches have meetings that are nearly all spontaneous. One person offers a teaching. Another person sings. Someone else offers a prophecy. There are house churches that have
‘spontaneous discussions’ that are not planned beforehand. After singing, whoever wants to can open up
the Bible to any passage and share. If
there are gifted teachers or prophets in these meetings, and the saints have
been spending time reading the word and sharing, and the group is led by the
Spirit, these meetings can be very edifying, even if there is no planned Bible
study. In some house churches like
this, the saints really get fed. A
church that practices this may wish to prayerfully consider whether their
members are being taught all of the scriptures.
There may be other alternatives to doing systematic Bible studies in the
larger house church meetings. For
example, all of the families may be reading through the scriptures together at
night throughout the week.
But not all
house churches are full of gifted teachers and prophets who have plenty to
say. Sometimes, brethren meet and have
little to say in meetings. Or they may
simply share their personal experiences in the Lord. Testimonies are good things to have in our
church meeting, but we need a balance.
All testimonies and no Bible teaching is not a balanced spiritual
diet. If a church has only prophecies,
and no teaching, there is a possibility that the church could go into error,
especially if the saints are not taught to discern false prophecies, or do not
have a sufficient knowledge of Biblical doctrine to do so. A church that has good teaching by does not
allow the prophetic gift to operate may miss out on important direction and
exhortation the Lord wants to give the church.
We need the best balance we can get in our meetings, given the gifts the
Lord has put in our church. Systematic
Bible study is a good alternative to meetings that are not balanced because the
meeting is all prophesy or all testimonies.
It is a good a alternative for meetings where people sit around and talk
about their feelings as in a group therapy group, or to meetings that degenerate
into chit-chatty discussions about politics or the latest TV show.
When a church
decides on a plan for systematic Bible study, it is wise to do this with
prayer, seeking the will of the Lord as a group. The church mat discuss the issue, and then commit
it to prayer for a week, and then pray together about it and share as the Lord
leads. For example, a church that
quickly decides, without consulting the Lord, to study the book of Revelation for three months may find it has to abandon
it’s plans anyway if the Lord adds a number of new believers who need
instruction.
The Biblical
Method Raising up Leaders and Teachers
The Bible says
nothing about Bible colleges or seminaries.
Paul and Barnabas did not appoint elders of the church by hiring young Bible
college graduates who had graduated ‘
If we study the
qualifications for overseers of the church in scripture, we see that these
local men had to be ‘apt to teach.’[305] According to Titus 1:9, an overseer must hold
fast “to the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound
doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers.” Elders of the church have to know the word of
God, and be able to use it. How did the
elders get their knowledge of the word if they did not go to Bible
college? We see in this verse that an
elder ‘hath been taught’ the faithful word.
Who could have taught it to him, if not a Bible college professor?
When Paul and
other apostles traveled and started new churches, they taught new believers the
word of God. We see from Paul’s comments
to the Ephesian elders that he had spent days and nights with them, exhorting
them[306]. The elders and other early converts in a
church, that heard the word of God from an apostle, were to preserve that word
and pass it down to others who would believe later. We see a principle in scripture of how
teachers are to be raised up. Some have
called this the Two-Two-Two principle because it is named after II Timothy 2:2
And the things that thou
hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men,
who shall be able to teach others also.
Timothy had
been taught the word of God by those in his home church, the apostle Paul and
others. He was to take these teachings,
and commit them to faithful men, who would commit them to others. On and on the word of God would go. This is the Biblical method for raising up
teachers. It is simple, isn’t it? The teachers in local church are supposed to
faithfully teach the apostles’ doctrine to others. Some of these will become teachers. On and on the cycle goes. This was the method for preserving Christian
teaching for hundreds of years. Over
time, the writings of the apostles were compiled into the New Testament. We are very blessed to have this treasure to
help us learn God’s word.
A faithful
church with elders and teachers can carefully teach the word the younger
generation and new believers who come in, and exhort them to obey it. If the saints in a church know and obey the
word, we can trust God to gift some of them, perhaps many of them, to be
teachers of the word. In this way, leaders
can mature without the need of Bible colleges.
Traveling ministers, like traveling teachers, apostles, and evangelists,
can take young people who are gifted to do these ministries along with
them. Paul took Timothy with him on his
journeys and trained him in ministry through a close teacher-disciple
relationship. There were several other
men who traveled around with Paul as he grew older and more experienced in
ministry. Paul was wise enough to pour
himself out into others who could continue the work. Mark traveled with Paul and Barnabas, and
later with Barnabas when this team split up.
Mark was also close enough to Peter for Peter to call him “ my son.”[307] There is an ancient tradition that Mark’s
Gospel is a record of the message he heard from Peter.
Within a
church, gifted teachers who are older and more experienced in ministry can find
young men to train and instruct. Through
close relationships, they can, not only teach them proper doctrine, but show
them how to live and minister. The younger
can serve the older, assisting them in their ministries, as they grow in their
own. This is a Biblical method of
teaching. Prophets in the church can
find young, budding prophets, and nurture them, as prophets did in the Old
Testament. Those gifted to show mercy
through ministry to the sick can gather younger brothers and sisters in the
Lord who have a heart for the same kind of ministry. In a new house church plant among an
unreached people group, the most mature elders, teachers, prophets, and other
ministers may be fairly young and new at the ministry themselves. Sometimes teacher-disciple relationships
resemble father-son or mother-daughter relationships. Sometimes they resemble older-brother—younger
brother relationships.
In some
churches the elders of the church will be the most prominent teachers, though
this is not necessarily the case.
Biblical churches that allow for people to use their gifts may sometimes
find that a godly young person who hasn’t lived long enough to fulfill the
requirements for eldership may be especially gifted in teaching the word. The elders of the church are still to
minister in a fatherly way in the church.
Elders are to lead, not by lording over others, but by being “ensamples
to the flock.”[308] They should try to give the saints a good
model of ministries. The elders can show
people how to evangelize by doing it themselves. They can show others who to teach responsibly
by doing so themselves. As leaders in
the church, elders should try to nurture the gifts in the body. Some professional church leaders maintain
control by not allowing others to use their gifts, and stamping down any gifted
brother who could be seen as a threat to their own employment (silencing
brethren gifted enough to be pendeta for the congregation.) Other church leaders are gracious and kind,
but they do not train and nurture new leaders because they enjoy the feeling of
doing all the work themselves. They
enjoy sacrificing more than anyone else, and take on responsibilities and work
that are actually training opportunities that could be given to other gifted
brethren. Many traditional church has
developed a culture in which the
responsibility of church ministers and leaders to train new ministers and
leaders is ignored. Instead, churches
depend on Bible colleges and seminaries.
Leaders should consider it their Biblical responsibility to raise up new
leaders.
The organic
method of training new leaders found in scripture are superior in many ways to
our modern dependence on seminaries and Bible colleges. If we follow the scriptural pattern, new
leaders will be trained, taught, and nurtured in a community that knows them,
loves them, and holds them accountable.
Then they serve their own communities.
They serve people they know intimately, people who they relate to--
people who already respect them.
Biblically qualified leaders can be trained in this way. His training is not only theoretical
knowledge of theology, but practical ministry experience. There are plenty of parents who send their
naughty children to Bible college to straighten them out. Four years later, this person is on the job
market, looking for a position as pastor, working for people who do not know
his past or his current character.
Clearly the Bible is superior to human tradition.
Training
leaders within a church community does not cost a lot of money. Bible colleges can be expensive. In some churches, the only way to become
recognized as an overseer in the church (whether the candidate is qualified
Biblically or not) is to graduate a Bible college or seminary. In order to attend seminary, one must pay
money. Isn’t this an ethical
dilemma: that one can only be educated
to be an overseer if he pays a certain amount of money. It is unlikely that Paul ever said to
Timothy, “Okay, Timothy, I will only give you training in apostolic ministry if
you pay me 30 shekels of silver every month, and when you get ready to
graduate, you will have to pay another 50 shekels.” Paul had a fatherly relationship towards
Timothy. Good fathers do not charge
their sons money to be their sons.
The Biblical
methods of training leaders are reproducible.
Some house church planting efforts have grown into church planting
movements. A church planting movement is
when a church is planted, and that church plants churches, and the churches
that church plants churches and so on.
House churches can grow spontaneously in this manner if we follow
Biblical practices and teachings, pray, and the Holy Spirit empowers the saints
and draws in the sinners. The current
Bible college system attracts many people who are not Biblically qualified to
be elders of the church, charges them money, usually does not teach them
everything they need to know to do their ministry, and is not equipped to
produce enough leaders for a church planting movement. If churches are committed to giving all
believers a thorough education of the word of God, and are committed to obeying
Christ and His apostles, then we can expect that God will produce the leaders
in these churches using His organic methods.
He can raise them up from within the congregation, just as He did in the
first century.
Everyone should
appreciate the knowledge that Bible college graduates have, and appreciate
their ministry in house churches. Some
Bible college graduates in
George
Patterson and Galen Currah give the following advice and training leaders:
* Train your own
leaders. Avoid sending men off to attend elitist educational institutions.
Without intending to create a clerical class
within their movement, educators do, in effect, instill within their students
an attitude of superiority based upon academic learning. Bible
school and seminary graduates generally do not deem non graduates fit to lead
congregation and cells and will not trust "mere laymen" to lead new
groups, even if the latter meet every one of the biblical qualifications of
elders. Students also imitate the leadership style that teachers model in an
institutional classroom, which is often quite dictatorial.
* Empower the obedient for ministry now. Amazingly, at the beginning of the
21st century, in spite of abundant evidence accumulated by mission researchers,
many missionaries and pastors still choose the "promising" young men
and send them off to Bible school or seminary to become the "future
leaders of the church". Choose for training and leadership only mature men
who have already undertaken to lead their families and witness in their social
networks. After some years of pastoral leadership, some of these should,
indeed, seek advanced education.[309]
Their advice
comes from years of experience planting churches, training church planters, training
teachers, coaching church planters, and also teaching and training in a
seminary setting.
Reproducible
Teaching
Paul wanted
Timothy to teach faithful men, so that they would be able to teach others
also. Timothy would have to use methods
that these faithful men could imitate, so that they could teach others
also. A teacher should teach others in
such a way that they will be able to imitate they way they were taught. It is the responsibility of the church
planter to understand the mindset and culture of the people he is serving,
rather than forcing them to adapt his culture.
Paul understood this when he said that he became “all things to all men,
that I might by all means save some.”[310]
The missionary
who goes to the jungle and shows tribesman the Jesus film, and persuades people
to believe in Christ may be doing a very good work for the Lord. But he has evangelized them in a way they
cannot imitate. If the villagers want to
scatter and tell the Gospel to their relatives in other villages, they may not
know how to do it without a generator, projector, screen, and the Jesus
film. A teacher should teach people in a
way they can imitate, so that they might later teach others.
Three
point-sermons are not very reproducible in a lot of cultural contexts. If a church planter plants house churches of
5 to 20 people that can fit in an average house, then it is unlikely that every
church will have someone good at giving polished speeches. He should teach in a way his listeners can
imitate and teach to others. A
discussion Bible study may be a reproducible method among people who can
read. If you teach poor people to be
dependant on overhead projectors and color booklets to teach, then they will
not have enough money to buy more overhead projectors and color booklets when
their church grows and plants other churches.
Illiterate
people from cultures where people are used to telling stories might learn
better through hearing stories. The Old
Testament is full of stories. Jesus used
stories to relate spiritual truths.
Telling stories can be very effective in teaching, and also in
evangelism. New Tribes Missions
missionaries use a method of evangelism that involves telling stories from the
Old Testament to familiarize tribal people with who God is, what sin is, and
the sacrificial system of the Old Testament.
Using stories and drama and other methods, missionaries prepare the
people to hear the story of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and His
resurrection. This method has been very
successful in some areas. George
Patterson successfully taught teachers to tell stories and use drama to
communicate the Gospel while ministering in
Many
missionaries have found that with prayer and godly living, teaching people
reproducible methods of evangelism and teaching have resulted in rapidly expanding
church planting movements. There are
many case studies of churches started by a small number of believers can
quickly grow into thousands of believers meeting in small house churches. For examples of case studies, please see [Refer
people to CPM website and other relevant websites. Hopefully, refer them to an Indonesian
version, if available before book finished.] The CPM web page is hosted by the
International Missions Board of the Southern Baptist Church in the
Teaching New
Believers
New believers
need special care. They need to learn
basic lessons to help them get started.
George Patterson wrote about his philosophy for dealing with new
believers.
To
plant churches in a pioneer field, aim for each community to have a group of
believers in Christ committed to obey His commands. This definition of a church might get a D
minus where you studied theology’ but the more you add to it, the harder it
will be for the churches you start to reproduce. We asked our converts to memorize the
following list of Christ’s basic commands:
1.
Repent and believe: Mark
1:15
2.
Be baptized (and continue in the new life it initiates): Matt. 28:18-20’ Acts 2:38;
3.
Love God and neighbor in a practical way: matt. 22:37-40
4.
Celebrate the Lord’s Supper:
Luke 22:17-20
5.
Pray: Matt. 6:4-15
6.
Give: Matt. 6:19-21; Luke 6:38
7.
Disciple others: Matt.
28:18-20[311]
New believers
need to learn to obey what Christ taught, as we see in Matthew 28:18-20. Therefore, it makes sense to start teaching
them the commandments of Christ in the Gospels and the writings of the apostles
from the beginning, with an emphasis on them really obeying it, and not just
learning it as ‘proper doctrine.’ Loving
God and loving one’s neighbor are central principles to Christian living, and
it is new believers must learn how to obey these commands from the beginning of
their walk from the Lord. As believers
mature, they can learn more of the commands of Christ.
Over time, new
believers will start to read the Old Testament.
Many people get confused when they read the commands about circumcision,
what foods to eat, how to wear cloths, what to do if you get unclean, and various
other laws. Some in the early church
were susceptible to the false teaching of men who would tempt them to be
circumcised, and to trust in circumcision and keeping the Law for salvation,
and not in Christ. Paul’s teaching on
not being under the law may be difficult for some to understand. If the new believers are Gentiles, as most
are, it may be easier for them to learn about Acts 15. Here we see that the apostles and elders of
the early church taught that Gentiles did not have to be circumcised and obey
the Law of Moses. James saw in the Old
Testament that there would be nations, not just
Teaching and
Teachers
Should teachers
be many, or should teachers be few?
James gave his readers a warning.
James 3:1-2
1
My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the
greater condemnation.
2
For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the
same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.
Here, James
gives a warning. God hates
hypocrisy. Jesus opposed it when He was
ministering here on earth. We as
Christians do not want to be hypocrites.
Teachers are judged by a high standard, and should live up to what they
teach. In this passage, James warns
about offending in word. He continues on
to discuss the dangers of the tongue, and to discuss the problem of men who
bless God and curse God with their mouths.
If a man teaches God’s word, but harms others with his mouth, this is a
terrible inconsistency.
The word
translated ‘perfect’ in James 3:2 is teleios. This word has to do with
the idea of being mature, or of full age.
A mature Christian is able to bridle his tongue, and his own body. In fact, in James 1:26, James says that the
religion of a man who does not bridle his tongue is vain. Teachers should be mature Christians.
The author of
Hebrews seems to expect his readers to be teachers. If many were reading his epistle, then we can
assume that he would want there to be many teachers. How does this fit with the teaching of James? In both cases, the issue is maturity.
Hebrews 5:11-14
11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard
to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
12 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.
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in
the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat
belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have
their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
Here we see
that, for the time, the Hebrews should have been mature enough to be
teachers. But they were still immature,
in need of milk and not meat. If they
had grown to maturity, and learned the word properly, then they would have been
teachers.
There are those
who think that only mature Christians should speak in church meetings based on
James 3:1-2. But if we consider the
Corinthian church, Paul described them not as spiritual, but carnal, and as
babes in Christ. They also were still
drinking milk and were not ready for strong meat.[312] But we see that this church, composed
primarily of immature Christians was very active in their church meetings. Did Paul rebuke them and tell them all to be
silent in church because they were not mature?
No, he did not. In fact, in I
Corinthians 14, Paul encouraged them to seek gifts, like prophecy, to build up
the whole body. In verse 26, we see that
some of them were bringing teachings to share in the meeting. Did Paul rebuke them for this, and forbid
them to teach? No, instead he told them
that they needed to do all these things unto edifying.
Not everyone is
gifted as a teacher, but many Christians who are not teachers still have to
teach others. Not all parents are teachers,
but they are still must teach their children about God.[313] Not all Christians are prophets, but Paul
taught the Corinthians that they may all prophesy.[314] If a saint in a church meeting participates in
a discussion, others may learn from his comments, but that doesn’t mean that he
is necessarily a teacher per se. There
are some in the church who stand and share a word on occasion that instructs
the body. There are others who are
gifted as teachers and who operate in the ministry as teachers. Others follow them as disciples and learn
from them. We need to take James warning
to heart about being teachers, and make sure that we keep our tongues and
bodies under control and grow into maturity.
But we must also obey the scriptural commands to use our gifts to edify
one another and not use lack of maturity as an excuse not to use our gifts.[315] The saints must be allowed to use their
gifts. Teachers must be allowed to
teach. This will strengthen the body,
and allow for more teachers to arise within our midst.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 20
Music
As we reconsider the nature of church meetings in light of
the scriptures, we should also reconsider some of our practices as they relate
to music. Music is an important part of
church life. In the Old Testament,
Israelites would sing songs of praise to God.
David praised the Lord with songs written to the harp. David and other musicians left us the
inspired music found in the Psalms. We
should sing in our church meetings.
Church meetings based on the scriptures function differently from what
we see in tradition. Meeting in small
homes may not allow for some of the practices we are used to in traditional
churches. So how can we apply the
Biblical teachings and principles about music in our gatherings?
Solos
in the Early Church
One verse in the New Testament that gives the church
instruction about singing is I Corinthians 14:26.
I Corinthians 14:26
How is it then, brethren? when ye come
together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a
revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
The idea here seems to be individuals bringing things to
share with the congregation. Each one
might have a teaching to share. Each one
might have a ‘psalm’ to share. Paul
likely has an individual standing and singing a solo to the congregation, which
can edify the church just as a spoken teaching could.
Approximately 200AD, the church leader Tertullian wrote of
Christians who still sang solos in meetings in which they ate the Lord’s Supper
as a meal:
Yet about the modest supper-room of the
Christians alone a great ado is made. Our feast explains itself by its name The
Greeks call it agape, i.e., affection.
Whatever it costs, our outlay in the name of piety is gain, since with
the good things of the feast we benefit the needy; not as it is with you, do
parasites aspire to the glory of satisfying their licentious propensities,
selling themselves for a belly-feast to all disgraceful treatment,--but as it
is with God himself, a peculiar respect is shown to the lowly. If the object of
our feast be good, in the light of that consider its further regulations. As it
is an act of religious service, it permits no vileness or immodesty. The
participants, before reclining, taste first of prayer to God. As much is eaten
as satisfies the cravings of hunger; as much is drunk as befits the chaste.
They say it is enough, as those who remember that even during the night they have
to worship God; they talk as those who know that the Lord is one of their
auditors. After manual ablution, and the bringing in of lights, each is asked
to stand forth and sing, as
he can, a hymn to God, either one from the holy Scriptures or one of his own
composing,--a
proof of the measure of our drinking. As the feast commenced with prayer, so
with prayer it is closed.[316]
The church in Tertullian’s day was apparently still
practicing this aspect of mutual ministry described in the Bible.
Speaking
to Yourselves in Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs
Paul left believers instructions to sing to one another in
his epistles.
Ephesians 5:18-20
18
And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the
Spirit;
19
Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing
and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
20
Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name
of our Lord Jesus Christ;
The ‘psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs’ of verse 19 are to
be sung out of being filled with the Spirit.
Paul tells us to speak ‘to yourselves’ with these songs. This verse allows for all kinds of songs to
be sung. As a Jew, Paul must have had a
lot of experience singing the Old Testament psalms. No doubt the early Christians, familiar with
the Old Testament scriptures, would sing selections from these scriptures to
the Lord. They also sang other types of
‘hymns’ and ‘spiritual songs.’ Paul was
very much in favor of prophecy in church meetings. Since the songs mentioned in this passage are
sung out of the overflow of the Spirit, we should not rule out the possibility
that Paul had in mind ‘spiritual songs’ that were prophetic music put to word,
sung under the moving of the Spirit.
There is a parallel passage that Paul wrote to the
Colossians.
Colossians 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in
all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and
spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
Here we see that the songs are sung out of a heart full of
the word of Christ. This was written
before the New Testament canon was completed.
The word of Christ was alive in their hearts. Out of it, they were to sing their psalms,
hymns, and spiritual songs. We see here
that we can teach and admonish one another through these songs.
The phrases ‘speaking to yourselves’ in Ephesians 5:19, and
‘teaching and admonishing one another’ in Colossians 3:16 may refer to one
person at a time, singing to the group, rather than to congregational singing.[317] When we interpret these two passages of
scripture, we should take into account the fact that the instructions described
I Corinthians 14 are regarding one person presenting something to the
congregation. In the case of singing,
this would be individuals singing solos.
Congregational
Singing
Congregational singing has held an important place in
church meetings since the Reformation.
The Reformers wanted the congregation to participate more in church
meetings, rather than merely hear music from choirs hidden from the
congregation. A new period of hymn
writing followed.
Many modern church practices are based on the assumption
that congregational singing must have a central role in church meetings. Many books written are based on this
premise. If we have congregational
singing, particularly in a large congregation, many feel there is a need for a
song leader, if for no reason than to keep everyone singing to the same
beat. Though ‘song leader’ is not a gift
or position described in scripture, it has become elevated in some circles
almost to an official position of church leadership. Books are written about the importance of the
ministry of ‘worship leaders.’ Some
full-time church staff are hired solely for the purpose of arranging and
leading the music for church meetings.
Some teachings about song leaders have evolved based on the traditions
of how we do church, rather than based on what the Bible says.
While there is no direct teaching in the New Testament that
we are to have congregational singing in our church meetings, Matthew and Mark
both record that Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn after eating the Lord’s
supper.[318] Modern Jews from Ashkenazik, Sepharidian, and
Yeminite communities sing the Passover liturgy taken from selections of
scripture from Psalms 113-118 and Psalm 136 as a group.[319] It is possible that Christ and His apostles
sang selections from these hymns congregationally as well. Notice that Tertullian, in the quote earlier
in this chapter, wrote that the church of his day sang songs after the Agape
meal. In their case, the saints sang
solos. Perhaps the after-dinner music of
Tertullian’s day was influenced by what Christ and the disciples did at the
Passover meal.
What we do in our church meetings should be governed by the
principle, ‘Let all things be done unto edifying.’[320] If congregational singing is edifying to the
body of Christ, then there is no reason to forbid it. We just need to be careful not to do away
with spiritual solos, and not to allow our doctrine about music to be unduly
influenced by the tradition of congregational singing.
Worship
Leaders
When we reconsider how we conduct our church meetings, we
need to be open to the idea that some teachings regarding music are not really
scriptural. The Bible does not teach
that there must be a special role of ‘worship leader’ or ‘music pastor’ or
whatever roles have evolved around our church practice. In recent years, some Charismatic books have
presented the idea of musicians as Levites or priestly figures. Some worship leaders believe that their role
is to lead the congregation into the presence of God. The Old Testament does teach that God inhabits
the praises of
Some house churches do have
musicians who play music and lead the singing.
This is an option for those who engage extensively in congregational
singing. Musicians also need to respect
the ministry of individuals who would sing solos. They should not feel that they have to play
music to accompany every solo. A
musician trying to figure out how to pluck out the tune of a prophetic song
could distract the prophet who is ministering.
Someone in the congregation may stand and sing an old hymn. The congregation doesn’t necessarily have to
join in and sing it, even if they know it.
There is a time for listening.
Usually, music leaders who do
help us sense that we are in the presence of God are those who are good at
making melody in their hearts to the Lord, as Ephesians 5:19 teaches us. It is possible to go to a church meeting
where people sing just because that is what Christians do when they meet. While they sing about God, their minds drift
to other things. If everyone in a
meeting sings like this, the singing may seem really dry. Being in the presence of those who really do
concentrate on the Lord when they sing praises to him can influence others to
do the same. If anyone in the church
leads others in singing, he should do so by making melody in his heart to the
Lord himself, so that others can follow his example. The one who sings to the Lord from his heart
not only honors the Lord, but he also can build up the body of Christ by
encouraging them to sing sincerely by his own example.
The Over-powering Guitar
Some musicians in the
Charismatic movement like to play music while the speaker is speaking. Musicians need to be careful about this
practice in a house church environment.
When speakers take turns exhorting one another in a house church
environment, a musician playing the guitar or keyboard can be distracting. If someone should stand to sing a song, it
could be difficult if a musician is playing another tune on his guitar. It can be difficult for someone to start
singing a song intended for the entire congregation to sing if another musician
continues on with another tune. Many
house churches have people from various backgrounds in them. To those unfamiliar with the Charismatic
movement, background music played while the speaker is speaking may seem
melodramatic or just plain weird.
Musicians need to respect the diversity of the meeting.
If a congregation is singing
congregationally, musicians need to be careful to sense the Spirit’s moving,
and the condition of the congregation.
Brethren may be ready to share teachings from the scriptures, or
prophecies, but find it difficult or uncomfortable to speak because the guitarist
continues playing on the guitar, continuing the music time. Christian musicians, naturally, consider
singing to the Lord an important part of the meeting. Some musicians never want this part to
end. Teachers consider teaching
important. Prophets consider prophecy
important. We need to respect one
another and allow for all the gifts to flow.
In a traditional Charismatic
church, a song leader might be expected to lead the congregation, playing or
leading music, exhorting people to praise the Lord, starting new songs, and
things of that nature. Biblical church
meetings are supposed to be mutual in nature, allowing ministry to ‘one
another.’ In this type of setting, there
does not always have to be one ‘leader’ for every activity. A musician who plays music for one song does
not have to lead all the singing. Some
meetings may have a song followed by a
teaching, followed by several prophecies given according to Biblical directives,
followed by songs again. Tradition has
taught us that we must have a set time for music. This is certainly an option, but we can’t
expect that every meeting of every house church will follow the traditional
pattern of having a set music time. Musicians
that want to allow for other members of the body to suggest songs, sing solos,
or give teachings can simply stop playing after a song is finished, unless the
Spirit leads them to play.
The Spirit can move
musicians to play as we see in the Old Testament. We should not inhibit the ministry of the
Spirit through musicians out of a reaction to church traditions. But we should not allow following church
traditions to keep us from having edifying meetings.
Musical Outbursts
In some Charismatic
churches, there is a practice of the musicians all playing notes that make up
one chord. All throughout the
congregation, people each sing their own song using the notes of this one
chord. Usually, one cannot make out what
another person is singing because everyone is singing something different. One person is singing a song of praise to the
Lord in his own language during this time.
Another is singing a song in tongues.
The worship leader usually starts off these sessions. There is no commonly-known name for this
practice, so this section is entitled ‘Musical Outbursts.’
Those who are interested in
returning to Biblical church practice should consider the musical outbursts in
light of scripture. Many of the
principles Paul applied to tongues apply to musical outbursts. Un-interpreted tongues builds up the one
speaking, but does not edify the congregation[324]. Therefore, the one who speaks in tongues
should speak to God, but should refrain from speaking out in the congregation,
unless there is an interpreter.[325] Paul’s instructions must not have been much more
popular in the Corinthian church than they are today, because he warned those
who disagreed with his instructions that they were the commandments of the
Lord.[326]
Naturally, the one who sings
in tongues should abstain from doing so in church unless there is someone who
can interpret the song. So this portion
of the ‘musical outburst’ is not done properly.
What about everyone singing a song in the common language, as praise to
the Lord? I Corinthians 14:40 tells us
to let all things be done decently and in order. If everyone in the church stood at the same
time, and all started teaching different things, all at the same time, would
the church be edified? Of course not. We couldn’t hear the teachings designed to
edify the body. If teachers take turns
teaching, then the body is edified. Some
of those spontaneous songs of praise that people sing during this time would be
very edifying for the church. Wouldn’t
it be better for people to take turns, each singing a song of praise
spontaneously to the Lord? Consider the
effects of the musical outburst on the unbeliever or someone unfamiliar with
the practice. As with tongues, these
people are likely to think ‘ye are mad.’[327]
Our church gatherings are a
time for each of us to feed one another.
They are not a time for each of us to feed ourselves only. We can edify ourselves at home. The one who speaks in tongues without
interpretation can receive as much true spiritual edification from praying in
tongues alone at home as he can from speaking in tongues before the
congregation. Without interpretation, he
doesn’t edify the congregation. With all
the noise of a musical outburst, the song a person sings, even in the common
language, doesn’t edify others. It only
edifies himself. We can edify ourselves
at home. In church meetings, we are
supposed to edify one another.
Therefore, it makes sense for us to take turns to sing songs of praise
to the Lord. That way the church can be
edified.
Edifying
Songs
As
we evaluate music in a Biblical light, we also need to consider the content of
the songs that we sing in our meetings.
Songs sung in church should contain good, Biblical theology. Songs which teach bad theology should be avoided,
or at least modified, and not sung in church.
Singing songs that come from the scriptures, or even the scriptures
themselves, is a very good, edifying practice.
Songs that praise the Lord are good and edifying to the church, and give
praise to God as well.
Some
songs have little edifying content to them. Anyone who chooses a song to sing
before the church should consider whether the song really builds up the
body. Some songs are designed for
entertainment and have little of substance to say. A considerate believer should avoid singing
these songs in church. Singers should
also be careful not to consider the churches time. There may be a need for teaching on a
particular subject one week, or the Lord might want to speak through
prophecy.
Potential Problems with
Solos
One reason why some
believers prefer congregational singing to solos is because solos are often
sung as what seems to be entertainment.
Singers who bring songs before the congregation should be careful not to
do so just for attention. Some people
love to perform. Unfortunately, this is
true in churches. It is not just true of
singers and musicians, but it is also true of many preachers. Some of them love the attention they get
behind the pulpit. Our motive for
singing speaking in church should not be to get attention. We should sing or speak to edify the body of
Christ.
The words of the song being
sung are what are important. While the
Old Testament encouraged musicians to ‘Play skillfully with a loud noise,” [328]
the purpose of music in church is not for us to be entertained with the ability
of the musicians, or to listen in awe as someone with a beautiful voice
impresses us by hitting the really high notes.
It is easy to get sucked into an entertainment mentality. Singers should sing as unto the Lord. Naturally, they should try to sing well and
hit the notes as best they can. But even
the praises of those who cannot carry a tune are pleasing to the Lord if their
hearts are right. We should not
discriminate against brethren based on talent.
We should listen to the words they sing, as they edify the body with
their songs.
The Simplicity of
One of the advantages of
meeting in homes is that there is no need for expensive sound systems. If someone in the house church has a
keyboard, they might wish to use it in the meeting. If no one has a keyboard, someone might still
have a guitar or a traditional musical instrument. Some house churches may wish to not use
musical instruments at all. Sound
systems cost money. Those who plant
house churches do not have to worry about spending money on such things. It costs nothing for people in a living room
to sit around and sing praises to the Lord.
If a house church did decide
it needed a huge, loud, sound system, it might actually find itself being
persecuted by its neighbors. Neighborhoods
generally don’t appreciate loud noise, and this is a practical concern that
many house churches must take into account.
Acapella singing is generally not very loud unless there is a very large
congregation.
As house churches fill to
capacity and grow, the simple pattern of using what musical instruments they
have or simply singing acapella can easily be applied in new house
churches. The brethren can sing
congregationally, or sing solos, without the need for a fancy music
program. The important thing is that we
sing as the Bible teaches us to, and that our singing is pleasing to the Lord.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 21
Fellowship, Breaking Fellowship,
and Church Discipline
God has called those who believe
in Jesus to be holy. Paul wrote to the
Corinthian church, “for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present
you as a chaste virgin to Christ.”[329]
Many of us think of personal holiness is important. I want to be holy before God. Personal holiness is important. But the Bible also teaches us to be holy
collectively. The entire church is to be
holy before God. Paul wanted to present
the church in
Due to rampant sin and unbelief in
religious establishments that are called churches, some teachers have developed
the concept of the visible church and the invisible church. The visible church is the organized structure
of the church, while the invisible church is composed of those who are truly
believers within the organized church structure.
It is God’s will for the visible
church to walk holy before Him. The
Bible does not teach the church to tolerate sin and unbelief in the church, and
simply wait for God to sort out his saints from the wicked within the church on
the Day of Judgment. In the Parable of
the Wheat and the Tares, the wheat and tares do grow up together. But if we read the parable carefully, we see
that the field in which the two grow up together is the world, and not the
church.[330] The visible church that we can see is
supposed to be righteous.
Why is it important that we
encourage one another not to sin? Some
Christians think they will sin, that everyone sins, and that it is no big
deal. But if we read the words of Jesus,
we know that sin is a very big deal. How
man of us would rather lose a hand or an eye than fall into sin? Jesus took sin very seriously.[331] If we read the apostles writings, we can see
that they did not have a casual attitude toward sin, either. Sin is destructive. Even if someone is forgiven of a sin, he can
still reap horrible consequences. Even
though the Lord forgave David for his sin regarding Bathsheba and Uriah the
Hittite, David still had to suffer the consequences that resulted in his
household as a result.[332]
We as the body of Christ must
think of ourselves collectively, and not only individually. God does deal with us individually, but he
also deals with us collectively. We as
Christians must be concerned, not only with our own spiritual health, but with
the health of the body of Christ, and the local expression of the body of
Christ that we are a part of.
As the author of Hebrews shows us,
one of the ways we can help protect the local body from sin is to exhort one
another.
Hebrews
3:13 But exhort one another daily, while
it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of
sin.
Exhorting one another to be obedient
and not sin is one of the tools God has given the church to maintain it’s
purity. We need one another in the body
of Christ. Encouraging your own family
and Christian friends that you meet regularly to obey the Lord can help
strengthen them against sin. If there is
a believer you know who has no Christian relatives or friends near him,
believers among us can make a special effort to reach him to encourage him in
the Lord.
Exhorting one another can take many forms. It can be having a conversation with a
brother or sister in Christ over a cup of coffee, talking about how to overcome
a problem in life in accordance with Christ’s teaching. Conversations by phone can encourage
believers in the faith. Taking time at
the end of the day to read the Bible with your own children and pray with them
can help keep them from sinning. We
believers need to walk with the Lord daily.
If we make it a habit to constantly speak of the things of the Lord with
one another, even when we are out of church meetings, we can be a great
encouragement to one another. There is
something a lot more fulfilling when one meets with a fellow believer and the
two discuss the things of the Lord and how to walk in a way that is pleasing to
the Lord, than when they meet and talk about things that are not really
important. We must remember that every
aspect of our lives is to be subject to the Lord. A discussion between two believers about a
problem raising children, paying the light bill, or many other normal things we
face in life can be a ministry opportunity for both of them.
Some think that visiting people
and encouraging them in the Lord is the work of an overseer. This type of ministry is certainly within the
scope of an overseer’s ministry, but all believers, even if they aren’t
overseers, are supposed to encourage one another.
Many people think that there are
two keys to a successful Christian life:
prayer and Bible study. These two
keys are very important, but there are also others. One of these is fellowship. The healthy church mentioned in Acts 2:42 not
only continued in the apostles’ doctrine and prayer, but they also continued in
fellowship and the breaking of bread together. Notice the emphasis John puts on fellowship
in the following passage:
I John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the
light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his
Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Those who are in the light have
fellowship with one another. The Christian
who is living a healthy life, who is walking in Christ’s cleaning power, is in
fellowship with other believers. He
shares with them in that koinonia, that ‘common union’ they have with
one another. To be healthy believers, we
need more than just Bible study and prayer done as individual actions, we also
need the body of Christ. One part of the
body should not say to another “I have no need of you.”[333] We need one another to be healthy. One of the ways other body parts help us is
to encourage in the faith and to keep us from sin.
Church meetings are an opportunity
for us not to sin. Remember what the
author of Hebrews said in chapter 3:13, “But exhort one another daily, while it
is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of
sin.” The author of Hebrews also
indicates that we should exhort one another in our meetings, so that we not
sin.
Hebrews 10:24-25
24
And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25
Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of
some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day
approaching.
We are to provoke one another to
‘love and to good works.’ This the
context in which the writer tells us not to forsake assembling, but rather to
exhort one another. When we assemble,
reading the scriptures, singing, words of exhortation, and teachings can all
encourage the body to love, to do good works, which will help strengthen us
against temptation to sin.
The Greek word notheteo is
translated as ‘admonish’ or warn.
Believers are supposed to admonish one another in the Lord.
Romans
15:14 And I myself also am persuaded of
you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge,
able also to admonish one another.
Paul apparently expected that the
Roman Christians would admonish one another.
He probably expected them to do this as they used their gifts in their
meetings.[334] But they may have done this outside of the larger
church meetings as well.
Songs can also admonish, or warn,
fellow believers in church meetings.
Colossians
3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you
richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and
spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
Jesus gave us instructions
regarding how to deal with those who sin.
Matthew 18:15-17
15
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his
fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy
brother.
16
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that
in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he
neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a
publican.
Following Jesus’ instructions here
may seem very difficult for us. Jesus
actually teaches us to confront those who sin against us. Some Christians think that it is noble to
suffer silently when fellow-believers sin against them. Remaining silent when someone sins against
you may require that we deny ourselves, and there is a place for this. But when a fellow believer sins against us,
we should confront him, as Jesus says.
Here, in this passage, we see
three steps the Lord tells us to take.
If the brother repents, we stop and do not proceed to the next
step. First, confront the sinning
brother alone. Then take one or two
others. If the brother still refuses to
repent, he is to be brought before the church.
If he will not repent, we are to treat him as a heathen man and a
publican?
What does it mean to treat a man
as a heathen man and a publican? Many
religious Jews in the
II Thessalonians 3:14-15
14
And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and
have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
15 Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish
him as a brother.
Here we see that Paul, Silas, and
Timothy taught believers to withdraw fellowship from those who are disobedient
to their apostolic teaching. This idea
is foreign to many Christians today. The
idea of withdrawing fellowship from Christians who do not obey Biblical
doctrine seems to be rarely taught or practiced.
Paul deals with a specific case of
an unrepentant member of the church in
Paul had judged the situation,
apparently by spiritual means.[336] He gave the Corinthians instructions to deal with
the situation in I Corinthians 5:4-5.
4
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and
my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that
the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Here we see, as in Matthew 18:17,
that the church has the responsibility and the authority to cut unrepentant
brethren off from fellowship. Neglecting
to do so can have devastating consequences on a local body.
Paul warned the Corinthians about
the dangerous of not cutting off an unrepentant member from among their midst.
I Corinthians 5:6-7
6
Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth
the whole lump?
7
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are
unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Here, Paul compares sin to
leaven. Leaven is a fungus, a
microscopic organism that grows quickly.
If you put some leaven in bread dough, it will grow quickly and the
whole lump of dough will be full of leaven.
The Old Testament commanded that unleavened bread be eaten for seven
days during the Passover season.[337] The Jews had to remove the leaven from their
houses.
The sin in the life of the
fornicator in
Consider the example of Achan in the Old Testament. Achan sinned by stealing treasure from
The New Testament does not tell
Christians to stone all who commit such acts within our midst. But it does teach us to break off fellowship
with those among us who sin in some cases.
Let us consider what Paul had to
say about how to deal with the unrepentant man in
I Corinthians 5:7-8
7. Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye
may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is
sacrificed for us:
8.
Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the
leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and
truth.
In verse 11, Paul will tell the Corinthians
not to eat with such a man. Here we see
Paul making references to the Passover.
It is possible that Paul has the Lord’s Supper in mind here, as the
Lord’s Supper was initiated during the Passover meal. Whatever the case, the fact that the Corinthians
were not to eat with the unrepentant man certainly forbade them from eating the
Lord’s Supper with him. The Christians
of that time often came together to eat, and remember the Lord, and we must
keep this in mind when we read of the saints eating together.
II Peter 2 and the book of Jude
contain very similar messages. Both are
addressed to churches warning them about false teachers. Jude writes the following about these false
teachers.
Jude 1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when
they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without
water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit,
twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Clearly, it was a bad thing that
the church was allowing these evil men to participate in their love
feasts. They were spots on the feast,
making it impure. Compare this to Paul’s
concern that the unrepentant man, or his sin was leaven that could spread
through the whole lump of dough. The
church at
II Peter contains a parallel
verse, which describes false teachers as spots and blemishes that feast with
the believers.
II Peter 2:13 And shall receive the reward of
unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots
they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while
they feast with you;
9. I
wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10. Yet
not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or
extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11. But
now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a
brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard,
or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12. For
what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them
that are within?
13. But
them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves
that wicked person.
Here we see that Paul did not want the Corinthians to withdraw fellowship from sinners. Remember that the religious leaders of Christ’s day looked down on Him for eating with publicans and sinners. Christ would eat with such men. But He taught that if your brother sinned, and refused to repent after he were properly confronted and brought before the church, that he should ‘be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.’[341] The religious Jews of Jesus’ day did not eat with such people. In I Corinthians, we see that Paul’s apostolic application of Jesus’ teaching is that Christians should refrain from eating with ‘any man that is called a brother’ who engages in certain sinful activities.
Let us consider the activities Paul lists here. The idea of withdrawing fellowship from a fornicator or an idolater may not be too hard for us to do. But we are also to confront those who are extortioners, covetous, or slanderers, and if they will not repent, refuse to eat with them.
Fornication is a more obvious sin to deal with, if it is made known. Hebrews 12 also warns of the defiling influence of fornication.
Hebrews 12:12-16
12
Wherefore lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees;
13
And make straight paths for your feet, lest that which is lame be turned
out of the way; but let it rather be healed.
14
Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see
the Lord:
15
Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of
bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled;
16
Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one
morsel of meat sold his birthright.
For His Own Good
The idea of breaking off someone in the church fellowship from someone who refuses to repent may seem cruel, particularly the idea of delivering him over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.
I Corinthians 5:4-5
4
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and
my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Notice that the man in this situation can benefit from being delivered over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. His spirit could be saved in the day of the Lord as a result of the church delivering him over to Satan.
Paul delivered Hymenaeus and Alexander over to Satan. These men were shipwrecking the faith of some believers by teaching that the resurrection had already taking place. Delivering these men over to Satan was actually beneficial to them. Paul did it “that they might learn not to blaspheme.”[342]
Paul instructed the Thessalonians to withdraw fellowship so that the offending person might be ashamed.[343] When we realize that sin is dangerous and destructive, as Jesus taught that it is, then we can realize that the actions we take to remove the unrepentant one from among us is for his own good. It may help him repent from his sin. We also need to realize that removing the sin from the church helps prevent the contamination of sin from growing among us.
Restoring the One who Sins
In II Corinthians 2:2-10, Paul tells the Corinthians to forgive a certain man among them. Some believe that this is the man spoken of in I Corinthians 5 who had sinned by fornication. It is also possible that the man was someone who had been judged by the congregation for some offense against Paul.[344] Whatever the offense this man was guilty of, the punishment meted out by the majority of the Corinthians was effective. He was apparently sorrowful over his sins, and ready to receive forgiveness. Paul wanted the man restored to fellowship.
After teaching the disciples about what to do ‘if thy brother shall trespass against thee’[345], and the authority of the church to deal with such a situation, that we read the following teaching on forgiveness:
Matthew 18:21-22
21
Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin
against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22
Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until
seventy times seven.
Jesus then tells the disciples the parable of the unforgiving servant. Notice in this passage that Jesus wants Peter to keep on forgiving. When we read this passage, we must realize that it is connected with Jesus teaching on church discipline. The man who does repent is to be forgiven.
Here, Peter asks about a man who sins against a brother repeatedly. He should forgive such a man over and over again. We must remember that the issue here is personal offenses. Apparently, Jesus is talking about someone who confesses his sin regarding a personal conflict with another believer before two or three witnesses are brought to him.
But what do we do with the person who is in sin and figures out that if he says, “I repent. I repent,” but continues in his sin, that he will be able to remain in fellowship? I Thessalonians 3:14 says to have no fellowship with a man who ‘obeys not our word.’ The church should judge those in the congregation who sin, not merely based on their words, but on their actions as well.
But we should also realize that some people are sincerely struggling. They are sincere when they say “I repent,”
but fall again later. For these people,
we must remember not to break the bruised reed, or quench the smoldering flax.[346] Sincere, struggling believers need to be
treated with mercy and compassion. They
need to be restored in love with mercy.
The author of Hebrews instructs the church to ‘lift up the hands that
hang down, and the feeble knees.’ [347]
The member of the body who is weak who is inclined to fall into sin might be compared to a hands that hang down, or feeble knees. We need to take extra care to encourage these members. They may need special attention from the elders, and extra telephone calls and visits from believers in the church. Going to the house of a weak brothers or sisters, showing them to pray and study the Bible, and encouraging them to do so regularly may help encourage them. Teaching these people how they can overcome sin by reckoning themselves dead with Christ, and acting accordingly by the power of the Spirit can help them overcome the temptations that they face.[348]
Who Should Restore the Fallen Brother?
As we have learned, Jesus instructed the disciples to confront a brother who sins against them. We must take this teaching of Christ seriously, and confront brethren who sin against us.
There are times when brethren commit sins that are not against us personally, but their sin can still contaminate the church. If someone in the church is in sin, who should confront them? Paul teaches them that ‘ye which are spiritual’ should restore him.
Galatians 6:1-2
1
Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual,
restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou
also be tempted.
2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
Often, the more mature, spiritual brethren are the ones to realize that another brother’s sin is a problem. Confronting a brother in sin should be done in the spirit of meekness. Some people will repent when confronted with meekness, whose hearts might harden if they are confronted with harshness and arrogance. Those doing the confronting must confront others the way they would want to be confronted if they fell into sin.
The elders of the church, as mature, spiritual leaders within the church, can help restore those who sin. James 5 tells of a ministry that elders can perform.
James 5:14-16
14 Is any sick
among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over
him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15
And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him
up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray
one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a
righteous man availeth much.
The elders are to answer the call to visit the sick in the flock. Some people, though not all, may be sick because they have committed a sin. When the elders pray for the sick, they can also pray with them about sickness. Verse 16 says “Confess your faults one to another….” It is possible that James would expect the sick man who had committed a sin, and called for the elders to come, to help him pray for the forgiveness of his sins. James does not require that believers confess their sins only to elders. He says to confess our sins one to another.
A few verses, later, at the end of James’ epistle, we read:
James 5:19-20
19.
Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
20. Let
him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall
save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
The elders of the church can labor to restore brethren
who sin. But this ministry is not
limited only to the elders of the church.
Regular believers can confront sinners.
Paul does tell the spiritual ones to restore the one who sins. But what should the believer in the church do
who does not consider himself to be especially spiritual? What if he sees a sin in the congregation
that no one is confronting? Should he
confront the offending brother about the sin?
Nothing in Galatians 6 forbids the less spiritual believers from
confronting. We all must learn to
confront sin as we grow in grace. This
was even a principle God gave
Leviticus 19:17
Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise
rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
A ‘regular believer’ who does not consider himself to be especially spiritual may still find times when he needs to rebuke those who sin. As he grows more and more spiritual, this will be a practice that he will need to mature in.
Notice that Leviticus associates hating your brother in your heart and not rebuking his sin. Those who love the Lord and love their neighbor, who understand the Lord’s teaching, will naturally rebuke those who sin because they do walk in love. If we love the Lord, we do not want sin contaminating his church. If we love the congregation, we will not want to see it contaminated by sin. If we love the brother who sins, we will rebuke him so that he may be restored. Rebuking sinning brethren may be uncomfortable and difficult for us to do, but it is important for us to die to self and obey Christ. Love should motivate us to restore brethren. We should put our love into practice by helping believers who fall into sin.
Proverbs 27:5-6
5
Open rebuke is better than secret love.
6
Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are
deceitful.
Who
Is to Disfellowship Unrepentant Brethren?
Some of Paul’s instructions could be followed without having a formal meeting of the church to disfellowship an unbeliever. Some Christians attend churches that totally ignore Christ and the apostles’ teaching on church discipline, or have to interact with unrepentant believers from other churches. Paul’s instructions to withdraw fellowship from one who sins in I Thessalonians 3:14, or his instruction to “mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” could be followed by individuals without a formal meeting of the church. But churches should obey the teachings of the Lord and His apostles on this matter, and confront unrepentant brethren.
Some church leaders think it is only the job of leaders to disfellowship the unrepentant. Some pastors will meet with someone in sin alone, and without involving the rest of the church, tell him not to return to church. This is not what the Bible teaches. Another mistake is for leaders to gather together as a group and confront the one who sins against his brother, before following the teaching of Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17.
It is clear from Matthew 18 that the unrepentant brother in this scenario is to be brought before the church. He is not merely to be rebuked privately by leaders and told not to return. The church should be involved in removing the sinning brother from fellowship. Paul’s teaching on disfellowshipping a fornicator agrees with Jesus. Paul gave instructions to the Corinthians:
I Corinthians 5:3-5
3
For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged
already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
4
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and
my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5
To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that
the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Who is to deliver the man over to Satan? The church is. Notice that Paul makes reference to the fact that the church gathers in the name of the Lord Jesus, and that the power of Jesus is present. Compare this to Christ’s statement in the Matthew 18 passage on church disciple, that ‘where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.”
In I Corinthians 5:3, we see that Paul acts as a judge in the case of the man in sin. He was able to judge the man by spiritual means, even from far away. The Corinthians were to apply this judgment by exercising the power of Christ in their assembly to disfellowship the fornicator.
It is shocking to some believers to hear that there is a sense in which the church is to judge those who sin. But Paul does teach us that there is a place for judgment in the church. Because of the Corinthians neglecting to judge themselves, they experienced judgment from the Lord.
I Corinthians 11:30-32
30
For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
31
For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
32
But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not
be condemned with the world.
Paul explained that Christians are to judge those who are within the church, but allow God to judge those who are without, as we see in the conclusion of I Corinthians 5.
I Corinthians 5:12-13
12
For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye
judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth.
Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
Originally, there were no chapter numbers in the New Testament, and Paul continues his teaching on judgment in I Corinthians 6.
I Corinthians 6:1-5
1
Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the
unjust, and not before the saints?
2
Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world
shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3
Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that
pertain to this life?
4
If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to
judge who are least esteemed in the church.
5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
The Corinthian Christians were going taking one another before pagan judges to judge cases. In Matthew 18, we see that some sins that need to be confronted are sins of one brother against another. Here, Paul indicates that the Corinthians should already have chosen judges from among themselves.
It is interesting that Paul doesn’t specify that the judges had to be elders of the church. Naturally, many churches that pay attention to passages such as I Corinthians 6 will want their elders to judge cases. There is an old tradition of monarchical bishops judging cases in the church. Naturally, elders can be involved in this kind of judging.
Sometimes Christians have disputes. One feels the other is sinning against him, and the other does not agree. These issues need to be decided. Christians who have a dispute can find a fellow believer to decide their case, and agree to abide by his decision. They could also have a small group of saints decide the case. In a small fellowship, a case might even be brought before the congregation to be judged, especially if it is urgent. An elder or group of elders may be asked to resolve a conflict of this sort. If the sinning brother refuses to follow the judgment given, and refuses to repent, the case can be brought before the congregation.
Jesus spoke of treating a man as a heathen man and a publican if he should refuse to hear the church. This indicates that the church speaks to the man in sin. New Testament church meetings allowed for the members of the body to speak to exhort one another. If the church should hear a case against an unbeliever in one of it’s meetings, then the one found guilty of sin should ‘hear the church.’ The members of the church should speak to him and try to persuade him to repent. If he hears the church, then he can confess his sin and be restored. If he will not hear and repent, then he should be cut off from fellowship. Even in cases where a judge or judges from the church make a decision, a man to be disfellowshipped should be given a chance to ‘hear the church.’
Suffering Yourselves to Be Defrauded
In I Corinthians 6:7, tells the Corinthians that it would be better to ‘suffer yourselves to be defrauded’ than to take a believer to court before an unbeliever. Some Christians will not hesitate to take another believer to court over an issue of money, land, inheritance etc. It would be better to lose money than to take a case like this before an unbelieving judge.
But there are those who interpret this verse to mean that the noblest thing a believer can do when another Christian cheats him is to be silent and say nothing. They consider this to be denying themselves. But is this in accordance with the teaching of Christ? While there are times when we should deny ourselves suffer silently, we must also remember that Christ commanded His disciples to confront brethren who sinned against them. If a fellow believer wrongs us or cheats us financially, our own well-being and comfort is not the only concern. A brother who sins needs to be rebuked. The church needs to be protected from the corruption of sin.
Some believers who are cheated by fellow-believers in business dealings or other matters struggle with their own motivations. This is a key issue. They ask themselves if they want to confront the person who cheated them merely out of a motivation from greed. The cheated party should pray about his motivations, but he should still obey Christ and confront the sinning party. Some believers who feel they have been cheated will find out that they have not been cheated at all when they confront their brethren. Often, Christians are able to work out their own conflicts without having to find someone to mediate between them.
Apostles as Judges
There is no specific passage in the New Testament about
elders judging cases. But we do see that
Paul, an apostle, judged the case of the fornicator in
Paul instructed that the man in the case he had judged
for
It is conceivable that Timothy may have been expected to act as a judge of cases brought against elders, as a part of his apostolic ministry.
I Timothy 5:19-20
19
Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three
witnesses.
20
Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
Notice that it is Timothy who has to determine whether or not to receive the accusation. Apparently the church will be involved as well, because Timothy would rebuke guilty elders ‘before all.’
What about Leaders Who Sin?
Paul’s instructions to Timothy are very applicable to us today. In the first century, even elders were subject to the commands of Jesus and the apostles for dealing with sin. Matthew 18 requires two or three witnesses for the brother accused of sinning against another disciple. I Timothy 5:19 requires two or three elders for accusing an elder. It would seem that accusing that elders do not receive a special privilege that puts them above being confronted if they sin. If there is a difference regarding how elders that sin are to be treated, it is that the elders who sin without reconciling the situation before two or three witnesses are called to testify, are to rebuked before all, that others may fear.
It is also interesting to note that Paul speaks of
Timothy receiving the charges against elders.
If an elder sinned and Timothy were present, it must have been easier
for the church to deal with than when Timothy was absent. Many believers are uncomfortable confronting
leaders in sin, even though leaders must be confronted if they sin just like
any other believer. Having another
leader rebuke a sinning leader makes it easy for the congregation. Still, at least one Christian in
In churches that do not have an apostle present with them, having a plurality of elders to turn to is a great benefit. If one of the elders sin, the others can help deal with the situation. If there are no other elders, the church still must be obedient to Christ and the apostles’ teaching about dealing with sin.
Even apostles are not above Christ’s teaching. Jesus taught, ‘For one is your Master, even
Christ, and all ye are brethren.”[353] Even if Paul were to have preached another
Gospel to the Galatians, he would have been accursed.[354] In Revelation 2:2, Jesus commends the church
at
The Problem of Unconfronted Sin
As in the Corinthian
Unconfronted and uncorrected sin among leaders is another
serious problem. The leaven of sin can
spread from any member of the body. But
when a leader sins, his example is all the more obvious. Unbelievers can sneer at Christians when
their leaders continue on in sin. As the
Bible said of the Jews, “For the name of
God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.”[355] Leaders should take the lead in confronting
other leaders, but the church also has a responsibility to confront those in
their midst that are in sin.
Unfortunately, the unbiblical way in which many churches
function hinders the saints from confronting sin. A format which only allows one leader to
speak does not allow a saint with a legitimate issue that needs to be dealt
with to raise his concern in the congregation.
Some churches have one main leader who is not held accountable by his
own congregation. Denominational rules
are established so that if a man sins, those in some distant denominational
presbytery, who do not know what is happening in his church, are theoretically
responsible for correcting his sin. This
is not the system we see in the New Testament.
In many churches of a church leader blaspheme from the pulpit, lives in
fornication, cheats the congregation out of money, or commits other sins,
denominational rules leave the members of the congregation with few options
besides going to church elsewhere. Those
who see the problems often leave the church, leaving behind, weak vulnerable
followers [penikut-ikut] who follow the leader down his spiral into deeper and
deeper sin or error.
Believers need to know their responsibilities toward God to
correct others who fall into sin, and to be open to correction themselves. They need to know that the congregation is
responsible to correct even leaders who fall into sin, if necessary, in a godly
manner. With the proliferation of men
calling themselves apostles and prophets these days, believers need to know
that apostles and prophets are to be tested.
None of us are above Christ’s teaching on correcting sin, no matter what
we call ourselves. God is not a
respecter of persons.
The Sorrow of Disfellowshipping Brethren
Some people, if kicked out of a modern church for sin, will feel little sorrow. One reason is for the lack of fellowship and body life in the church these days. If a church has the kind of church life we see in the scriptures, then someone who has been among us for a long time who gets out will be cut off from close friends. Missing church will not be merely missing a long meeting full of speeches, but will be like being cut off from close relatives. This type of separation hurts. It is supposed to hurt.
Paul was concerned that a man the Corinthians had exercised church discipline on might be ‘swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.” He needed to be forgiven and accepted again.[356] He must have been in deep emotional pain. If a man were kicked out of the Corinthian church at that time, he couldn’t simply go down the street and join a church of another denomination. The nearest church would have been far away. After leaving the close fellowship of the saints, he would have been left without Christian fellowship unless some Corinthian Christian decided not to properly apply church discipline toward him.
The unrepentant person is not the only person who is hurt in this situation. The rest of the church hurts when they disfellowship an unrepentant brother. It hurts parents to discipline their own children, but loving parents do discipline their children for their own good.[357] We must also be concerned with the health of the other saints in the church.
Some believers who have learned about Biblical meetings as described in I Corinthians 14, are overjoyed when they get the chance to use their gifts with others in the assembly. We can experience great joy as we meet and celebrate the Lord’s Supper in the most Biblical manner we can. While we should be happy that a church is pursuing holiness by taking the commandments of Christ and the apostles about church discipline seriously, when a brother is to be disfellowshipped, we should naturally mourn. Paul expected that the Corinthians should have mourned that the fornicator should be taken away from them. Instead, they were proud. There hearts were wrong on this matter.[358] We should not neglect to deal with sin out of pride, and we should not rejoice over the sins of others. If someone is really happy to have other members of the congregation disfellowshipped, and doesn’t grieve over the situation, that person has a wrong attitude.
Potential Problems
In Romans 14, Paul teaches believers with different points of view to accept one another without judging. Some people can be very judgmental. They may consider many things that are not sins to be sins, and want to bring accusations against their brethren before the congregation about these matters. They carefully examine others for sin, but are not aware of their own sins.[359] People like this in an assembly can cause a lot of damage.
One of the lessons we must learn from Romans 14 is that it is possible for Christians to hold to different ideas, even doctrinal ideas, and still remain in fellowship. There are false teachings that attack the very nature of Christianity. Paul dealt with men who denied the doctrine of the resurrection, and very important teaching. The Bible warns us about false prophets, teachers, and apostles.[360] We must be on the lookout for such men, but also accept he ministry true prophets, teachers, and apostles.[361]
Something interesting to note about false prophets is that Jesus taught that we would know them by their fruits. We can see what prophets are like by their lives. False prophets will bear bad fruit.[362] The false teachers that Peter and Jude warned had lives that overflowed with sin.[363] They were not merely teachers who erred in their understanding of doctrine in some small area, but men who did not have the Spirit, who should not have been teachers in the church.[364] They were false teachers—men who were not truly teachers set forth in the church by the Lord.
Those in the church who are quick to condemn others as heretics for a different theological viewpoint on some issue like predestination or how many angels can stand on the head of a pin should be careful not to condemn God-gifted teachers as heretics over some small issue.
There are many issues that can divide churches that become serious about church discipline. What proper steps should be taken divorced people who remarry without Biblical grounds before or after their conversion is a big issue that can break fellowship. Even the issue of what to do with polygamists who become Christians can become a dividing point. Churches dealing with such issues should really seek God for wisdom on these issues, and not just dive ahead with their own opinions.
Some people may wish to excommunicate others over smaller matters, like smoking, drinking alcohol in moderation, or other issues. We must be careful not to allow personal opinion or church tradition to take the place of the scriptures in dealing with sin in the church, and we must be open to the leadership of the Holy Spirit.
Confessing Sins One to Another
Many modern Christians think of confession and
forgiveness of sin as something personal, between themselves and the Lord. But notice what James about confessing sin.
James 5:16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
James goes on to talk about the effective prayers of Elijah, and encourages brethren to convert brethren who err from the truth. We Christians need one another. Prayers from other Christians can help us overcome sin in our lives, and help us be healed from sickness.
Who should we confess our sins to? If one believer sins against another, he should reconcile to the person he offended. This will involve confessing his sin. Someone who sins may wish to find other brethren in the Lord that he trusts, confess his sin, and ask for prayer. There may be cases in which it is appropriate to confess one’s sin before the congregation. Leaders who sin may wish to do this. In some meetings, the Spirit may convict brethren in sin, and move them to confess their sins. We need to allow room for this in our gatherings. If the church hears a case against a man guilty of sin who has been confronted by one brother, and then by two or three, if the man decides to heed the churches advice and repent, it is likely that he will confess his sin right there before the whole church. Another situation in which a church may wish to hear confession of sin is when a brother who has been disfellowshipped wishes to be restored to fellowship. He may wish to come before the church and confess his sin, so that he might be restored to fellowship again.
Christianity is not just about “Jesus and me” as some people think. Christians are a part of the body of Christ. Our fellow brethren can help us in our Christian walk, even as it relates to struggles against sin.
Basics for Christian Holiness and Community
When Jesus sent the eleven apostles into all nations, He told them that they were to teach ‘them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”[365] Christians need to learn to obey Jesus’ teaching so that we will not have disfellowship brethren.
Matthew 5-7 contains some of the great moral teachings of Christ. These teachings of Christ are very important. They teach us how to love God and one another. Jesus warned His disciples against calling people names in anger. He taught us against sinning in our hearts. Many of these teachings are essential for us to obey if we want to resolve conflicts among us.
Some people have a difficult time asking for forgiveness or saying they are sorry. Others have difficulty forgiving others. For some, this difficulty arises from their culture. Their culture teaches them not to apologize, or acknowledge their sin. This is an aspect of culture that must be rejected by those who come to faith in Christ. Reconciling oneself with others is essential to the Christian life.
Jesus taught us to reconcile with others.
Matthew 5:23-24
23
Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest
that thy brother hath ought against thee;
24
Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be
reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.
Jesus is talking to a Jewish audience, who were accustomed
to bringing gifts for God to the altar in the temple. Even though we do not take gifts to the
temple in
If we truly repent from our sins, we will not only be concerned with asking God for forgiveness. We will also try to reconcile with others we have hurt. Jesus went to the house of a tax collector named Zacchaeus. Some criticized the Lord for eating with a sinner, but due to Jesus’ influence, Zacchaeus decided to repent.
Luke 19:8-10
8
And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of
my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by
false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
9 And Jesus
said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also
is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
The Lord apparently
recognized Zacchaeus’ repentance as genuine.
Notice that Zacchaeus sought to make right the wrongs he had done to
other people. If we want to have a good
relationship with God, we must treat other people right as well.
Church planters and teachers
need to teach believers confess their sin to those they have wronged and be
reconciled. Believers also need to learn
to forgive those who come to them to reconcile.
Jesus taught us to forgive others.
Luke 17:4
And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in
a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
Jesus also taught the consequences
of what happens if we do not forgive others.
Mark 11:25-26
25
And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that
your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.
26 But if ye do not forgive, neither will your
Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
These are serious words, words
that don’t always fit with some of the teachings we hear about grace and forgiveness
of sin. But they are the words of
Christ, and we must take them seriously.
Christians must forgive those who sin against them.
Church planters, teachers, and all
the brethren in the church must encourage the saints to forgive one another and
to reconcile with others if they sin.
This is essential for the spiritual health of the church. If the brethren in a church do not want to
reconcile with others they have wronged, or confess their sins, then that
church will face many problems trying to implement Biblical teaching on church
discipline. Those who will not forgive
or reconcile may all end up out of the church for their sinful, un-Christ-like
behavior. New believers who come to
Christ who are from cultural backgrounds which teach them to be proud and not
confess their sins to others need to learn to forsake that aspect of their
culture, and follow Christ. Parents must
teach their children to forgive and reconcile.
These are essential teachings of the Christian life.
Churches that are serious about
returning to New Testament fellowship, in which the saints really know and care
for one another, will really need to obey Jesus’ teachings about forgiveness,
reconciliation, and confronting sin. If
someone you barely know hurts you, it does not hurt deeply. But when if someone you know well, whom you
care about deeply, hurts you, it really hurts.
Many saints who participate in house churches are learning to return to
the New Testament practice of having close relationships with one another. This closeness is a great blessing. But when you actually know the people in your
church very well, and care for them deeply, it is also possible to get deeply
hurt by them. Churches must learn to
follow the Lord Jesus’ teaching so that those who are wounded in conflicts
between brethren can be healed.
Jesus taught that if we love Him,
we will keep His commandments.[366] The Lord has commanded us to love one
another.[367] He and the apostles He has sent have taught
us how to maintain and preserve a loving community of saints that goad one
another on to righteousness. If we obey
the Lord, we will have a holy, loving community.
We must remember that God the
Father is preparing a bride for His Son.
If we love the Lord Jesus, we will strive be a holy people, so that,
collectively, we will be a suitable bride for the Lord. Paul, an apostle, who planted churches, had a
heart to present the church as a chaste virgin to Christ.[368] Our love for Jesus should motivate us to maintain the love,
unity, and purity of the body. The
saints should encourage one another to be pure.
Church planters and other ministers of the Gospel must teach the saints
to encourage one another, to put away sin from among themselves, to reconcile
with one another, and to forgive. We
must do these things for our Lord Jesus Christ.
Chapter 22
Holy Communion
Many modern believers, if transported back in time to a first century church meeting, might not even recognize it as a church meeting. The mutually interactive meetings of the first century in which all were allowed to prophesy must have looked much different from our modern spectator-type meetings of modern times. A modern believer transported back in time might not recognize the Lord’s Supper either.
Let us consider the modern ways in which
communion is usually celebrated. Roman
Catholic churches and some of the highly liturgical Protestant churches have
people line up to partake of tiny bread crackers. They may line up and have the priest or pendeta
put the bread on their tongue or in their hand.
In other churches, the members sit while deacons or ushers bring them
tiny bread crackers and tiny glasses of wine to them.
When Martin Luther and other
Reformers faced the issue of Communion, the debated over several doctrinal
issues related to Communion. Roman
Catholics believed in transubstantiation:
that the bread and wine actually becomes the body and blood of Christ. Luther believed in a Consubstantiation: that the bread and wine were the body and
blood of the Lord, while being bread and wine at the same time. [Zwingli believed in a spiritual presence
of Christ in the eucharist/ that communion was just symbolic—look up source for
all this.]
With all the talk of doctrine,
something else seems to have been overlooked, the manner in which communion in
celebrated. Sure, the Reformers did
change some aspects of how the Lord’s Supper was celebrated. The wine was being reserved only for the
priests in Roman Catholic churches, while the congregation shared in the
bread. In Protestant churches, the
congregation returned to the practice of drinking communion wine as well.
If we carefully examine the New
Testament descriptions of Holy Communion, we can see that it was eaten as a
full meal. This fact is something that
many scholars of early church history agree one.
[Site some
scholars, including the oft-quoted thing about second century Christians using
the supper as an opportunity to share food with the poor—hardly the case if
they were eating tiny wafers.]
The early church ate what was
known as ‘the love feast’ or agape.
In some cases, the fact that the early Christians were eating a full
meal is obscured by the way the Bible is translated.
I Corinthians 11 goes into detail
to correct the Corinthians for the way in which they were eating their meal
together. Paul wrote that when they came
together, they were not meeting to eat perjemuan Tuhan, but rather their
own supper. Apparently, Paul felt they
should be eating the Lord’s Supper, instead of eating their own supper and
leaving others hungry.
In Greek, the word deipnon,
which is translated as perjemuan,,
refers to the main meal of the day, usually eaten toward the evening.[369] Throughout the New Testament, we see this
words in its various grammatical forms used to refer to actual suppers. Herod’s made a deipnon, a supper, for
important officials the night Herodias’ daughter asked him for the head of John
the Baptist.[370] In Luke 14, Jesus tells the parable of a man
who invites people to a deipnon, but the people responded with excuses
as to why they could not come. This man
sent his servants to call in the poor, the maimed, the halt, and the
blind. Those who were invited would not
eat of his supper. In John 12:2, the
word deipnon is used again to refer to a dinner made for Jesus the night
Mary anointed Him in
If we know this, it should not
surprise us that the church celebrated the Lord’s Supper as an actual meal in
the early centuries of Christianity. The
early church learned this tradition from the apostles. Since the apostles had never experienced a
Roman Catholic style mass, with believers lining up to receive wafers from a
priest on their tongues. They had never
experienced a Communion service in which deacons brought tiny wafers and tiny
glasses full of wine to people in their seats.
So naturally, they did not teach these methods of celebrating
communion.
What was the experience of the
Twelve apostles in regard to Holy Communion?
Their experience was eating an actual meal with the Lord Jesus, a
Passover meal, on the night he was betrayed.
This was a real meal, with real food.
Though the Passover meal was full of symbolism, it was not purely a
token meal with tiny portions of food.
The disciples reclined at a table to eat.[371] The disciple whom Jesus loved, believed to be
John, leaned on Jesus’ chest as he spoke with him. It was the custom in the Grecco-Roman for
people to eat dinner leaning on the left elbow, using the right elbow to eat
off a low lying table, and not seated as in the famous Leonardo Di Vinci
painting. In this position, if John were
beside the Lord at the table, to listen to the Lord, he could easily have
leaned back on his chest.
It is unlikely that they ate this
way only to eat tiny wafers and drink wine.
Surely, the Lord was eating an actual meal with the disciples. This is the experience the Twelve had to
teach the church as a model for eating the Lord’s Supper. Paul learned about the supper from the Lord,
and taught it to the Corinthians
I Corinthians 11:23-25
23 For I have received of the Lord that which
also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was
betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it,
and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in
remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup,
when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do
ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
The supper eaten the night the
Lord was betrayed was the model for eating the Lord’s Supper that Paul taught
the Corinthians. It was what the Twelve
had taught the early church. Shouldn’t
we also be eating a supper to remember the Lord, as the Bible teaches, instead
of reducing the supper down to a token meal?
If all the food we have is tiny wafers and tiny glasses of wine, then of
course we should remember the Lord with these small portions. But many of us have more food than that. Why don’t we eat a supper as the Bible
teaches?
Historically, partaking of the
Eucharist, as it has been traditionally called, has been considered the central
focus of Christian meeting. Roman
Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians still hold to this view.
Steve Atkerson is an author and editor of house church books like [list
Ekklesia, Toward a
The three thousand saints who
repented at Peter’s preaching on the day of Pentecost also broke bread.
Acts
2:42 And they continued stedfastly in
the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in
prayers.
Many Bible scholars believe that
‘breaking bread’ refers to participation in the Lord’s Supper. When we consider that the Lord’s Supper was instituted
by the Lord Himself, then it is reasonable to assume that the early saints
considered it to be a very important part of their meetings.
Let us consider some of the
traditions, that is, practices, of the church that the Bible teaches us to
observe. I Corinthians 14 gives a fair
amount of detail regarding how we are to conduct our meetings. Paul, an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ
passed down commandments of the Lord regarding church meetings.[372] These commandments are naturally very
important. There are many other
important practices of the church mentioned in scripture that were passed down
by the apostles. But the Lord’s Supper
is so important that the scriptures record the Lord Himself teaching it to His
disciples. All four Gospels tell of
Jesus eating this supper with His disciples and Paul mentions this event as the
basis for the supper as well.
Some think that the Lord’s Supper
is only a symbol, and that therefore it is not important. When we eat the bread and drink the wine, we
commune with the body and blood of Christ.
I Corinthians 10:16-17
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not
the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the
communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we being many are one bread, and one
body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
This is no mere unimportant
symbol. When we partake of the Lord’s
Supper, we have koinonia, that is ‘common union’ with of the Lord’s body
and blood. We have koinonia with
one another. This meal is very important
for the life of the body together.
When we partake of the Lord’s
Supper we ‘shew the Lord’s death till he come.’
The Lord’s Supper reminds us of the Lord’s death, and that the Lord will
return. We need this continual
reminder. Abraham ate bread and wine
with Melchizedek, priest of God Most High.[373] Moses commanded the Israelites to eat the
Passover.[374] These events pointed forward to Christ. The Lord, on the night of the Passover,
instituted the Lord’s Supper. All of
these things point forward to a future feast in the
The Corinthians were not eating
the Lord’s Supper. They were eating
their own supper selfishly. Some were
eating the food up before others had a chance to eat. Paul even mentioned drunkenness at the
supper.[377]
Considering the social make-up of the
church, in which there were not many wise men after the flesh, mighty, or
noble, it is likely that there were many poor people.[378] A poor hired servant or a slave would not
have had the freedom to leave work or their home at any hour they chose and
meet with the saints at a particular time.
This was before the invention of the clock, and it is unlikely that they
decided to meet at an exact time.
Perhaps the richer saints came together first with food. They were hungry, and they started
eating. A poor saint or a slave might
who finished working after the other Christians had already started gathering
might not have food to bring with him to the dinner. He would be concerned with quickly walking
across the city to the meeting. When he
arrived, he would find the plates were empty and the dinner was missing. [footnote Toward a
“What? have ye not houses to eat
and to drink in? or despise ye the
Paul warned the Corinthians of the
seriousness of their sinful behavior in the Supper.
I Corinthians 11:27-34
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and
drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood
of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him
eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily,
eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among
you, and many sleep.
31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should
not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of
the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together
to eat, tarry one for another.
34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home;
that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order
when I come.
In verse 27, Paul makes a serious
warning. The Indonesian translation says
‘tidak layak makan roti atau minum cawan Tuhan’ is sinning against the
body and blood of the Lord. [Get a
good Greek source that says that the issue here is an UNWORTHY MANNER. They were sinning by not regarding the Lord’s
body.] Many take verse 28 to mean
that we should search our hearts for sin before partaking of the Lord’s
Supper. This is certainly a good
practice, and we should examine our hearts for sin. But what is the issue Paul is discussing in
this chapter? What sin in particular
does Paul have in mind? The Corinthians
were sinning by “not regarding the Lord’s body” as it says in verse 29.
How were the Corinthians not regarding the Lord’s body. As Paul will explain in this letter, “For as
the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body,
being many, are one body: so also is Christ.”[381] The Corinthians were sinning against the
Lord’s body by improperly partaking of the bread, but they were also sinning
against the body by not properly treating the other saints, who are members of
the body of Christ. In fact, these other
saints were also a part of the same loaf of bread.
I Corinthians 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one
body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
The Corinthians erred, not only by acknowledging the Lord
Jesus properly in eating the Communion bread, but also by acknowledging one
another, the body of Christ. Because of
their sin, many were sick and others ‘slept’ (often interpreted as a reference
to physical death. v. 30) These consequences could be overted if the
Corinthians would only judged themselves. (v. 31) If not, they would be judged by the
Lord. (v. 32) But, though some were sick and dying, this
judgment would result in chastisement from the Lord, and not condemnation from
the Lord. (v.32.)
The Jews had an understanding of the connection between
eating bread and fellowship. We can get
a glimpse of this connection in the Psalms
Psalms 41:9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I
trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.
This Psalm, which of course refers
prophetically to Christ and Judas, shows us how inconsistent it is for someone
to betray you who has eaten your own food.[382] Many of the conservative Jews in Jesus day
chose not to eat with publicans, sinners or Gentiles.[383] Eating was a form of fellowship that they did
not want to share with such people.
Jesus broke the cultural rules by eating with publicans and sinners,
stating that “They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that
are sick.”[384] God led Peter to violate the Jewish tradition
of not eating with Gentiles, telling Peter in a vision, “What God hath
cleansed, call not thou common.”[385]
The issue of Jews eating with
Gentiles continued to be a problem in the church. Paul wrote to the Galatians about rebuking
Peter for not eating with the Gentiles.
Galatians 2:11-14
11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I
withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
12 For before that certain came from James, he
did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated
himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with
him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly
according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If
thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews,
why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Many of us, while reading this passage,
may be tempted to think, “What’s the big deal?
Why is Paul so upset? If the Jews
want to eat by themselves, and Gentiles want to eat by themselves, what is the
problem?” But for some reason, Paul sees
Peter and Barnabas’ not eating with the Gentiles as a major theological
threat. He must have some reason for
including it in this epistle.
Since we know that the early
church regularly gathered to eat for the purpose of remembering the Lord, it is
likely that Paul is writing about Peter and Barnabas not eating with Gentiles
during the Lord’s Supper. If they would
not eat with Gentiles, then when the time for the Lord’s Supper came around,
they would not have eaten with them then either.
If Gentiles and Jews partook of
the Lord’s Supper separately, then we can understand why Paul would see this as
such a major theological issue. The
Corinthians had division between the rich and poor in their supper. The rich apparently brought the food and ate
it up before the poor got there. They
didn’t eat the food together with the poor, and share in common fellowship with
them. In Antioch, there was division
between Jews and Gentiles.
This experience related very
closely with the message Paul wanted to express to the Galatians. There were false teachers teaching the
Gentiles that they had to be circumcised and obey the Law to be saved. Conservative Jews of this sort were probably
of the variety that would not eat with an uncircumcised Gentile. If a Gentile were to be accepted into Judaism
through circumcision and various other rituals, he would be accepted as a
Jewish proselyte, and these religious Jews would eat with him. But if the Galatians were to accept such
circumcision, they would be putting their trust in the Law for salvation, and
not in Christ. If they did that, Christ
would not be of any profit to them.[386]
By not eating with the Gentiles,
Peter was not showing them proper honor as co-heirs of Christ. If, in Corinth, God judged the church for
division in the Lord’s Supper by having members of the body get sick or die, we
can understand why Paul would see division in the Supper as a big issue in
Antioch as well.
Why would Peter stop eating with
the Gentiles when men came from James in Jerusalem? Some of the Jews in Jerusalem were very
conservative, observing the Law of Moses.
There are people who think that the men from Jerusalem, or even James
himself, put pressure on Peter not to eat with Gentiles. But the passage does not say this. The Bible is positive about James, and he
even wrote a book of the Bible. There is
no reason to believe he held to a false understanding of the Gospel. Peter had eaten with Gentiles before, as
recorded in Acts 11, and the circumcision group at that time seemed to accept
his explanation. But perhaps in Jerusalem,
with the overwhelming majority of believers being Jews, there was little
contact with Gentile Christians. Maybe
eating with Gentiles was not an issue.
Peter may have stopped eating with
the Gentiles out of his own insecurity.
Maybe he was afraid the conservative Jews from Jerusalem would look down
on his eating with Gentiles. Maybe he
didn’t want to offend them, but didn’t realize the seriousness of the division
his actions were causing. The tradition
not to eat with Gentiles was not something Moses taught. It was a later Jewish tradition, one that ran
against what God wanted the church to do.
So far, we have learned that it is
important to keep unity in the body, and that we can be judged by God if we do
not acknowledge other members of the body of Christ when we eat the
Supper. But there are also times not to
eat with other people.
In Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus tells
how to deal with the brother who sins against you who will not repent when
confronted by one person, then two or three people, and then by the whole
church. Verse 17 says, “…if he neglect
to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.”
It was a custom in Jesus’ day not
to eat with heathen men and publicans.
Jesus ate with publicans, so what is He saying in this verse? We can understand how to interpret this verse
by studying the writings of one of Christ’s apostles, Paul. In I Corinthians 5, Paul addresses the issue
of a Corinthian man who was fornicating with his father’s wife. This man was a part of the Corinthian church,
and the church had done nothing about it.
Paul told the church to deliver
the man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit might
be saved in the day of the Lord.[387] How was the church to do this
practically? Paul wanted the Corinthians
to withdraw fellowship from the man.
From the passage, we see that Paul did not want the Corinthians to eat
with him. The passage is full of
references to the Passover that relate to the Lord’s Supper. The Corinthians were not to eat with the man
at all, and certainly not the Lord’s Supper.
In the verses below, we see that
Paul wanted the Corinthians not to eat with this man, but to put him away from
their midsts.
I Corinthians 5:9-13
9
I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of
this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then
must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep
company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or
an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no
not to eat.
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that
are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth.
Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
The Old Testament community of Israel
was to stone certain sinners among themselves, to purge the evil from among
themselves. The church is to
disfellowship sinners who refuse to repent, and refuse to eat with them. This certainly includes the Lord’s Supper.
Jude wrote of ungodly men creeping
in among the church and eating in their love feasts. This was a dangerous thing for the church.[388] A parallel passage in II Peter calls the
false teachers ‘spots and blemishes.’[389] The Lord’s Supper must be offered up in a
pure manner. On the one hand, cutting
off brethren from fellowship wrongly during the supper can result in God’s
judgment.[390] On the other hand, we must use righteous
judgment if the purity of the Supper is threatened by the sin of unrepentant
brethren.[391] The leaven of sin can work its way throughout
the whole lump of dough.[392]
If, as many Bible scholars
believe, ‘breaking bread’ in Acts 2:42 refers to eating the Lord’s Supper, it
is interesting that the supper was eaten in homes. The Jerusalem church met in large numbers in
the temple where the apostles taught them.
But they also met in homes. It
was in the home setting that they broke bread together.
The Corinthian church may also
have eaten the supper in a home as well.
According to Acts 18:8, many Corinthians believed and were
baptized. But how many is many? The Corinthian church was probably small by
the standards, especially when we consider the size of some congregations in a
large city like Jakarta. When Paul wrote
Romans, the church in Corinth was still small enough to fit into the house of
Gaius.[393] The Corinthians may have met in smaller
groups as well in other homes. [Site
Robert Banks suggestion about ‘Chloe’s people’] But for the supper, Paul mentions the
Corinthians coming together into one place.[394]
The Corinthian church was still small
enough, apparently, to fit in one house for the supper. The Jerusalem church was very large, and met
in many houses.
Most of us are used to eating at
home. The home is the normal venue for
eating a meal. The home is a good place
for a family atmosphere. The church is a
family, so shouldn’t the meal the church eats together be like a family
meal?
Members of a family usually know
one another. They have
relationships. There is a good, practical
reason for a city church the size of Jerusalem having the Lord’s Supper in
smaller home meetings, rather than in a larger city-wide church meeting. In the smaller, intimate family setting, you
are more likely to know the lifestyle of the people you are eating with. If someone in the house church you meet with
is involved in sexual immorality or cheating people out of money, you are more
likely to know it than in a huge crowd.
We, as believers, should not fellowship with one called a brother engaged
in such sins, or even eat with them.[395] If all meetings were very large, it would be
easy for a brother who falls into such a sin to go unnoticed. We could eat with such a man and not even
know it because of the lack of community in our church.
The city-wide Corinthian church
was small enough to be hosted by Gaius.
But Gaius may have had a very large house. But we know that people in their church knew
each other well enough to know if sin was in their midst. The church knew that the man mentioned in I
Corinthians 5 was involved in fornication.
They just hadn’t taken any action.
There are many ways that the
Lord’s Supper is celebrated in house churches.
In one house church I visited, participants all brought food from home
that they prepared for the meeting: meet
and vegetable dishes. After a time of
singing and Bible study, we all went out on the carport of the house for
lunch. No mention was made of the bread
or the wine during the meeting. One of
the brothers there explained to me that a certain loaf of freshly-baked bread
was the communion bread, and that a bottle of wine was there as communion
wine. During the meal, people group up
into different groups and spoke with one another. Children ran around and played.
In another house church I
participated in, one goblet of wine was passed around along with bread. The brethren each took some bread and dipped
a piece of it in the wine to partake of communion. Some other house churches practice communion
this way. My guess is that they do it
this way because some people are uncomfortable drinking after other
people.
Another method of taking the
Lord’s Supper is perhaps a closer imitation of what occurred during the Lord’s
Supper. After the believers eat a meal
of whatever food they have brought, and come to the end of the meal, everyone
gets a little more serious. They take a
particular loaf of bread and a glass of wine and pass it around, and the saints
partake. The early church may have
celebrated the love feast in this manner, having the solemn moment of breaking
bread and drinking wine at the end of the meal.
After all, Jesus broke the bread and gave the cup to the disciples at
the end of the meal. The Passover meal
in Jesus’ day included a certain number of cups of wine that participants were
to drink. [Site source] According to Luke, it was the ‘cup after
supper’ of which Jesus said, “This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which
is shed for you.” Matthew and Luke tell
of these events occurring as they were eating.
Right after this, they sung a hymn and left the room.[396] Taking all the Gospel accounts into
consideration, it seems that Jesus gave them the loaf of bread and cup of wine
identified as his body and blood right at the very end of the meal. Those who are very serious about following
New Testament traditions may want to closely model the meal that Jesus’ ate
with the disciples. From time to time,
we should also considering incorporating foot washing into our church meetings,
in accordance with Jesus’ teaching in John 13:14.
During the dinner in some house
churches, the saints break up into small groups informally and talk, as during
many family dinners. It is also possible
to do the things described in I Corinthians 14:26 while eating. Prophecies can be given to the group over a
dinner table. Teachings can be given
over the dinner table as well. Christ
taught the disciples at length the Lord’s Supper. Yet the meal was not so rigidly structured to
prevent each of the disciples from asking the Lord “Is it I?” concerning His
statement that one of them would betray Him.[397] There was also an opportunity for Christ to
make some private statements to Judas Iscariot and John the beloved.[398]
It is not clear if the practices
described in I Corinthians 14:26 were done during the supper or not. Many of us do not imagine eating a meal while
following the instructions in these verses, maybe because this is not our
church experience. I Corinthians
14:16-17 mention the issue of blessing, or giving thanks in tongues verses
doing so with the understanding. The
Bible often uses these words in connection with blessing food and drink, but
they are used in other contexts as well.
While breaking the bread and
drinking the wine, we should remember the Lord.
The Supper reminds us of the Lord’s death. While breaking the bread, it is a good time
to read or quote verses that have to do with the Supper. This reminds us of the seriousness of the
supper, and to take the supper seriously.
The quotes from the Gospels about the Last Supper and Paul’s teaching on
the subject are good passages to read
during this part of the meal. The
statements of Christ about the Lord’s Supper are repeated many times in
scripture, and it is appropriate for us to repeat them over and over again
during our meetings as well. We need
continual reminders of what we are doing so that we will not forget.
The Corinthians were being judged
for not regarding the Lord’s body during communion. Communion provides us with a good motivation
to reconcile with other believers and ask forgiveness, if necessary, before
partaking of the meal. In a house church
setting, it is possible to allow people to time to talk to individuals and
reconcile if there are any broken relationships. Remember the words of Jesus:
Matthew 5:23-24
23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the
altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;
24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go
thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.
Jesus was talking about offering
gifts on the altar in the temple. It was
important that a man set things straight with his fellow man before offering a
gift to God. Before partaking of
communion, when we examine ourselves, we can also examine our relationships
with other people, and determine if we need to confess or forgive sins, or make
a step toward reconciling with others.
We need to take the Lord’s Supper
seriously. If Corinthians were getting
sick and dying over not regarding the body of Christ during the supper, we need
to be careful how we partake of the supper.
Paul taught the Corinthians that if any man were hungry, he should eat
at home so that the Corinthians not come into condemnation.[399] Some have interpreted this passage to mean
that the modern way of eating very tiny wafers is superior. We need to keep in mind that the Corinthians’
problem was that some were so intent on eating their own supper, that they
gobbled up all the food which prevented the poor saints who came later from
partaking of the food. The poor were
supposed to fellowship with the body and blood of Christ together with the rest
of the saints, but they were being deprived of this opportunity.
Nevertheless, we need to be
careful not to allow the Lord’s Supper to become a time of gluttony and concern
about physical hunger. If we turn the
Lord’s Supper into an elaborate feast, we need to make sure that the purpose of
the feast is not to fill our own belly.
If we start eating our own supper instead of eating the Lord’s Supper
with respect for the Lord, we can fall into sin.[400] Believers can prevent temptation to being rakus
during the supper by eating before they come. We should be careful not to gobble up the
food, but to save some for others. Even
if we attend a church dinner in which the church does not break bread and drink
wine to remember a Lord, it is good to remember this passage and refrain from
being rakus.
Bread and wine was the main food
makanan pokok for Greeks and Jews in the first century. A very simple meal for a poor might have
consisted of bread wine. Maybe a poor
family would have had some bread dip or a few vegetables as well. Some churches may wish to celebrate communion
with bread and wine only, rather than cooking elaborate meals.
In the first centuries of
Christianity, the idea took hold that only a priest (elder) should be allowed
to bless the bread and wine for communion.
In fact, some believed that because of a priests apostolic succession,
the bread and wine were transformed into the body and blood of Christ.
It is easy to understand why an
elder would be chosen to bless the food at the Lord’s Supper. As a leader in the church, it is natural that
many would expect an elder to say the blessing.
During the late first century and early second century, only having the
elders say the blessing could have been a means for preventing people with
heretical views from speaking during a crucial time in the church
meetings. [site reference] Some of the tendencies in the church which
eventually led to not allowing believers to exercise their gifts in the church
may have been a reaction to the spread of heresy.
In the early second century,
Justin Martyr described a church meeting of his day. He spoke of the ‘president’ of the assembly
blessing the food. [site source and
correct if need be.]
But we need to keep in mind that
many of the early churches did not have elders.
Many of the same people in the early centuries of Christianity who
believed that only elders should bless the Lord’s Supper may also have said
that only elders should baptize. But
neither of these requirements has any basis in the scriptures.
If Paul had the Lord’s Supper in
mind when he wrote I Corinthians 14:16-17 then it is likely Paul thought that
any believer could give thanks during the Lord’s Supper. Notice what Paul says about blessing the cup
at the Lord’s Supper.
I
Corinthians 10:16
The cup
of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The
bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
Notice that Paul speaks of the cup
which ‘we’ bless. If it were so crucial
that only ordained elders could bless the cup, wouldn’t he have said, “the cup
which the elder blesses.” Though the
epistle of I Corinthians does salute some Corinthians who were active in
ministry, none of the Corinthians are identified as elders or bishops in the
letter.[401] It is possible that there were no appointed
elders when the letter was written. If
elders were necessary for the supper to take place, and especially responsible
for the way the supper was organized, why didn’t Paul rebuke them in his
letter?
Breaking bread together was an
important practice of the early church.
Many of the churches did not have appointed elders for some time after
they came into being. We should not think
that this prevented them from celebrating the Lord’s Supper. The early believers mentions in Acts 2:42
broke bread from house to house. As
brand new believers in the Lord, probably none of them were qualified to be
appointed as elders.[402] This did not prevent them from breaking bread
from house to house. With three thousand
people to care for, it is unlikely that the apostles were present every time
they broke bread.
According to Houses that Change
the World by Wolfgang Simson [quote gereja Rumah, the Indonesian
translation, if info is present about unbelievers dismissed by a bell]:
[Quote about dismissing the
unbaptized before the Lord’s Supper.]
The Didache, that early church
document from the late first or early second century says,
[quote that says not to let unbaptized
person partake of communion]
From the early centuries of
Christianity down to this day, the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper has been
seen as something for baptized believers in Jesus Christ. There is a Biblical basis for the idea that
unbelievers not participate in the breaking of bread and the wine..
I Corinthians 10:16-17
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not
the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the
communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we being many are one bread, and one
body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
If the cup of blessing is the
communion of the blood of Christ, why would an unbeliever participate? Why would an unbeliever commune with the body
of Christ? If an unbeliever is not a
part of the ‘one bread’ spoken of in verse 17, why would he partake of that one
bread at the communion table.
In verse 21, Paul tells the
Corinthians, “Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye
cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.” He was writing to persuade Christians to flee
from idolatry. It was inconsistent for a
Christian to participate in Communion, and then eat in an idols temple.
Let us consider another
issue. What if an idol worshipper who
ate of sacrifices to idols visited the Corinthian church meeting and wanted to
partake of the bread and wine? Wouldn’t
this also violate the principle of I Corinthians 11:21?
One solution to this problem would
be to dismiss unbelievers before we eat together. Perhaps we could make them separate food and
send them away. Some might be
comfortable with allowing unbelievers to partake of their feast, but ask them
not to participate when that one loaf of bread and one cup of wine, intended for
remembering the Lord, is passed around.
Another solution we may consider is that when we meet to break bread, we
make it a practice not to invite unbelievers.
Many Christians think that the primary purpose of the church meeting is
evangelism. In scripture, we see that
this was not the case. Meetings of the
body are, generally, for the building up of the body. The apostles went to where the unbelievers
were to preach to them, instead of expecting unbelievers to come to church
meetings.
A church planter who teaches new
believers how to practice communion must keep in mind that what he teaches must
be reproducible. If a house church grows
into two house churches, both churches must be able to celebrate communion.
A missionary to Mongolia once
brought along a gold communion chalice.
Not only would a gold communion chalice be out of place if the
Mongolians were poor, but it also presents them with a non-reproducible model. New believers learn from what they see in
church meetings. If their communion
chalice is very expensive, they may think that communion chalices must be
expensive. If a house church is left
alone with a communion gold chalice and the idea that communion chalice must be
expensive, what will they do when they grow into two house churches, or when
someone from the church plants house churches elsewhere? If they think they must have gold chalices
for communion, this will slow church growth.
Just think of all the time and energy that could be spent trying to
raise money for a gold communion chalice.
One church in West Java used a
mixture of wine from Israel, sugar, and water for communion wine. This type of communion wine is not something
that can be easily duplicated. Finding
plants to make bread and wine in that grow in Indonesia can be helpful to
churches wanting to eat communion. A
small house church in a village would not have the resources to send someone to
Israel.
One foreign missionary pointed out
that the passages about Communion do not specify that Jesus’ drank wine. There is mention of ‘the cup’ and the ‘fruit
of the vine.’ He had considered the idea
of drinking tomato juice which also comes from a vine. Tomatoes grow in Indonesia, but the
communion wine is not something we want to experiment with it too much. Some people might not be able to drink tomato
juice during the supper in faith. We do
know from history about the Passover and Jewish culture at that time that Jews
drank wine for the Passover meal. There
is a sour grape that can grow in many parts of Indonesia, the Bali grape. Alcoholic Bali grape wine is even packaged in
wine bottles to be sold to tourists in Bali.
Members of poor village house churches, full of farmers, could grow Bali
grapes and use the wine for communion.
The unleavened bread at the Last Supper was probably cooked in a big round piece. The bread would be a little flexible when it was hot, and would turn into a hard kripik after it cooled down. There are many grains that grow in Indonesia which could be used to make Communion bread, even in the villages. For example, corn grows well here. Corn can be made into kripik. There are kinds of bread that can be made from rice, a staple food in Indonesia. [Site Bryan’s source]
Communion is an important part of church life, and it should be done in faith. The church should be willing to yield to weaker brethren who have concerns about what we eat for communion. If someone feels he is sinning if he partakes of leavened bread for communion, for example, we should respect his conscience, even if we consider it to be a weak conscience. Allowing that person to provide the bread may be a solution.
It is important that church planters teach new believers the doctrines related to Communion, so that they can pass these teachings on to others as the church multiplies and grows into multiple churches. Teaching believers to read and obey passages about the Lord’s Supper before partaking, to spend time confessing sins and reconciling with brethren, and rightly regard the body of Christ can help strengthen unity during the Supper. Simple practices such as these can help preserve the purity of the supper.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 23
Rich and Poor
In the Bible, we can see that God
cares greatly for the poor. Through
Moses, God taught the Israelites to be generous to the poor, and for judges not
to be biased against them in court.
Jesus taught people to be generous to the poor as well.
It is possible that many of the
Jews in Jesus’ day equated material blessings with God’s favor. Maybe this is why the disciples were so
shocked about Jesus statement that it is easier for a camel to go through the
eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.[403]
In recent decades, in some
circles, there has been a lot of teaching about the fact that God is our
abundantly supplies our financial and material needs. This is true. However, some have interpreted this truth to
imply that the poor do not have God’s favor.
We must be careful to guard our hearts against such teaching because it
contradicts the teaching of Christ and the apostles. Some teaching on God’s provision has gone to
the extreme of teaching that Christians should be rich, or appealing to the
carnal desire of listeners to be rich.
The Bible warns against the teaching that godliness is a means of making
money. It also warns against the desire
to be rich.
I Timothy 6:5-10
5
Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth,
supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
6
But godliness with contentment is great gain.
7
For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry
nothing out.
8
And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.
9
But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into
many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
10 For the love of money is the root of all
evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and
pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
These teachings are very relevant
for our time, and they go right along with Jesus’ teaching that we cannot serve
God and mammon.[404] Any believer who lusts after the riches of
this world and believes it is God’s will for all saints to be rich, should sit
down and read through the teachings of Jesus in their context, reading straight
through the Gospels. As Christians, we
should stay away from teachers whose teaching appeals to the lust of the
flesh. In this case, we should stay away
from teachers who teach us to be greedy and to try to be godly out of a
motivation to get wealth.
The Jerusalem church had a large
number of poor widows among its ranks.
The Jerusalem church had such a problem with poverty that we repeatedly
read of the Gentile churches sending contributions to the ‘poor saints’[405]
at Jerusalem. It is interesting to note
that the scripture refers to these poor Christians as ‘saints.’ They were not unholy because they were poor,
or poor as a result of their lack of holiness.
James epistle shows us that the
poor, more than the rich, who were responding to the Gospel.
James 2:5-7
5 Hearken,
my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith,
and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?
6 But ye have despised the
poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?
7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the
which ye are called?
Paul wrote that “not many wise men after the flesh, not
many mighty, not many noble, are called” and that “God hath chosen the foolish
things of the world to confound the wise.”[406]
Many early Christians came from the
lower ranks of society.
It should not
be surprising then, to find that the Gospel attracts people of the lower
classes today, as well. On the one hand,
in Indonesia, a large percent of the financially successful people in Indonesia
profess faith in Christianity. There are
Biblical principles that Christians learn about hard work, honest, and
obedience to the Lord, that can result in material blessings. Faith in Christ brings discipline and order
that can result in a good harvest for a Christian’s labor.
In spite of the
large number of financially successful Christians, when the Gospel is preached
in unreached areas where there are few Christians, many of those who do accept
the Gospel are not the most financially stable members of society. I spoke with one missionary who told of how
many who became Christians in certain villages were on the ‘fringes of
society.’ Some church planters find that
small house churches fill up with young people who have no trade to support
themselves. These young people get
kicked out their homes for their faith, and have to find a way to make a
living. If church planting efforts
result in many poor people coming to the Lord, this is normal in light of what
we see in the New Testament. Brethren
who have goods to give should help them out, and the saints should encourage
new believers to find work they can do to feed themselves and others.
The Danger
of Despising the Poor
Treating other
brethren as less important because they are poor goes against the teaching of
the New Testament. James warns against
this.
James 2:1-9
1
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of
glory, with respect of persons.
2
For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly
apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment;
3
And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto
him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or
sit here under my footstool:
4 Are ye not then partial
in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
As Christians, we should treat the
poor brother who lives on the street with as much respect as we treat the man
who owns his own business. Many times,
the mistreatment of the poor does not appear to be as extreme as we see in the
James account above. Often, the poor are
not treated fairly in churches due unintentionally, due to a lack of attention
to their needs.
Houses churches started through
evangelistic efforts may be made up primarily of people from the same
neighborhood or area. In poor areas,
house churches will likely be made up of poor people. We might expect that house churches hosted in
the expensive homes in exclusive housing complexes [perumahan] in and
around big cities like Jakarta would attract richer Christians from that
neighborhood. In some neighborhoods, in
Jakarta, the rich live in large mansions right next to run-down houses. In these neighborhoods, the rich and the poor
live right next to one another. A
neighborhood house church in this environment could have a mixture of rich and
poor participants.
Many believe that, in the early
church, rich Christians opened their homes to the church, sharing their nice
houses with others. In many of the
Gentile cities of the first century, the number of Christians may have been
very small, with Christians traveling across the city to arrive in a home for
church meetings. Poor and rich alike may
have met in one of the larger homes of one of the richer saints among
them. This type of meeting would have
allowed for a mixture of rich and poor in one congregation.
Rich Christians who find
themselves in a house church with no poor saints should remember the Biblical teachings
on giving to the poor. If no one in
one’s own house church is poor, the saints there should seek out others to whom
they can give. One way to do this would
be to find a poor church nearby and help the saints out there. In the New Testament, many of the churches
had a level of organization that included all the saints in the city. The Jerusalem church had an organized effort
to feed poor widows. In addition to
giving to widows, donations were given to help others who were in need.[407] A house church should keep in mind not only
the needs among those in the meeting, but those of other saints in the local
area, and throughout the world.[408] The Gentile churches in the scriptures would
send funds to the poor Jewish believers in Judea, to whom they were spiritually
indebted.[409]
Another way to help a house church
full of rich members bless the poor is for the church to make a conscious
effort to invite poor believers into their fellowship, and win poor unbelievers
to Christ.
Many
rich and middle-class believers in the cities of Indonesia hire maids and
drivers. Many of these people are
unbelievers. If participants in house
churches win their employees to Christ, they can invite them to their own house
churches. It wouldn’t be right to
discriminate against hired hands, trying to get them to go to some ‘poor
church’ to keep them out of a rich house church.
Hosts
of house churches that have hired help that are Christians, who Biblically have
a right to partake of the Lord’s Supper, must be careful how they treat their
servants during the meetings. The
Corinthians erred during the Lord’s Supper by not discerning the Lord’s
body. Their actions showed a lack of
respect for the poor.[410] Many in Corinth were sick when they came under
judgment from God for their actions.[411] Apparently, some rich Corinthians were
gobbling up all the food they brought, and not leaving any for the poor who
came later.[412] There are other ways to despise the poor, and
we must especially be careful not to mistreat the poor, who are also part of
the body, in our gatherings.
A house
church host who has a Christian maid who goes to another church may think, “My
maid goes to another church. Why should
she partake of communion with us?” We
need to keep in mind that in the early church, a Christian maid in a Christian
home would not have gone to another church.
The boss and maids would have gone to the same church. Household servants would have been considered
part of the same household, and it would probably have been odd for Christian
members of a Christian household that held a Christian meeting to not
participate in the meetings. If a
Christian maid is Biblically qualified to partake of communion, shouldn’t she
partake of communion with the congregation?
In a
home with hired servants, maids, nannies, and drivers are often asked to eat in
the kitchen or some other room, away from the dining table where their boss’s
family eats. There is a practical reason
for the maid, who is expected to wait on the family, to eat before or after she
has served the meal. But during the
Lord’s Supper, we should not have the maids and drivers eat separately from the
rest of the body. In Galatians 2, we
read about the terrible situation of Jews and Gentiles being separated by not
eating together. We would not want a similar division between the rich and
poorer members of the body in our meetings.
Taking
care of small children during the meetings is an issue many house churches
face. In churches with rich members, the
simple solution is to let the nanny watch the children. Of course, this isn’t a solution for poorer
house churches, and it keeps the little ones from growing up in the church
meetings as well. If the nanny who
watches children is a believer, she may have as much of a need to hear the
teaching, prophecy, and other ministry in the meeting as anyone else. One way to alleviate the burden of nannies
and parents as well, is for other saints in the meeting to agree to help hold
babies during t the meeting. Many people
love to hold babies, anyway. Passing
babies around is the type of thing that is done in family gatherings, and this
will feel more natural for parents as family relationships grow in a house
church.
There are many
church activities that rich Christians can participate in, but the poor
cannot. As Christians, we need to be
especially aware of this. In planning
church activities, we need to ask ourselves whether or not the activities we
plan exclude the poor.
Some ministry
opportunities in large organizational churches have requirements that can put a
financial strain on participants. A
music ministry that requires all singers to wear a white dress shirt and tie
can exclude a poor person who would like to play music or sing, but can’t
afford new clothes. A requirement that
ushers or deacons get a new uniform made every six months can exclude a poor
person from one of these ministry positions.
Rules about fancy clothes set up by a ‘mother church’ in a big city
might not even be culturally appropriate in a village where people might even
wear sarong and kabaya to church meetings. Since the Bible does not teach us to wear
fancy clothes to church meetings, why should we put such burdens on our poor
brethren?
Retreats that
require every participant to pay a fairly large sum of money often
automatically exclude the poor. Some
churches that have expensive retreats and other activities take up money to pay
for those who would like to go but cannot afford it.
Expensive church banquets are
another similar activity that can exclude the poor. Even believers who like to gather with their
friends and eat at restaurants after church meetings can separate themselves
from opportunities to fellowship with the poor because of the price of the
restaurants. Jesus taught His disciples
to throw banquets for the poor, maimed, lame, and the blind, so that we might
receive our reward for it at the resurrection of the dead.[413]
Unfortunately, many institutional
churches allow few opportunities for fellowship. When all opportunities for
fellowship such as retreats, banquets, and meals at restaurants after church;
require more money than the poor among us can afford, we cut them off from
opportunities for fellowship.
One method of promoting a return
to Biblical church practices is to host house church conferences in which these
Biblical doctrines are taught. One of
the practical issues with organizing a Christian conference is that, if the conference
is free, some people will sign up for the conference, but never attend or call
to cancel. If there is a registration
fee, usually only those serious about attending sign up.
The unfortunate side effect of
this practice is to prevent the poor from attending such conferences. In Indonesia, the amount of money assigned
for a conference on house church or church planting may seem rather small and
reasonable for those who live in the city, and for ministers who have a large
organization supporting them and paying their way. But this same amount of money is quite a lot
to those who live in villages who make less money.
In China, many of the church
planters are said to be regular, poor villagers. Without large religious organizations to
support them, they travel from place to place preaching the Gospel. As house churches grow and multiply, so do
the leaders that the Lord raises up in them.
As the house church movement grows in Indonesia, we should hope to see
the Lord raising up these kind of ministers.
Now, many house church planters may be Bible college students. Some of these may actually be able to get
some kind of support from an organization.
But if the house churches in Indonesia continue to grow and multiply as
the early church did, eventually we can expect the Lord to raise up an
increasing number of poor village preachers to evangelize and plant
churches. Some house churches in
frontier areas in Indonesia are beginning to see leaders and ministers emerge
from within the congregations, who did not come from a Bible college.
Expensive house church conferences
can exclude this type of house church planter, the type that may be the future
of church planting in Indonesia. High
price tags may also turn off Christians who have the money to attend, but who
are turned off by the high price tag, and its effect on the poor.
This issue is a difficult one for
those who would want to organize a house church conference or a conference on
church planting in general. How is it
possible to organize a house church conference without the troubles that come
with some people signing up but not attending, and still teach the word of God
free of charge, so that the poor may attend?
One solution is sponsoring those
who cannot afford to come to house church conferences. Those who have funds can pay their own way
and the way of others who would like to come.
This presents another problem.
Some house church planters may be committed to living on faith. They preach the Gospel without asking for
anything in return, trusting God to provide for them. These people may see a brochure for a house
church conference with a price on it, and a comment that anyone who cannot
afford the price of the conference can ask to come for free. The man committed to living on faith, without
asking for money, may not want to ask for a fee waiver out of his personal
conviction that he should not ask anyone for money. So this method can isolate a certain group of
Christians as well.
Another solution, one practiced by
the Southeastern House Church Conference in the US, is to offer the house
church conference free of charge, but to negotiate a good price on food and
lodging near the house church conference.
The Southeastern House Church Conference has been held on a university campus. Lodging and meals are available to
participants in the conference for a price from the university campus, should
they choose to sign up. Anyone who does
not want to stay on campus may come free of charge. With speakers willing to speak free of charge,
and some committed not to ask for money but who receive it if the Lord moves
the hearts of others to give, this conference does not have to worry about
paying honorariums. [Verify this part
with Steve Atkerson’s info.]
Another
alternative requires a large Christian community willing to help support the
conference. Instead of housing
conference participants in one place, have local Christians agree to extend
hospitality to conference participants.
Showing hospitality is very Biblical.
Many believers who understand this are happy to share their home and
food with other believers traveling through their area. Christians who come to such conferences may
be so impressed and thankful for their hosts’ generosity that they seek to
imitate it when they return home. Those
organizing conferences in which participants stay in the homes of hosts should
be careful to schedule enough time for participants to travel back and forth to
their lodgings, and to spend time with their hosts. It may help for transportation and fellowship
if the hosts are also attending the conference.
There are advantages to going to a
house church or church planting conference in which large numbers of people
gather from far away. Assuming there is
time for interaction and one-on-one fellowship, these conferences can be a
great place to network. Participants may
be able to find other believers doing the same kind of work who can help
them. They may meet others who would
invite them to minister or offer them hospitality on their ministry
journeys. Conferences can be a good
place to learn about Bible study materials or other helps in the language of
participants. There are many advantages.
But there are also advantages to
smaller local house church conferences.
Those who understand Biblical principles regarding the church can put on
conferences in their own local areas.
Traveling ministers can offer one-day teachings on the subject. House church conferences do no have to be
very large. Smaller conferences are easy
to organize. If conferences are local,
they alleviate the burden of having to find food and lodging for large numbers
of people.
The house church conference, per
se, is not something we see in scripture, though we certainly have freedom in
Christ to have large gatherings for teaching.
Bible teaching is scriptural.
There are many areas in which churches have drifted far from the
practices of the New Testament, and there is a great need for teaching in this
area.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 24
Finances
One of the great things about planting house churches is
that it costs very little. Evangelistic
crusades that require renting stadiums and setting up load speakers cost a lot
of money. Sending thousands of men to
Bible college for four years, sending them out to plant a church, and paying
for all the church buildings is expensive.
But planting house churches is much less expensive.
A typical house church needs to spend nothing on its
meeting place. The host either owns the
house, or he pays rent that he would have to pay whether the church meets there
or not. He may incur a few extra
expenses for hosting the church, like the cost of the electricity to turn on
the lights or to pump a little extra water when his guests use the rest
room. Most of what the host has to
sacrifice is labor, cleaning up after meetings, and a considerate church can
help with this, and with any extra expenses incurred.
The members of the church will need to spend money if they eat
meals together, but the saints would have to eat anyway, whether they eat at
home or together. A low cost means of
eating together is for every family to bring enough food for themselves and
some extra for guests or those who do not have food to bring, and for everyone
to share the food.
Many
churches think they need expensive wooden pews or sound systems. The early church had neither. A church does not need to spend money for
sound systems or musical instruments. If
someone in the church wants to bring a guitar or keyboard to minister, then he
can bring his own equipment. The
congregation does not have to buy anything.
Many
Christians think of church planting and evangelizing the world as expensive
things to do. Some expenses can b
involved in evangelism, like the cost of travel and feeding those who do the
work. But a lot of the expensive things
associated with church planting are completely unnecessary. The idea that we must rent, build, or meeting
places is a tradition, not a scriptural teaching. This concept slows down church planting, and
weighs down church planting efforts with a lot of unnecessary expense. The idea that new church leaders have to go
to Bible college is a lot more expensive than the Biblical method of one
teacher teaching another, and leaders being trained within the local
church.
Meeting
in homes free up churches and church planters from wasting time looking for
church buildings to rent, or from focusing on building plans, rather than
focusing on their ministry to people. It
also frees up funds for more useful, more Biblical purposes.
The
cost for maintaining house churches is very low budget. This must have been a great blessing to the
early churches, which had many poor believers.
But if we study the scriptures, we see that the churches did collect
funds for certain purposes. What did the
early church use funds for?
From
the examples we see in scripture, we can classify the way the early church was
to spend money using these two categories:
The New Testament makes a case for
supporting evangelistic preachers of the Gospel, apostles in particular, and elders
of the church.
Before the crucifixion and
resurrection, Jesus sent the Twelve out in pairs to cities and villages to
preach the Gospel. He instructed them to
go out with no bag to carry things, no bread, and no money.[414] They were to trust God to provide for their
needs. They were also to find a worthy
man in the city or town, and stay with him if he would receive them. According to the apostles’ report to Christ,
they lacked nothing on this journey.[415]
Luke reports Christ sending out
the Seventy with similar instructions.
This account gives a bit more detail.
We see Jesus’ instructions in Luke 10.
5
And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house.
6
And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not,
it shall turn to you again.
7 And in the same house remain, eating and
drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go
not from house to house.
Here we see that the apostles were
laborers worthy of their hire, receiving payment in form of hospitality. It is likely that the worthy man, or the man
of peace in these cities provided for the apostles food and other needs while
they were there.
In I Corinthians 9, Paul addressed
the fact that he had the right to earn a living from preaching the Gospel, but
he did not use this right among the Corinthians. Instead, Paul worked to support himself. Nevertheless Paul writes, “Even so hath the
Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.”[416] The early part of this passage mentions the
ministries of men who evangelistically proclaimed the Gospel, in Paul’s case
among unbelievers.
Paul also uses an argument from
Old Testament scripture to support the idea of preachers of the Gospel living
from the Gospel:
I Corinthians 9:9-11
9
For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth
of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10
Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this
is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that
thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is
it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
Who Supports Them? And How?
If an apostle travels from place to place, who should
support him? We find some hints to
answer this question in Paul’s second
letter to the Corinthians.
II Corinthians 10: 8-10
8
I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.
9
And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man:
for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia
supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you,
and so will I keep myself.
10
As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting
in the regions of Achaia.
Paul here is using hyperbole,
saying that he ‘robbed’ other churches to make a point. Paul was not in Macedonia, ministering to the
Macedonians. He was in Corinth, but the
Corinthians did not support him. Paul
probably felt that it was appropriate for the Corinthians to support him while
he was among them, and that it was appropriate for the Macedonians to support
him while he was in Macedonia. Paul
taking money from the Macedonians while not there ministering to them is called
‘robbing’ them here, metaphorically.
Of course, it was permissible for
Paul to receive money from the Macedonians while he was not there ministering
to them. The Philippians, who lived in
Macedonia, were generous, and Paul was glad that they gave that fruit may
abound to their account. For a season in
the early years of Paul’s ministry, the Philipian church was the only one that
supported Paul financially.[417]
They were giving sacrificially, supporting Paul’s ministry, even though other
churches were reaping the benefit of it.
In many places, Paul chose to work for a living rather than press
churches to support him for the greater good.
In Corinth, he made tents.[418]
It is likely that the Philippians
supported Paul with gifts of money. But
there are other ways to support a preacher who lives of the Gospel. The way we see in the Gospels, when the
Twelve of the Seventy preached and received their due hire was in receiving
hospitality. Their host would provide
them a place to stay, and probably feed them all the meals they needed. No doubt any godly [sale] Jew would
have done this for his guests in the first century. It is possible that the hosts provided clothing
or other items as needed. It is possible
that some of the Christians who supported apostles with funds sent them on
their way with funds for the journey.
Christ sent disciples out without a purse to carry money, so they may
have been paid in food and hospitality rather than in monetary donations Of course, Christ’s apostles were not
forbidden from carrying moneybags at all times..[419]
Paul
had some very good reasons for denying his right to payment for preaching the
Gospel. One reason was so as not to
abuse his authority in the Gospel.[420]
It is a really ugly thing to see a minister of the Gospel press people
for money. This turns unbelievers off to
the Gospel. While the laborer is worthy
of his hire, a preacher of the Gospel must also follow the principle ‘freely
you have received, freely give.’[421]
By
refusing to receive payment, Paul was helping further the cause of Christ. His desire was to become a servant unto all
that he might gain more people for Christ.[422] The
fact that he had not received payment from the Corinthians was something he
could boast about. He could us this
boast to show the Corinthians the difference between himself, and false
apostles of Christ who would deceive them.[423]
Paul,
by preaching for free and working to support himself, had very clear
motivations. He knew that he was
preaching willingly, and that he would have a reward. By sacrificing more in this age, he was
working for his reward in the age to come.[424]
It is
very sad that some Christians actually honor a preacher of the Gospel less
simply because he works for a living.
Some think that a man of God who purposefully evangelizes free of
charges is less spiritual than one who receives payment for doing so. They think of the idea of a preacher working
a secular job almost as if it were a sin.
Usually, people who have this attitude have not carefully studied the
writings of the apostle Paul.
The
church should not demand that traveling evangelists and apostles earn their own
living, but we should respect those who do.
They provide a good example for others.
In fact, providing an example for others was another benefit Paul’s
experienced when he worked to support himself while preaching the Gospel.
Consider
Paul’s departing words to the elders of the church in Ephesus.
Acts 20:33-35
33 I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or
apparel.
34
Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my
necessities, and to them that were with me.
35
I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support
the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more
blessed to give than to receive.
The
church in Ephesus had really grown. The
word of God had spread throughout the surrounding province for the three years
Paul was there. But Paul did not use
this great church growth to build a financial support base for himself. If Paul had pressed the people to support
him, then the elders might have scoffed when he said he had coveted no man’s
silver and no man’s gold. But Paul had
not done this. He had worked with his
own hands. By doing so he gave the
elders the example of working with his own hands to support themselves and
others, and to work hard to support the weak.
Paul quoted a saying of the Lord, ‘It is more blessed to give than to
receive.” He had put himself in a
position of financially giving, rather than financially receiving.
We need
to pay attention to the fact that Paul gave this to elders of the church. Paul had waived his right to receive payment,
and had worked hard instead, and he left this example of hard work,
self-support, and generosity to the local church leaders.
Paul encouraged elders of the church to work hard to support themselves. The apostles did not have a system of church leadership like we have today, where many of the church leaders are young people with no marketable job skills other than being religious teachers or ministers.
The apostles had appointed men who
already had families and ruled their houses well. If they ruled their houses well, they had to
have figured out a way to support their families. A man who refused to provide for his family would
not be qualified to be an elder of the church.[425] As a general rule, these early Biblical
elders would have had a way of supporting themselves other than receiving
payment from the church.
This is one of the financial
advantages of a church having Biblical elders, rather than young Bible college
graduates. Older men who have been
working for years have had the chance to learn to earn a living. Some men qualified to be elders in the modern
world may be retired and live off of pension funds. A potential elder who lives in a village may
have a more traditional form of retirement.
After years of working a rice paddy, his sons grow old enough to work it
with him, relieving some of his burden as he grows older. Many potential elders are out earning a
living for their family.
When these men become elders in
the church, they can continue to follow Paul’s example of working hard to
support themselves. Dangling a high-paid
pastoral salary, financed by missions funds collected from overseas or from
wealthy Christians in the cities can actually attract the wrong kind of men to
try to be elders. I Peter 5:2 tells the
elders to pastor the flock of God, but ‘not for filthy lucre.’ A man who wants to pastor the flock of God
only if he receives a certain amount of money for doing so does not have the
right flock. The man who is willing to
work hard to support himself, and pastor the flock of God for free will be
greatly blessed when people start to give gifts to him to support his life and
ministry.
Paul left an example of hard work
and self support to elders. But this is
not all the Bible has to say on the matter.
Consider Paul’s words to Timothy.
I Timothy 5:17-18
17
Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour,
especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not
muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his
reward.
Here we see the word ‘honor.’ The Greek word for honor, time can
refer to honor, but it can also refer to some kind of compensation given to
show honor. Some see ‘double honor’ as
financial compensation. Another view is
that all elders of the church should receive some kind of ‘honor’ in the form
of compensation, but those who rule well should receive twice this amount. If this is the case, then perhaps ‘single
honor’ is the amount of ‘honor’ widows, mentioned earlier in the passage
receive.[426] Acts mentions that the widows in Jerusalem
received relief on a daily basis. This
may have been in the form of food.
It is interesting to note that
Paul uses Old Testament verses used elsewhere to argue for the right of
apostles to receive compensation for their ministry. Paul uses the verse about the ox treading out
the corn as recorded in I Corinthians 9:9.
The verse about the laborer being worthy of his reward is used by Christ
when sending out the Seventy as recorded in Luke 10:7.
It is interesting that the amount
of ‘honor’ the elder is to received is closely related to the amount of work
that he does. The saints in one church
should take special care to give gifts to support elders who work hard in
teaching and preaching. The passage does
not specify that all elders must receive their complete living from the Gospel. In a house church community that has ten
families and two, Biblically qualified men as elders, with the small number of families, and the
lack of financial support available in that community, the elders may need to
be bi-vocational, working secular jobs, and receiving gifts freely given by the
saints they minister to. As they and the
congregation share the Gospel and minister to people, the church may grow. When the church grows larger, and the elders
take on more work, and more people are added to the church, the elders may find
that more saints are supporting their ministry.
An elder may prayerfully consider
spending less of their time in their secular work, or quitting altogether.
Many people in
our modern world think of money when they think of honoring elders. But, in some parts of Indonesia, there are
people who live on the fringes of the cash economy. Some of these people live off of fish from rivers,
animals they hunt in the forests, rice and vegetables they grow themselves, and
trade what they hunt, fish, or grow for other goods they need. In this environment, honoring an elder or a
church planter may mean giving him food or other things that he can use.
If a church wants to support an
elder who has a coconut grove, the brethren can go help him collect
coconuts. If he has a rice paddy, then
they may help him work his rice patty.
Even those who have no money can help in this way. Brethren who want to express love in a
practical way may want to work the fields of others who are not elders anyway,
especially old widows, the sick, and the weak who cannot work their fields
themselves.
An artisan or tukang may
bless an elder in his church by teaching the elder’s son his trade. If an elder is working a physically demanding
job that makes it difficult for his church duties, or that is becoming
difficult because of and elders age, one of the brethren might teach the elder
a new trade to use to earn a living. A
brother or sister with an empty house that needs to be watched could let an
elder or evangelist move into the house to take care of it for a time. There are a lot of things that brethren can
do to bless and even help support elders and preachers of the Gospel that do
not involve giving cash. Even brethren
who do not have cash to give can do something to help. As Christians share their lives with one
another, they may discover many ways to help another person in ministry besides
giving money.
It is interesting that when Jesus
told the Seventy that the laborer is worthy of His hire, He was speaking of
their right to receive hospitality. To
many of us, today, the idea of a preacher coming into a town, asking who was a
worthy person in the city, going to his house, and requesting hospitality may
seem strange. But Jews in Jesus day
probably had a different understanding of hospitality.
The Jews new that righteous people
were to be given to hospitality. They
had read the story of Abraham, and how important hospitality was to him, and
how Lot put his duty to show hospitality, above the safety of his children.[427] The culture of Jesus’ day valued
hospitality. Consider some of the
instructions given in The Didache,
it is likely that in the late first, or early second century, one of the
problems in that area were that traveling ministers, some of whom were
considered to be apostles, were apparently using hospitality for an extended
period of time. Some of these may have
been false teachers or false prophets trying to make a living off the
church. One of the reasons this was
possible was because the early brethren were very much given to hospitality.
The New Testament commands
Christians to be ‘given to hospitality.’[428] Peter commanded Christians to ‘Use
hospitality to one another without grudging.”[429] Being hospitable is a requirement one has to
meet in order to be an overseer in the church.[430] Some call hospitality a spiritual gift. While some Christians may have more grace
from God to be hospitable than others, the Bible never calls hospitality a
spiritual gift. Being hospitable is a
commandment of Scripture. We must all
learn to be hospitable.
Not only do we need to be
hospitable by opening up our homes to church meetings, but we as Christians need
to be willing to allow traveling Christians to spend the night with us. We need to feed them, and send them on their
way. The Greek word for being hospitable
implies love foreigners. A foreigner, or
stranger, in the Greek mindset, was someone from another place. A ‘foreigner’ might be someone from another
city or town, or someone from very far away.
A simple way we can support
traveling preachers is to open our homes for them. There are frontier areas of Indonesia where
there is little or not Gospel witness.
Just imagine if house churches are started in these areas, and the new
believers are taught to be hospitable, and obey this Biblical teaching. An evangelist could travel from place to
place with little expense, accepting hospitality, sleeping and eating in the
homes of brethren, traveling from place to place. Brethren doing this may wish to have letters
of reference from churches that know them to show to churches in communities
they visit. We can expect that, in the
future, much of the evangelism in rapidly multiplying house churches will be
done by poor villagers who live simply and who need very little money to
travel, rather than by evangelists who grew up in the city and require a high
standard of living and a lot of money to travel. It is said that in China, villagers spread
the Gospel to other villages, and the church is growing quickly in the
villages.
A network of hospitable brethren
in churches is useful for sending teachers, prophets, and other brethren who
travel and visit house churches full of new believers to build them up in the
faith. These brethren can go from church
to church, living cheaply off of hospitality rather than paying for
hotels. House churches strong in
teaching can send teachers to house churches with few teachers to help
them. House churches with strong people
strong in prayer can send these people to other house churches. Hospitality makes this kind of travel very
affordable, and builds up relationships between hosts and visitors, creating a
network of relationships among churches.
Brethren who are traveling, but on no official church business, may be
able to spend the night in another Christians home if churches take the command
to be hospitable seriously.
The saints need to be wary of
false teachers and prophets and of those who would take advantage, who want to
eat, but who do not want to work. But we
also need to obey the commands to be hospitable.
George Patterson, church planter,
and ‘church planting coach’ wrote the following warning about funding church
planting movements:
“Another almost universal impediment to reproduction are
missionary subsidies the stifle nationals’ own giving and build a dependent
spirit. Don’t rob poor believers of the
blessing of sacrificial giving! God
multiplies their mite by special celestial mathematics that will prosper them
now and for eternity. Paying national
pastors with outside funds nearly always stifles spontaneous reproduction and
eventually leads to deep resentment when the source no longer equals the
demand.”[431]
Using
missions funds to pay local elders in village house churches can cause an
unhealthy dependency. One expatriate in
Indonesia who works closely with a fellowship of Indonesian churches has
noticed the problems caused by the administration of foreign funds. Well-meaning churches in the US send money to
pay a pendeta’s salary. The
salary is many times what the average peneta could make working another
job here in Indonesia. The pendeta
becomes very protective of his job, and pushes down others in the congregation
who are especially gifted or talented, fearing they could be a threat to his
job. This is sad, and it is an example
of the problems that can occur with unwise use of funds, particularly with the
one-man pendeta system.
Funds
from wealthy Christians in the cities of Jakarta, sent to support elders in
poor villages can also bring with them some of the same problems, if not
administered wisely. Any time people
perceive that being an elder of the church is financially rewarded, there is
the possibility that unsuitable types with the wrong motivation will try to
become elders of the church. Local
churches who do not have to give to support those who minister to them may grow
dependant on outside funds.
Supporting
the elders of a local church with outside funds is not a very reproducible
model. As churches grow and reproduce,
and more elders raise up as the saints mature, eventually the amount of outside
funds will not be enough to support all the elders. This could lead to hurt feelings. Elders who work hard to support themselves,
and congregations who give sacrificially to support their elders follow a very
reproducible model. The ironic thing is
that it is actually a good thing to give to elders who are preaching the
Gospel. Christians who wish to give to
village elders who make one-time gifts, without a promise of monthly payments
can bless them without creating a sense of dependency. It is possible to give to poor churches and
their leaders without setting up a system that leads to dependency. Elders who receive ministry funds on a
regular basis from outside sources need to be aware that what they are doing is
not reproducible, and be ready to deal with the situation that arises when future
elders are not able to be paid in the same way.
Giving
to Indonesian evangelists who travel from place to place preaching the Gospel
is another alternative. Missionaries
having ‘tent-making’ jobs that they work on for visa purpose or for the purpose
of status in the community, but who earn a living from foreign missions funds
is, not a reproducible model. The
indigenous Indonesian ministry working a ‘tent-making’ job only a few hours a
week and living off of a set wage from
an evangelistic agency is not a very reproducible model either. If, as we hope and pray, the number of house
churches grow and multiply exponentially, eventually, there will be more
evangelists than any one evangelistic agency can assign a salary. It is not wrong to support an evangelist on a
monthly basis, but evangelistic agencies, and the evangelist himself, should
realize that his method of self-support is not reproducible. He should take this into account when he
gives advice to churches started through his ministry about supporting
evangelists that they send out.
Biblically, a church started through the evangelistic ministry of a
preacher of the Gospel, should be responsible to support him while he is
ministering among them.
Living on Faith
Many
of the evangelists and missionaries of the previous centuries were what were
called ‘faith missionaries.’ Some of
these people did not believe in asking for funds, but trusted God to provide
for their needs. Sundar Singh in the
late 1800’straveled throughout India without asking for food, sleeping where he
could, and eating what was provided for him.
John G. Lake in the very early 20th century, is said to have
given away his substantial wealth, keeping only a little to buy boat tickets to
South Africa for his family, and enough to feed his children. He and his wife fasted on the trip. When they arrived in Africa, the amount of
money they needed to enter the country and a place to stay were provided for
them through people they met before they went through customs. They did not have to ask for these things
except in prayer.
Beresford
Job is recognized as an elder in a house church community near London
England. He lives ‘on faith’ teaching in
the US and the UK, trusting the Lord to provide for him, without working a
secular job.
“However, the apparent
contradiction we seem to have in scripture is that although the laborer is
indeed worthy of his hire (such men have bills to pay and families to support too),
ministry is nevertheless free of charge and we see nothing whatsoever in the
New Testament of salaried positions.
Indeed, the idea of churches ‘employing’ someone is perfectly at odds
with the teaching of the New Testament as a whole. So let me put it to you that what we have is
that if someone feels called to a ministry which prohibits them the time to
earn money from other employment, then they can well trust the Lord to provide
their needs. It will, of course, be
through the freewill offerings of the Lord’s people, but nothing must be done
by the one called into full time service to ever procure money or that
transgresses the scriptural teaching that all ministry is free of charge.
“For
myself I have been in full-time ministry for 25 years and don’t charge money,
don’t take collections, have never requested that collections be taken on my
behalf, have never mentioned expenses incurred, never sent out a prayer letter,
or made needs known to others in any way.
I finance everything I do myself and simply respond to whatever I
believe the Lord would have me do, whether it’s driving locally to teach or
buying plane tickets for myself and my wife and daughter to come over to the
States to do various things as invited.
And I do this knowing that if I work free of charge then the Lord will
provide for myself and my family in answer to prayer. I call it ‘living by faith properly’ as
opposed to ‘living by faith – and hints and prayer letters and collections’.”[432]
Giving to Those in
Need
The
early church gave to those who were in need, especially to widows. The Gentile churches collected offerings to
deliver to the poor saints in Jerusalem.
Giving to the needy receives a lot of attention in the New Testament.
One of the notable things about the
early Jerusalem church is that they really took the teachings of Christ to
hard, and obeyed them in practical ways.
Christ had taught His followers to sell possessions and give alms.[433] The early
saints took these instructions very seriously.
Those that had them sold their possessions and laid them at the
apostles’ feet, to be distributed to them that had need.[434] This was a
very practical expression of love.
Jerusalem
must have had a big problem with poverty.
It was a large city. Men married
women much younger than themselves, and their wives outlived them. The city was the home of the temple, and so
Jewish men from throughout the known world may have sought to sell their
businesses in retire in Jerusalem. Their
wives, who outlived them, would have had a difficult time living far from
relatives in a foreign city once the money from their husbands estate ran
out. They may have had to deal with
legal experts who would twist the law to ‘devour widows houses’ in Jerusalem as
well.[435]
When a great number of widows believed, the church took care of
them. This was a major undertaking. The apostles had to eventually hand the
responsibility over to seven trustworthy men chosen by the congregation.[436]
Providing
for widows was not just something that the Jerusalem church did. Paul gave Timothy instructions about
providing for widows in the church in Ephesus.
The widows had to meet up to certain criteria to be on the list of those
provided for by the church. They may
have had to make a commitment not to remarry. Those who had relatives to
provide for them were not to be put on the list.[437]
The
churches also sent funds to help the poor saints in Jerusalem and Judea. This topic receives a lot of attention in the
New Testament, many more lines of text than the topic of giving funds to
provide for apostles or elders.[438]
We can learn of doctrine about giving from these passages. For example, Paul taught the concept that
congregations that have goods should give to supply for congregations that
lack.[439]
He also taught that it was appropriate for Gentiles to give money to
these poor Jewish saints in Jerusalem, because the Gentiles were debtors to
them, and had partaken of their spiritual benefits.[440]
Since
Paul often did not receive financial support for his own ministry, much of his
financial teaching must have been related to collections taken for poor
saints. Providing for the poor is a high
priority in the New Testament. How do the
attitudes of the apostles and the early church as recorded in the New Testament,
toward giving to those in need compare to the attitudes of modern
Christians. How would our ministry
expenditures compare to theirs? Many
churches spend large amounts of money on building payments or rent, light
bills, preachers’ salaries, and various expenses for which we have no example
in the scriptures. Our churches’
financial priorities should resemble those found in the New Testament.
Practical Issues
Related to Giving
How
can a house church practically express the love of Christ by giving? How can it administrate giving to the poor,
widows, and poor saints in Jerusalem or in Indonesia.
One
practical thing a house church can do is to provide for those in need in it’s
own midst. Jesus gave instructions on
giving alms.[441]
Some alms are given directly from one individual to another person in
need, without going through a church offering.[442]
This is a practical way for those who have to give to those in
need. In a small house church, where saints know one another,
those who have goods can give directly to those in need. If there is one widow in a house church who
is in need, other saints can help provide for her.
The
Jerusalem church, as a large city church, had a program for providing for
widows. The Ephesian church, on the city
level, may have had a similar program.
Not many Christians realize that they are a part of a church in a city,
and not many elders attempt to have city-wide programs of this sort. House church Christians can give to what
programs are available. As Biblical
churches spring up in some villages where there is now no Christian presence,
maybe they can provide us an Indonesian example of a city church that works
together to feed it’s own widows. In the
meantime, saints in a house church can work to feed their own widows, and to
feed other believing widows in the community, even if they do not go to the
same house church. Wealthy Christians
who want to help house churches might consider sending relief to poor brethren,
rather than only supporting local elders.
Many house churches among unreached people groups have members who are
young people with no marketable job skills.
Contributing money to help these people with job training can help house
churches to become more financially independent, and able to help others.
It
is interesting to note that the fund-raising the early church did for the poor
was for poor saints, rather than for poor unbelievers. We as believers have a priority to take care
of our own families, and our own spiritual family.
Galatians 6:10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do
good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
If
a house church is committed to using funds in a Biblical manner, one approach to
giving is for the leaders and the congregation to have an understanding that
funds not used for something specifically Biblical will be collected for that
purpose. For example, if the leaders of
the church want to use a large sum of money from church funds to rent a stadium
for a prayer gathering, they can ask for a specific offering for this
purpose. If the church has an
understanding that offerings go to help poor brethren in need, and entrust
deacons and elders to distribute the funds, then other types of expenses need
to be collected separately. Believers
that grow up in a house church environment may find that some of the large
events and programs that traditional churches put together are not really
necessary.
Arranging
to provide ‘honor’ for elders can be a sticky matter. In some denominational churches, according to
denominational guidelines, the top pendeta gets to administrate a large
percentage of the church funds anyway he sees fit. If a pendeta sets up his organization
to be a mother church with hundreds of branch churches, all paying tithes to
him, he could give himself a huge salary, and use money given for the kingdom
to buy a Mercedes for himself, while paying no attention to widows and other
poor saints in the congregation.
Paul
wrote to Timothy that elders who ruled well were worthy of double honor. It seems unlikely that the elders themselves
were the ones who determined if they ruled well. Maybe Timothy was to make the
determination. But Timothy was an
itinerant minister, and someone would have to make this determination when he
left. Maybe elders lived off of gifts
that were collected from the congregation for the purpose of giving to the
elders. Paul received a gift that was
collected and delivered from the church in Philippi. One practical way of giving to elders is to
take up an offering for each individual elder, without giving the elder a
chance to see how much each person gives.
The people can give in response to how well they feel they are being
led, taught, and preached, giving more to those who rule well and minister in
preaching and teaching. Some house
churches may just choose to have the saints personally give gifts to elders
outside of the meeting. The negative
side of this is if the congregation neglects to provide for those who feed them
spiritually.
Tithing
The Old Testament shows us that the Israelites were required to pay tithes of the increase of their fields, flocks and herds.[443] One tithe the Israelites were to follow was to eat their tithe in the place the Lord their God should choose.[444] If the journey was too far, they were allowed to sell their tithe for money, and when they arrived at the place the Lord chose, use the silver to buy “for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household”.[445] Every third year, an Israelite was to give tithes to the Levite, foreigner, fatherless, and widow within his city gates.[446]
The Levites and priests were
to be supported by Israel’s tithes and various other offerings. These tithes were not to be given to the
elders of the people (unless an elder happened to be a Levite.)[447] There is no command in the Old Testament to
give tithes to Gentile elders of the church who are not Levites either.
When Malachi gave the word
of the Lord and said, “in tithes and offerings have ye robbed Me”, he was
talking about the Old Testament system of tithing. The book also warned the Hebrews for bringing
blind, lame, or sick animals as sacrifices.[448]
The New Testament scriptures
mention tithes. Jesus spoke about the
scribes and Pharisees paying tithes of mint, anise, and cumin. These are plants with small leaves. The scribes and Pharisees may have taken
counting the small leaves seriously, making sure they gave a tenth.[449] The book of Hebrews says, “here men that
die receive tithes”, speaking about the Old Testament system of tithing.
Did the Christians in the
early church pay tithes? Many of the
saints in Jerusalem probably did, since they were”‘zealous of the law.”[450] But they would have paid these tithes into
the system of tithing described in the Old Testament as interpreted by the
Sanhedrin, along with their firstfruits offerings and other requirements of the
Law. These Christians were Nazarenes,
but they were also Jews. Apparently,
there were Jewish Christians who would take part in practices described in the
Old Testament like the Nazarite vow, and offering animal sacrifices.[451] There is no reason to believe that these
Jerusalem saints would have thought that the tithes that Moses and Malachi
spoke about were to be given to the apostles or the elders of the church. The Old Testament explained how these tithes
were to be given. Along with the other
various offerings, tithes were a part of the financial law that God gave the
Hebrew nation.
In the New Testament, we see
that the apostles and elders agreed that it was not the will of the Spirit for
them to lay upon the Gentiles the requirement to be circumcised and commanded
to obey the Law of Moses.[452] There is no indication in the Old Testament
that the Gentiles, living in nations outside the land of Israel, were required
by God to pay tithes. There is nothing
in the New Testament scriptures that commands a new system of tithing in which
Gentile believers are commanded to pay ten percent to the elders, apostles or
evangelists.
Before the Law was given,
Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, and Jacob promised God a tenth of all that
the Lord would give him.[453] But in both cases, there is no indication
that these men were commanded to give these tithes.
Pendeta Demanding Tithes
There are many teachings
about tithing that are not scriptural.
Nowhere does the Bible teach that the New Testament version of the
‘storehouse’ that Malachi spoke of is the general fund of the local church, or
the pendeta’s bank account. There
is no Biblical basis for saying that gifts required Levites or imam now
belong to church elders. The elders of
the church correspond most closely to the elders of the people in the Old
Testament, and the elders who were not Levites had no right to demand tithes
for themselves. What right does a church
leader have to misuse Old Testament scripture to demand tithes for
himself? The chance of any pendeta
in Indonesia being a descendant of Levi is slim. And the chances are, the members of the
congregation he speaks to are Gentiles, who were never commanded to give a
tenth of their income in the Law. Most
Indonesians do not get their income from
the produce of the land of Israel either.
Many preachers repeat these teachings on tithing simply because they
have heard these teachings over and over.
Many of them were taught these things in Bible college. We must be careful not to become like the
Pharisees who came to Jesus, who held to “traditions of the elders” that
actually contradict the teachings of the Bible.[454]
Preaching tithing in such a
way as to put the listeners under an allegorical misinterpretation of the Law
of Moses may pay the light bill, but God doesn’t want Christians to give out of
compulsion, but rather cheerfully.[455] Christians need to give out of a generous
heart, giving joyfully. They do not need
to give because a pendeta misuses the Law of Moses to instill fear in
them.
If a pendeta uses the
same type of allegorical reasoning used to legalistically command church
tithing on other Old Testament practices, many believers will recognize his
teaching is a misuse of the Law. For
example, if a pendeta demanded the firstborn of all sheep, goats, and kerbau
be given to him as an offering, and if he demanded to be given a sheep or goat
to redeem every firstborn child born in the congregation, many Christians would
recognize that his financial demands are a misuse of the Law.
One, rather wealthy pendeta,
told his congregation that if a someone were out of work for a while, he should
give his first months paycheck to the church as a firstrfuits offering. In the Old Testament, the children of Israel
gave firstfruits offerings out of the actual plants that grew in the land of
Israel. The New Testament doesn’t demand
Christians among the nations give their firstfruits of their crops, or that
they give away their first months salary on the job. The early church in Jerusalem gave gifts to
be given to others who were in need. If
a saint in that church lost his job and needed money, he could probably receive
funds from the church. If a church not
only does not help support the unemployed, but actually legalistically requires
them to give up their first paycheck, is this right? There is nothing in the Bible that gives a pendeta
the right to demand that a man’s first paycheck be put in the offering. Pendeta should be very careful what
demands they make of their congregations in regard to finance, because they
will be held responsible by God.[456]
In discussing the rights of
an apostle, or one who proclaims the Gospel, to earn a living from the Gospel, Paul
compares these rights to those of a priest, who had a right to eat from what
was sacrificed on the altar.[457] Men like this do have a right to financial
support. But the Bible does not teach
that this support comes in the form of tithes or firstfruit offerings. The New Testament does not lay these commands
on the church.
Some preachers are so intent
on persuading people to pay tithes, that they teach them that God only requires
10% of them, and lets them keep the rest.
Is this Biblical? What if a rich
man hears this teaching, and then brethren come to him naked and hungry, and he
thinks, “I have already paid my tithes, so I have no moral obligation to help
these hungry naked people.” But this is
not true according to James 2:15-16 and I John 3:17. God has a right to 100% of all that we have,
and we need to be good stewards of what he has given us.
Applying Principles From
the Law
“The Law was our
schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”[458] The requirements of the Law were quite
elaborate. In regards to giving, the Law
required Israelites to give a temple tax, tithes, sin offerings when they
sinned, firstborn animals from their flocks, and various other requirements for
the sacrificial system. In addition to
all these things, Hebrews were commanded to love their neighbors as themselves,
and to lend without charging usury, and to lend and give generously to the
poor.
A Hebrew who had a heart
full of faith, who sought to follow the Law, would have learned many moral lessons
from the Law. It would have taught him
to be generous. If he raised crops and
herded sheep, he would have given a lot of the crops to the Lord. He would have given much more than 10%.
While we are not under the
Law, we can learn moral lessons from the Law.
We should not try to put people under the Law of Moses, but we should
encourage our brethren to be generous and give from cheerful hearts to the
Lord. Many Christians, wanting to be
disciplined in their giving, do make it a practice to give 10% of their
income. Some find when they tithe, they
have more financial blessings than if they withhold. This shouldn’t be
surprising “He that soweth sparingly,
shall reap also sparingly.”[459]
Many people find that
discipling themselves to give 10% of their income is a good practice to teach
themselves generosity. A goat herder in
a church might read the Old Testament about redeeming firstborn sons, and
decide to give a firstborn goat as a gift to an elder in his church, or to use
it to throw a feast for widows or orphans.
A man, inspired after reading the Law, may give like this, but it would
be wrong for a teacher in the church to demand that every goat herder give all
his firstborn goats, trying to put them under the law of Moses.
Many people who have tithed
for years believe strongly in it.
Others, seeing the abuses of the ecclesiastical system, are very much
opposed to the teaching tithing to Christians as law. House church Christians who disagree on
issues like this can get along well if we learn not to looked down on one
another or judge one another on such issues.[460] While it is a sin for Christians to be
greedy, different views and practices on tithing are no reason for brethren to
break fellowship.[461]
Corruption in the
Church
[Quote from Crispus
Ratnam]
The
churches in Indonesia should be a light to unbelievers. Christians should pay taxes. Church leaders should provide a godly example
of faithfulness with money. Many
countries that have been greatly influenced by Christianity have a high degree
of honesty and financial accountability in the government. Even unbelievers in these countries are
afraid to take bribes or extort money because the culture has no tolerance for
this kind of corruption. If the
Christians in Indonesia provide a high standard of integrity with the use of
money, refusing to take bribes, using funds for what they are collected for,
and correcting those in the church who do sin by embezzling or cheating others
out of money, then we will provide a high standard of integrity that can
influence the nation.
Many
church leaders and other Christians in Indonesia need to repent of financial
corruption. The Bible teaches that “if
we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of
the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.”[462]
The church should be responsible to judge those who will not repent of
financial corruption, as I Corinthians 5 teaches. Even elders of the church should not be
exempt from being put on trial by the assembly if there are two or three
witnesses.[463]
If the church would judge those who sin and will not repent, we could
prevent the leaven of sin from spreading in our midst, and avert judgment from
God. Pendeta and other Christians
who have cheated people out of money or misused the Lord’s money should confess
their sin, and, if possible, pay back the money.
Some
forms of unfaithfulness with funds are not as obvious as outright
stealing. Earlier in this chapter are
examples of how pendeta can misuse the Bible to demand funds. Another common type of corruption is that
people will ask money for one type of ministry, and use it for something
else. For example, a missions team might
puts together a proposal outlining detailed expenses to be used on specific
outreach projects. If the members of the
team arrive at their destination, and decide not to do all the projects they
collected money for, and spend up church funds on eating out, this is a form of
financial corruption. If someone asks
for funds for a specific project, he should use them for that specific
project. If a church planter visiting
Java receives funds for the churches in Kalimantan, he shouldn’t use those
funds to finance his traveling around Java.
Sometimes
people misuse funds simply because of a lack of wisdom or knowledge. Some people who are entrusted with keeping a
certain sum of money will put that money in their own bank account or keep the
money as cash and in with their own money.
The person who manages money this way may find that, when his money runs
out and the brethren come asking for the church collection, that he has spent
the church’s money on his own needs. A
brother keeping interest from putting church funds in his bank account has
another, practical, moral issue to deal with.
House church deacons and others put in charge of church finances can
benefit from visits with brethren from other churches who explain to them how
to manage money in a wise way so as not to inadvertently misuse the Lord’s
fund. Learning to teach simple financial
management techniques to farmers who may only have a SD education could be a
great help to village churches.
House
church planters must be careful not to teach new believers to imitate the
problems of many institutional churches in Indonesia. The pendeta system can easily attract
people who are simply looking to make a living.
The apostles appointed elders to tend the flock of God, not Bible
college graduates who were looking for employment. Elders were forbidden to tend the flock of
God for money. They were not to be
covetous or “greedy of filthy lucre.”[464]
As long as churches ignore do no take these qualifications seriously,
they leave open a door of opportunity to religious professionals who are just
seeking comfortable jobs to support themselves, or who are penipu who
see godliness as a means to gain.[465]
If elders are appointed from within the congregation, then the other
saints will know if he has a habit of cheating others out of money or a
tendency toward covetousness. Men who do
not meet the Biblical qualifications should be rejected.
In
addition to elders, churches should support men who travel and preach the
Gospel. Believers may with to support
itinerant teachers and prophets who go on journeys to minister to churches. Church planters should not teach churches to
promote the practice of preaching for hire.
Since the believers in the church are to minister to one another with
spiritual gifts, we should not expect that everyone who speaks in the meeting
will be paid. In this environment, a
guest teacher may be simply a guest brother participating in the meeting with
the other saints. The brethren may
decide to contribute money to his ministry if he is strengthening the body of
Christ with his ministry on a regular basis, especially if he is working so
much for the kingdom he has no way to support himself.
A Practical Look at
House Church Finances
Realistically,
most house church planters and cannot expect to receive a predictable, stable
salary from house churches, especially if they minister in the poor village
areas. Large denominations can offer
stable salaries. This is not the case
with house churches. Church planters,
traveling teachers, and elders, can who are not able to work a secular job
because of the great amount of work they do for the kingdom must learn to trust
God to miraculously provide their living.
Even if some house church planters and elders are able to find financial
sponsors, if house churches multiply rapidly throughout the country, then we should
expect that regular villagers start
traveling around ministering the Gospel, and ministering on a local level. It
is unrealistic to think that these
people will all have financial sponsors and a guaranteed monthly income. They will need to learn to trust the Lord for
provision, as He moves saints to give.
House
churches will be greatly strengthened if many of the saints decide to emulate
the apostle Paul in not seeking to receive compensation for their
ministry. Some church planters may try
to find work that they can do while planting churches. Gifted teachers who work secular jobs may
wish to take their vacations to teach new believers in house churches in
villages without expecting money in return.
Theology graduates may wish to earn a living teaching Christianity to
children in school, and then use their breaks to go on a teaching tour of small
house churches.
Teaching
a godly attitude toward hospitality can be a great helps to church planters,
teachers, and other traveling brethren.
If a minister of the Gospel knows that, at the end of the day, he can
stop in a village or town and stay in the home of Christians who will feed him,
he needs very little money. A network of
hospitable Christians can greatly further the work of the kingdom.
As
Christians follow the commandments of the Lord and His apostles, showing the
love o others through giving, we can expect the churches to grow and grow. Taking care of widows and others in need is a
great testimony for the Gospel.
© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003
Chapter 25
Denominations, Baptism and Wedding
Certificates and Other Legal Issues
Those interested in planting house
churches in Indonesia will naturally wonder what they can do about legal
paperwork. Indonesian Christians may
need to have baptism certificates to go to school, to get a job with a
Christian organization, or to get a passport or other legal documentation. Christians in Indonesia get legally married
through denominations as well. How can
Christians who meet Biblically in homes get legal documentation?
On the other hand, many people who
participate in house churches around the world believe denominations are
unscriptural for a number of reasons.
This is true of many Christians in house churches in the United States,
and also in China. House churches in many parts of China face severe
persecution, while the Three Self Church is allowed freedom as long as it stays
within government guidelines.
Are Denominations Biblical?
A careful study of the New
Testament shows that the church was not organized into thousands of splintered
denominations. Rather, we see that the
saints who gathered in one city are referred to as a ‘church.’ The word ‘church’ is used in the singular to
refer to the saints who gathered in one city.
But when the New Testament refers to the saints who gathered in
assemblies in a region, the plural ‘churches’ is used. Though the Jerusalem saints met from house to
house, Acts sill speaks of the Jerusalem church as one ‘church’ in the
plural. Repeatedly, we see that that
Scripture refers to one ‘church’ in a city.
We see references to ‘church’ of each of the following cities in
Scripture: Antioch, Caesarea, Ephesus,
Corinth, Laodicea, Thessalonica, 'Babylon', Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis,
and Philadelphia.[466]
The Jerusalem church was very
large with thousands of believers. But
the Bible still speaks of one church in that city. Jerusalem had elders who worked together on
issues related to the whole city church[467]. In Acts 20:17 Paul called the elders of the
church in Ephesus—the city church presbytery.
Acts 14: says that Paul and Barnabas ‘ordained them elders in every
church.’ In Titus 1:5 Paul tells Titus
to ‘ordain elders in every city.’ These
two passages make sense if we realize that local churches were administrated on
a city level.
The system of church government we
see in scripture is one in which churches are administrated on a city
level. The church in Corinth was one
church, but it had received ministry from many gifted believers. The Corinthians were familiar with the
ministries of Paul, Apollos, and Peter (Cephas). The church was started through the ministry
of Paul and his co-workers. Paul wanted
the Corinthians to administrate their own affairs. He did not set them up as a branch of a
denomination with headquarters in Antioch, the city in which he had been
committed to the grace of God to minister.
Later the Corinthians had received
ministry from visits from Apollos and possibly Peter. When Apollos went to Corinth, he ministered
to the church that was already there. He
didn’t start an ‘Apollos church’ that was a separate entity from the church
that Paul planted. Apollos ‘watered’
what had already been planted in Corinth.[468] He didn’t start a new denomination with
headquarters in Ephesus. Peter didn’t
start a separate church, administrated from a denominational headquarters in
Jerusalem. The Corinthian church was a
church, not a branch of a denominational organization.
Paul rebuked the Corinthians as carnal
because they divided themselves based on who their favorite teacher was. They said, “I am of Paul”, “I am of Apollos”,
and “I am of Cephas.” Some of the really
spiritual-sounding Corinthians said “I am of Christ.” Even today, some Christians identify
themselves spiritually by naming the preacher of the church they go to: “I go to Pendeta A’s church.” Many Christians only ant to associate with
Christians of a certain kind of denominational background. They have loyalty to a denomination or a particular
teacher, when they should have loyalty to Christ and the whole church.
In addition to being a pattern
from scripture, the citywide church makes a lot more sense than the
denominational church structure.
Denominational leaders in a distinct city often know little of the
specific problems church leaders are facing on a local level. Distance can make it difficult if not
impossible to provide real accountability or guidance (bimbingan) to
church leaders underneath them on the organizational chart. Denominations naturally need to have
unbiblical positions in their church structure.
To make the denomination function, additional layers of denominational
offices are added to the extra-scriptural offices of pendeta muda, pendeta. In the Bible, the ‘offices of church
government’ we see are apostles, who laid foundations of churches. Often this involved planting new churches
that they would offer guidance to through visits and letters. Apostles appointed elders from within these
congregations to govern the affairs of the local churches and to pastor the
people.
Denominational systems typically
have a headquarters in one city, and many ‘franchise’ churches in other
cities. These franchise churches operate
as separate entities from the franchises of other denominations elsewhere. Often, they compete with each other. Restaurant franchises specialize in different
things. Franchises sell ayam kampung,
friend chicken, bak mie, hamburgers, hotdogs, or pizza. Church franchises often specialize on
different things. Some denominations
emphasize healing, or tongues, or doctrines related to salvation,
predestination, or other aspects of the Christian faith. But a local church is not supposed to be a
franchise. A church should teach all the
doctrines of the faith and should allow for the expression of all the gifts of
the Spirit in accordance with the teachings of Scripture.
The Bible teaches believers to
endeavor to ‘keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body…”[469]
We must realize that it is God’s desire that ‘there should be no schism in the
body’.[470]
Church planters who work in an
area where there is already a should respect what God is doing in that area,
and work toward helping those they win to Christ to be ‘fitly joined together’[471]
with the rest of the body of Christ in that city. Christians who meet in house church also need
to be careful not to get an exclusive mindset, desiring only to fellowship with
other people who meet in homes. Our
oneness in Christ, and not location or method of meeting is not our basis for
fellowship with other Christians.
When we see the citywide church in
the Bible, we may wonder how to see it as reality in our own day and age. One response some believers have taken is to
simply consider their own church to be the official citywide church. This makes little sense. Declaring one’s church to be exclusively the
church in the city isn’t the solution.
What Christians can do is acknowledge that the Lord sees the body of
Christ as one, and begin to act according to that reality. Church elders can seek opportunities work
with other elders in the same city.
From Jesus’ teaching Matthew
18:15-20, we see that God has entrusted great authority to the church. It is therefore important that we understand
the nature of the church. If we see that
the word ‘church’ in scripture often refers to the church of the whole city,
does that mean that there are no smaller units of ‘church’?
If we search the scriptures
carefully, we will see that in addition to the city level of ‘church’, the word
‘church’ is used to refer to the smaller gatherings of believers in homes.
In Jerusalem, the saints had some
of their meetings in homes.[472] Acts tells of an occasion in Philippi when
Paul and his coworkers met with the brethren in the house of Lydia. In addition to these, there are several
references that use the word ‘church’ (ekklesia) to refer to meetings in
homes. Paul tells the Romans to greet
Aquila and Priscilla and “the church that is in their house.”[473] When Aquila and Priscilla lived in the Roman
province called Asia, Paul wrote to the Corinthians, “Aquila and Priscilla
salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.”[474] Paul greeted Philemon and “the church in they
house.”[475] In his letter to the Colossians, Paul saluted
“Nymphas, and the church which is in his house.”[476]
In some cases, the entire church
of a city may have gathered in one private home. Paul wrote of the Corinthian church coming
together into one place.[477] Somehow, Gaius was able to host “the whole
church” even though there were many people.[478] Some of the house churches may have comprised
the whole city church.
But in Romans, we see a situation
in which the saints in Rome are asked to greet one church among them that meets
in the house of Aquila and Priscilla. If
all of the Christians met I this church, then it would seem unlikely that Paul
would ask the all the saints in the city to greet themselves. Paul greets several other brethren besides
the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla in chapter 16, as well.
Scripture refers to both the city
church and the church in the house as ‘church.’
We can conclude that both levels of ‘church’ have authority from
God. While we should recognize the need
for unity in the body in faith and action on the city level, we should also
recognize that God also works through the church in the house.
The Indonesian government wants
Christians to be registered in denominations.
The Bible teaches Christians to be submissive to the government.[479] Of course, God’s law is the highest law. When ordered not to preach by the rulers of
Israel, the apostles decided that they had to obey God rather than men.[480]
We need to realize that governmental
recognition of a church is not the same thing s spiritual recognition. When Saul of Tarsus had governmental
authorization to persecute believers and take them to prison, the church
meetings were still valid in God’s eyes.
When the Roman government outlawed Christianity and was feeding
Christians to the lions, the church was still valid. A meeting in Indonesia can legally be a persekutuan
and still be a church spiritually.
In the United States, the government
does not pressure churches to be part of a denomination. Many house churches remain independent and do
not form any kind of legal entity. In
China, many of the house church Christians are severely persecuted by the
government. The government places some
restrictions on what government-sanctioned churches can teach. Whether or not to be a part of a denomination
in Indonesia is an issue of conscience that Christians who wish to do church
Biblically will have to wrestle with.
In recent years, some
denominations have started recognizing the church-growth potential of house
churches. The Southern Baptist
denomination is now supporting house churches on mission fields. Some of these house churches end up as
non-denominational, and others are part of the Baptist denomination, depending
on the legal situation in each country.
There are those who say that it is
legal to gather in homes for prayer, and that there is no law against talking,
reading the Bible, and eating with other people, and so church (jemaat)
meetings in homes are legal, as long as the church does not try to make an
unofficial gereja. Whether this
is true or not, Christians who take this approach can face trouble when a
village is riled up against them, and an unsympathetic village head asks them
for denominational paperwork to show that their meeting is legally valid.
Christians who meet apart from an
official denomination face many practical problems. Indonesian Christians may find that they need
baptism certificates to get married legally, and to find work in Christian
schools and other organizations, or to change one’s religious status on a
KTP. Sometimes a baptism certificate may
be required to get a passport.
Some Christians in Indonesia seem
to think that baptism certificates have some spiritual significance. Denominational endorsement has nothing to do
with the spiritual validity of a baptism.
Baptized Christians are baptized whether or not they have denominational
baptism certificates. In fact, there are
many churches around the world that do not give out baptism certificates. Some foreigners have difficulty getting
married in Indonesia if they never got a baptism certificate in their home
country.
In order for a Christian to get
married legally in Indonesia, he needs to go through a denomination. This can create difficulties for the
Christian who attends a house church, who never got a baptism certificate and
never changed his religion on his KTP.
He wants a Christian wedding, but how?
Christians who want to return to
Biblical church practice can find the problem of dealing with government
requirements and related to denominations a difficult one. As we consider this issue, we must be “as
wise as serpents and harmless as doves.”[481] We must also remember to put obedience to the
Lord first. There are several approaches
to dealing with legal and denominational issues.
1.
Work with existing denominations to provide paperwork.
Many denominations place
unbiblical limits on the growth of the church.
For example, some denominations require Bible college-educated young
people to serve as pendeta instead of allowing God to raise up a
Biblical plurality of elders within the church.
There are denominations that will not recognize a church that doesn’t
have a pendeta or elders. There
is also the problem that some churches restrict who can baptize, which can slow
down the growth of churches, especially in areas where denominationally
authorized baptizers are rare.
One approach some house church
planters use is to find pendeta or other officials in a denomination who
can understand some of the Biblical principles of church, and are friendly
toward house churches. These officials
provide baptism and wedding certificates, and paperwork acknowledging house
churches as legal churches or cell groups.
The difficulty in working with
denominations is that often the churches that seek to be Biblical have to stay
close enough to the officials of the denomination to get paperwork, but stay
far enough away from the denominational system so as not to fall into
unbiblical traditions or requirements.
Some house church planters get
licensed as pendeta themselves, even if they realize that denominational
paperwork is only useful for legal purposes, and does not correspond to
Biblical ordination. Church planters and
house churches that go this route must be careful not to see themselves as
members of a denomination, but as members of the body of Christ.
There are some denominations that
have policies that are very open to Biblical-style church. GerejaYesus Kristus Tuhan is very supportive
of house churches. It is closely related
to Abbalove Ministries and Metanoia Bookstore.
Metanoia has published a book about house churches, and some house
churches are legally a part of GYKT in addition to a large cell church that has
a plurality of elders. GPUA would
probably be open to legally sponsoring house churches. They sponsor some brethren churches (referred
to by some as ‘Plymouth Brethren’) and various other extremely contextual
churches with various forms of church government and a great variety of
doctrine. Gereja Jemaat Kristus also has
plural eldership and provides sponsorship for some Christians who meet in
homes. There may be many other denominations
willing to offer legal support for house churches, provided church planters
have close relationships with the denominational leadership.
There may be some house church
people who feel that working with a denomination is a compromise of Biblical
principles. House churches that decide
whether or not to do this must make these decisions prayerfully, without
overrunning the consciences of brethren who do not agree.
2.
Starting House Church Denominations
Another, similar approach would be
for house church people to approach an existing denomination that only has a
few churches, but wants to join with some people who are wanting to help people
involved in evangelism. If a small
denomination would like to allow itself to be used as a tool to spread house
churches, denominational policies could be change to allow for Biblical church
function and growth.
Such a denomination could
acknowledge that it is just an organization set up to provide legal paperwork,
and not a church with spiritual authority.
The denomination could issue baptism certificates through elders,
deacons, or itinerant ministers who chose to register with the denomination, or
to any Christians based on the testimony of two or three witnesses. It could allow for church elders to register
as denominational officials or not, and allow freedom in conducting wedding
ceremonies. Basically, serve as a
legal-document factory for house churches, without usurping the authority or
taking over any of the spiritual responsibility of the local churches or
traveling ministers. Participants in the
denomination should be careful not to place the loyalty that they should show
toward Christ and His church in the denomination. Hopefully, this would satisfy government
requirements.
Still, there may be some
assemblies who could not join such an organization in good conscience. These churches could remain as ‘persekutuan’
legally, and ask the churches that do join the organization for baptism
certificates and other paperwork.
3.
Request a Change in the Law
Denominations have the potential
to wield a lot of political power, rallying behind certain political
candidates. Some of the larger political
parties in the government have reason to be concerned.
One solution to this fear that we
could suggest to the government would be to do away with anything that gives
denominations legal power over Christians.
The Indonesian government could guarantee the right of people to meet in
home, pray, study and expound on scriptures, and participate in other religious
activities. They could do away with any
requirement for baptism certificates as a form of identification for any
government department. Religion on KTP
could be changed based on the confession of the person filing for the KTP. If the Indonesian government would allow for
non-religious, civil marriage, Christians who attend house churches could
perform whatever cultural and religious ceremonies they chose, and then
register their marriages civilly. Another alternative would be allowing Christians
to register Christian marriages with a catatan sipil based on the
testimony of witnesses (e.g. bride groom, parents, and other witnesses) without
requiring any paperwork from a denomination.
It could be really beneficial to
Christians if the government would do away with putting religion on KTP
altogether. Religious persecutors have
been known to check KTPs I a crowd to determine who to persecute. Doing away with religion on KTP’s could do
away with a tool used to promote unrest in some parts of Indonesia.
Many Christians believe that for a
wedding to be valid, it must be performed by the church, or by an official of a
church. In Indonesia, marriages are
legally performed through denominations or other religious institutions.
But when we look at the Bible,
there is no teaching that marriages must be performed by the church or by
church elders. In the Old Testament,
Hebrew marriages were covenants between a groom’s family or the groom himself
and the bride’s father.[482] Usually the groom then paid the bride price,
his betrothed was his, even though he waited a while to take her to his
home. When the groom came to collect the
bride, it was customary to throw a feast.[483] There is no mention of elders or Levites
being necessary to perform weddings.
Generally, marriages involved consent of the bride’s father’s, though
there were some exceptions to this.[484]
In the case of Ruth’s marriage to
Boaz, there were elders present to witness the event, though there is no
indication that they blessed it or took an active role. Their presence may have been due to the fact
that the law required the presence of elders when a man declined to take his
deceased near-relatives wife.[485]
Boaz was not the first in line to receive Ruth as his wife. Ruth 4:1-13 show how the wedding was
performed.
The traditional Christian ceremony
involves the bride and groom exchanging vows, the exchange of rings, and
blessing by a church leader. Where does
the typical Christian wedding come from?
Christianity grew in the Roman Empire.
Before Christianity became a prominent cultural force in Rome, Romans
had wedding customs that involved the woman wearing a ring on the third finger
of her left hand and uttering certain words of consent before a pagan
priest. When Romans many became Christians,
it is easy to see how they would take their own cultural wedding adat
and adapt it to Christianity. Instead of
saying words in front of a pagan priest, Roman Christians said wedding vows in
front of a church elder that blessed their marriage.
So how should Christians have
wedding ceremonies? How can weddings be
performed in the context of a house church?
We may realize that, Biblically,
marriage involves a man leaving father and mother and cleaving to his wife.[486] A young Christian man may arrange with a
young Christian woman’s father to have her as his wife, but if there is no
church wedding, Christian relatives may consider them not to be married. As Christians, we need to be concerned about
the consciences of other people.[487] Marriages that are not performed in
accordance with the law are not a good witness to unbelievers. We must ‘abstain from all appearance of
evil.”[488]
There is nothing wrong with having
the elders of the church bless a marriage, and in fact it is a good thing. In fact, if elders have a close relationship
with the young people in the churches, the young men may actually go to the
elders for advice about how to find a spouse, whether or not to marry a
particular person, and how to carry it out.
The younger women may go to the elder women in the church and ask
similar questions. If the elders pastor
the young people as they make these decisions, then it would make a lot of
sense for elders to bless weddings. One
elder can bless a couple that is getting married, or more than one elder could
do the same. If a church has no elders,
the marrying couple could ask for an elder or elders from another church to
bless their wedding, or for another minister of the Gospel to do so. For the sake of conscience of visiting relatives
and for the sake of legality, someone legally authorized to perform wedding
ceremonies may participate in the wedding.
Weddings can also incorporate aspects of cultural adat that do
not involve compromise with idolatry or pagan practices.
Some house churches incorporate
weddings into a house church meeting, and allow all the saints to offer words
of blessings, encouragement and advice to the new couple. It seems unnatural for a lot of house
churches to practice mutually edifying meetings most days, and suddenly shift
to the one-man preacher format when it comes to wedding ceremonies. If the couple is going to partake of their
first communion together as a married couple, it makes sense, in light of the
warnings of I Corinthians 11, to do so with a local body of believers, rather
than only one elder and the couple taking Communion in front of a congregation
that is not allowed to participate.
When a church considers how to
conduct weddings, we need to realize that the scriptures do not put the authority
to perform weddings into the realm of the church per se, though marriages and
weddings should be conducted in line with scriptural teaching. Church leaders should encourage new believers
to find their spouses in honorable ways, taking into account the right of
parents, and encourage believers to marry in ways that will be legally and
socially acceptable so as not to bring reproach on the Gospel.
There is no compelling need for
Christians married in another religion to be required to have a Christian
wedding, but some couples in this situation do want to have one. It is a good thing to received blessings from
elders and other believers.
Church planters who minister to
unreached people groups and the first converts of these people-groups will have
to work out how to incorporate aspects of their own cultural adat and
generally accepted Christian cultural adat together into legal, socially
acceptable wedding ceremonies. Members
of different Christian communities of newly reached people groups can also meet
to discuss these issues and work out their own wedding ceremonies.
[1] Harper, James, ed. Great Events of the Bible. Copyright 1987. New York. P 172.
[2] Watchman Nee. The Normal Christian Church Life. Copyright 1980 Living Streams Ministries. Anaheim. Pp. 73-74. This book is an edited version of Concerning Our Mission by Watchman Nee.
[3] I Corinthians 14:26.
[4]Alfred Adersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Book 3. Chapter X.
[5] I Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:7-10.
[6] Luke 10:1, Mark 6:7.
[7] Romans 15:24, I Corinthians 16:6.
[8] Acts11:22.
[9] Acts 11:30.
[10] Acts 13:2-3.
[11] Acts 6:1-6.
[12] I Timothy 4:14. II Timothy 1:6.
[13] I Timothy 5:22.
[14] Acts 14:23.
[15] Titus 1:5.
[16] Acts 13:2
[17] Acts 26:17. The word for ‘send’ here is a form of the Greek verb apostello.
[18] Many scholars now believe that Paul wrote his epistle to the Galatians before the Jerusalem council described in Acts 15. The epistle may have been written to some of the churches planted on what is called Paul’s First Missionary Journey, churches which were located in the province of Galatia. Acts 16:4 shows that Paul delivered the decision of the Jerusalem council to churches, indicating that he approved of the decision. Galatians deals with the issue of Gentile Christians being tempted to be circumcised by Judaizer. If Paul had already delivered the decision of the Jerusalem apostles and elders to the churches, it would make sense that he would have referred to this decision in his epistle. Paul’s trip to Jerusalem mentioned in Galatians 2 may have occurred might correspond to the trip described in Acts 11:29-30, or may simply be omitted from the book of Acts.
[19] I Corinthians 9.
[20] Acts 20:33-35.
[21] I Peter 2:5,9. Revelation 1:6.
[22] I Corinthians 10:31.
[23] I Timothy 3:2. Acts 20:28, I Peter 5:2.
[24] I Timothy 3:4-6, Titus 1:6.
[25] I Corinthians 1:7, I Corinthians 3:1.
[26] I Timothy 3:4-6, Titus 1:6, I Timothy 3:12.
[27] I Thessalonians 1:1, 2:6.
[28] I Timothy 4:14.
[29] II Corinthians 1:19, I Thessalonians 2:9.
[30] I Timothy 4:14, II Timothy 1:6. I Thessalonians 1:1, 2:6.
[31] ANTE-NICENE FATHERS VOLUME V: Fathers
of the Third Century: Hippolytus; Cyprian; Caius; Novatian; Appendix: Baptism
of Heretics, Anonymous Treatise Against the Heretic Novatian, Anonymous
Treatise on Re-baptism. >From
the website
<http://www.synaxis.org/ecf/volume05/ECF05HIPPOLYTUS_ON_THE_TWELVE_APOSTLE.htm>.
[32] Nee, Watchman. P. 5.
3 Jones, David A FEMALE APOSTLE? A Lexical-Syntactic Analysis of Romans 16:7. Available at http://www.cbmw.org/resources/articles/femaleapostle.pdf on December 14, 2002.
[33] Don Walker. Arrows of Truth. Are there Apostles Today? August 12, 2002. <http://basileiaministries.talkoftheplanet.com/custom54.html>
[34] I Thessalonians 1:1, 2:6.
[35] The Didache 11:4-9. J.B. Lightfoot translation. Available at <http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-lightfoot.html>.
[36] The Didache 15:1-4.
[37] Eusebius Ecclesiastical History.III. 37.2. <http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf2-01-08.htm#P1497_696002>
[38] Eusebius Ecclesiastical History.III. 37.3. <http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf2-01-08.htm#P1497_696002>
[39] The Catholic Encyclopedia: Gregory the Illuminator. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07023a.htm>
[40] Gregory the Illuminator. <http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintg35.htm>
[41] SAINT PATRICK APOSTLE OF IRELAND—389-461 <http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/PATRICK.HTM>. Taken from "Lives of Saints", Published by John J. Crawley & Co., Inc.
[44] MARTIN of TOURS c. 315-397. http://www.cin.org/martours.html.
[45] Medieval Sourcebook: Rimbert: Life of Anksar, the Apostle of the North, 801-865. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/anskar.html>
[46] Medieval Sourcebook:
[47] Catholic Encyclopedia. Sts. Cyril and Methodius (Or Constantine and Methodius). <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04592a.htm>
[48] February 14 SS. CYRIL AND METHODIUS, CC. <http://www.cin.org/saints/c&m.html>.
[49] Glimpses Issue# 24. John Eliot: Apostle to the Indians. <http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/GLIMPSEF/Glimpses/glmps024.shtml>
[50] Glimpses Issue# 24. John Eliot: Apostle to the Indians.
[51] DGM Country Packets. Protestant Christian Batak Church – HKBP. <http://www.elca.org/dgm/country_packet/indonesia/hkbp.html>
[52] According to I Corinthians 1:16, Paul baptized the household of Stephanas. I Corinthians 16:15 identifies this household as the firstfruits of Achaia. If Stephanas household, evangelized by Paul, were the firstfruits in Achaia, it is highly unlikely that Aquila and Priscilla or any other Christian had won anyone to Christ in Corinth before Paul arrived with his companions.
[53] II Corinthians 10:8-13.
[54] Matthew 20:25-27, Mark 10:42-45, Luke 22:24-26.
[55] I Peter 5:3.
[56] Acts 20:17-38.
6 Romans 14.
7 Romans 7:13, Galatians 2:8
[57] I Timothy 5:1, 17, 19.
[58] Acts 6:1-6.
[59] Acts 4:34-37. Acts 11:29-30.
[60] House2House-Issue 4. Speaking Prophetically, Acting Apostolically. Wolfgang Simson.
[61] II Corinthians 11:19-23.
[62] Mark 6:7, Luke 10:1.
[63] Acts 13:2-5; 15:37-38.
[64] Matthew 20:20-28, Mark 9:23-35;10:37-34, Luke 22:24-28.
[65] Acts 2:46, 5:42.
[66] I Corinthians 4:13
[67] Romans 1:9.
[68] Colossians 1_7-8;4:12.
[69] The Jerusalem church had a plurality of elders. Acts 11:30; 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23; Acts 16:4. Acts 21:18. The Ephesian church had a plurality of elders. Acts 20:28, I Timothy 5:17. Paul instructed Titus to appoint plural elders in every city in Crete. James instructed the churches to call the plural elders of the church. Peter addressed the elders, plural, of the churches (I Peter 5:1.0 John the Revelator saw plural elders in his heavenly vision. (Revelation 4:4, 10; 5:5, 6, 8, 11, 14; 7:11, 13; 11:16; 14:3, 19:4)
[70] I Corinthians 9:7.
[71] I Timothy 3:2
[72] I Timothy 3:6
[73] Titus 1:5
[74] Acts 19:1, 22
[75] I Thessalonians 1:1, 2:6
[76] The Apostolic Constitutions. Book II. Section I.
[77] Acts 20:28.
[78] Acts 18:3.
[79] Acts 14:21-24.
[80] Acts 20:31.
[81] II Timothy 2:, Philippians 2:22, I Corinthians 4:17.
[82] Exodus 24:13.
[83] I Kings 19:21.
[84] Acts 22:3.
[85] Titus 1:5.
[86] I Peter 5:2.
[87] John Wesley. The Ministerial Office. Sermon 115. (text from the 1872 edition) [a.k.a. Prophets and Priests (Sermon 121 in the Bicentennial Edition)]. Available at http://gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/serm-115.stm
[88] I Corinthians 12:41
[89] I Corinthians 12:18, 12:28.
[90] I Timothy 3:2-3.
[91] I Timothy 3:6.
[92] I Kings 12.
[93] Luke 22:23-27.
[94] II Corinthians 10:13-16.
[95] I Timothy 3:2,4-5.
[96] I Timothy 5:8.
[97] Acts 20:35.
[98] Acts 20:28. I Peter 5:2.
[99] I Timothy 3:2. I Timothy 5:17. Titus 1:9-10.
[100] Genesis 24, Exodus 22:16-17, I Samuel 18:22-27, Deuteronomy 22:28-29, Joshua 15:16-17.
[101] Judges 14, Matthew 22:2-14, John 2, Revelation 19:9. \
[102] Ancient Roman Daily Life
[103] Acts 8:12, 36-38.
[104] Acts 6:3-6; 21:8.
[105] Acts 9:10.
[106] Acts 8:1, 11:22; 2:46.
[107] Acts 13:1; 18:22, I Corinthians 1:1, II Corinthians 1:1, I Thessalonians 1:1, II Thessalonians 1:1,
[108] I Corinthians 16:1; 16:19’ II Corinthians 8:1;, Galatians 1:; 1:22.
[109] I Corinthians 11:20, I Peter 5:13, Acts 20:17, Revelation 2:1; 2:8, 2:12; 2:18; 3:1; 3:7; 3:14.
[110] Romans 1:7.
[111] Titus 1:5.
[112] Deuteronomy 19:12; 21:3; 21:6; 21:19; 21:20; 22:15; 22:17; 22:18; 25:8, Joshua 20:4.
[113] Acts 20:31.
[114] Acts 20:28.
[115] Luke 16:10.
[116] I Timothy 3:2.
[117] I Corinthians 14:26.
[118] I Corinthians 14:29-31, 37.
[119] Acts 20:28.
[120] I Corinthians 2:16.
[121] Acts 16:1-2.
[122] I Timothy 4:14.
[123] I Timothy 3:2.
[124] Acts 8:1, Acts 11:19-21.
[125] I Timothy 3:2.
[126] I Peter 5:3.
[127] I Corinthians 14:29-33.
[128] I Timothy 4:14.
[129] Acts 18:24-28, Acts 19:1.
[130] Acts 11:27, Acts 15:23-34.
[131] Acts 20:33-35, I Corinthians 4:16; 11:1-2, Philippians 3:17, I Thessalonians 1:7, II Thessalonians 2:15, 3:9
[132] Matthew 28:20.
[133] Acts 20:28.
[134] Acts 20:33-35.
[135] I Timothy 3:1
[136] Jude 1:19.
[137] Isaiah 42:3.
[138] Luke 3:8.
[139] Acts 26:20.
[140] Matthew 7:17.
[141] Galatians 5:18.
[142] Matthew 19:17.
[143] Matthew 19:18-19.
[144] Matthew 19:20.
[145] Matthew 19:21.
[146] Acts 9:5.
[147] Acts 9:9, Acts 22:16.
[148] Jonah 3:4.
[149] Matthew 21:31,
[150] Matthew 3:2.
[151] Matthew 3:2,
[152] Matthew 4:17.
[153] Matthew 16:17.
[154] Matthew 11:27.
[155] Matthew 3:7, Luke 3:7.
[156] II Corinthians 4:4.
[157] Romans 1:21.
[158] Ephesians 6:17.
[159] II Corinthians 5:11.
[160] Green, Keith. What’s Wrong with the Gospel? Section 2: The Added Parts [find English web page and cite Indonesian source.]
[161] Green, Keith.
[162] Matthew 26:28.
[163] see also Mark 1:4.
[164] John 4:1-2.
[165] Matthew 9:1-7, Mark 2:1-12, Luke 5:16-26.
[166] Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19, I Corinthians 11:24.
[167] I Corinthians 10:20-21.
[168] I Corinthians 10:1-2.
[169] Bryan. From a post to NTCP email discussion list. June 18, 2002.
[170] I Corinthians 7:14.
[171] Matthew 18:2-3, Luke 18:17
[172] I Peter 3:21.
[173] Ironically, Martin Luther was a strong supporter of infant baptism.
[174] Acts 9:10.
[175] Acts 22:12.
[176] Acts 18:8.
[177] Matthew 23:15.
[178] Luke 14:26-35.
[179] Genesis 1:1-3. John 1:1-5.
[180] Such a long period of instruction was not required from what is recorded in the book of Acts.
[181] The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome 21:1-11. The English version from which this quote was taken from http://www.bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html.
[182] The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome 21:12-18.
[183] The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome 21:21-38.
[184] Acts 17:15-34.
[185] Matthew 10:32, Luke 12:8.
[186] Matthew 10:23.
[187] Luke 7:45. See also Matthew 26:48-49, Mark 14:44-45, and Luke 22:47.
[188] Romans 16:16. I Corinthians 16:20. II Corinthians 13:12. I Thessalonians 5:26.
[189] Luke 24:36.
[190] James 4:15.
[191] I Corinthians 4:19.
[192] I Corinthians 16:7.
[193] John 9:35-36.
[194] William S. Thurman, Ph.D. “WorshipAnyone?” An email message sent March 15, 2004.
[195] James 2:2. Acts 9:20; 13:5, 13, 42; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:4, 19, 26; 19:8.
[196] Acts 19:9.
[197] I Corinthians 14:37.
[198] Collosians 3:11.
[199] Matthew 28:19-20.
[200] Ephesians 3:9-11.
[201] England Calling. July 25, 2003. A personal email from Beresford Job.
[202] An illustration from Beresford Job given at the 2003 South Eastern House Church conference in the United States.
[203] Many of the ideas in this paragraph were also borrowed from Beresford Job’s address to the 2003 South Eastern House Church conference.
[204] I Peter 4:10.
[205] Acts 6:1-6. I Timothy 5:3-16. Acts 11:29-30. Romans 15:26. I Corinthians 16:1-3. II Corinthians 8:2-15.
[206] Matthew 6:1-5; 23. Mark 12:40.
[207] Matthew 15:1-9. Mark 7:1-13.
[208] Romans 8:14. Galatians 5:18.
[209] I Corinthians 9:27.
[210] I Corinthians 11:26.
[211] I Corinthians 14:26.
[212] v. 30.
[213] v. 31.
[214] v. 30.
[215] Collosians 4:16. I Thessalonians 5:27.
[216] Revelation 2-3.
[217] Galatians 4:11.
[218] I Corinthians 9:24-27.
[219] I Corinthians 9:17-18.
[220] Matthew 5:12, 46; 6:1; 10:41-42; 16:27. Mark 9:41. Luke 6:23, 35; 23:41. I Corinthians 3:8, 14. Colossians 2:18; 3:24; Hebrews 10:35; 11:26; II John 1:8. Revelation 22:12; 11:18. Matthew 6:19-21; 19:21. Mark 10:21. Luke 18:22. I Timothy 6:17-19.
[221] Romans 1:13.
[222] I Corinthians 9. II Corinthians 11:9-12.
[223] I Peter 2:5.
[224] John 5:41-44.
[225] I Peter 5:2.
[226] II Peter 2:15. Jude 1:11.
[227] Philipians 1:15.
[228] I Corinthians 1:12-13.
[229] Hebrews 10:24,25.
[230] I Corinthians 10:17.
[231] Acts 21:18-26.
[232] Romans 12:13, I Peter 4:9. See also I Timothy 3:2, Titus, 1:8.
[233] Acts 14:23.
[234] Acts 11:30.
[235] Acts 6:1-6. I Timothy 3:8-13. Romans 16:1-2.
[236] I Peter 5:4.
[237] Acts 28:29-30.
[238] Acts 20:28. I Peter 5:2.
[239] John 13:35
[240] John 17:22-23.
[241] Beresford Job. England Calling. July 25,2003. Personal email.
[242] Matthew 19:23-30.
[243] Luke 16:10
[244] I Samuel 15:22.
[245] I Corinthians 14:37.
[246] I Corinthians 14:33, 36.
[247] I Corinthians14:40.
[248] I Corinthians 14:31.
[249] I Corinthians 14:30.
[250] I Corinthians 14:4.
[251] I Corinthians 14:14-15.
[252] I Corinthians 14:4-11.
[253] I Corinthians 14:16.
[254] I Corinthians 14:22-23.
[255] I Corinthians 14:19.
[256] I Corinthians 14:28.
[257] I Corinthians 14:16-17.
[258] I Corinthians 14:18-19.
[259] I Corinthians 14:3-5
[260] I Corinthians 14:5.
[261] I Corinthians 14:3-5.
[262] I Corinthians 14:24.
[263] I Corinthians 14:31.
[264] I Corinthians 14:13.
[265] Romans 12:6-7.
[266] I Corinthians 12:28. Ephesians 4:11.
[267] Deuteronomy 24:8. II Chronicles 15:3.
[268] Matthew 23:34.
[269] II Peter 1:21.
[270] I Chronicles 25:1.
[271] Ezekiel 5:1. Jeremiah 26:2. Isaiah 20:2-6. Micah 1:8. Acts 21:11.
[272] Acts 21:11.
[273] I Kings 22:17. Genesis 37:5. Numbers 12:6.
[274] Numbers 22:20. Joshua 13:22.II Peter 2:15. Jude 1:11. Revelation 2:14.
[275] John 11:49-52.
[276] I Corinthians 14:31.
[277]The following is an
excerpt from the email, “2or3a” sent Monday, April 28, 2003 5:19 AM:
N.B. that three dots ... represents
a lacuna, or gap. Contrary to almost all English translations I think 'two or
three' does not refer to those who speak in tongues or to prophets, but to
statements (logoi). The three lines successively comprise Latin, partly
shape-based choices of letters available in ascii and mostly conventional
orthoepic equivalents (as in medical terminology or earlier, more correct than
now scientific nomenclature).
1st Corinthians 14,19:
... sed in ecclesia volo quinque verba sensu meo loqui
... alla ev ekklhcia 0elw nevte logouc tw voi mou lalhcai,
... alla en ecclesia thelo pente logus to noi mu lalesai,
but in assembly I prefer five words with the mind of me to utter,
Here's the background use of logoc = logos 'statement' that first made me ask
if it would work well to supply it with the words 'two or three' below.
Logoc = logos does not signify essentially a detached 'word' in the sense of
what's in between any two empty spaces in our line. It signifies what someone
had to say or has to say. It can be long. The writer of 'Acts' calls all
of 'Luke' his npwtoc logoc = protos logos 'former treatise'. In rhetoric it may
have the sense of a sentence, in logic of a premise.
ut et alios instruam quam decem milia verborum in lingua.
iva kai allouc kathxhcw, h mupiouc logouc ev glwcch. ...
hina cae allus catecheso, e myrius logus en glosse. ...
that also others I may instruct, than 10,000 statements in a tongue. ...
Again, logos = logoc appears as an object of 'utter', or 'speak'.
1st Corinthians 14,24-31:
Si autem omnes prophetent,
Eav de navtec npofhteuwciv,
Ean de pantes prophetevosin,
But if all prophesy (function like an Israelite nabhiy'),
intret autem quis infidelis vel idiota, ...
eicel0h de tic anictoc h idiwthc, ...
iselthe de tis apistos e idiotes, ...
then may enter some 'outsider' (= unbeliever) or 'unofficial' guy, ...
Idiwthc = idiotes someone who does not hold a public position or enjoy
professional status, about like our 'commoner'. It works about like
'Christian' = chretien in medieval France, where those concerned about the
peculiar behavior of a retarded boy would be reassured by being told that he
was just an 'ordinary citizen' = chretien, hence our English word 'cretin'.
Cum convenitis unusquisque vestrum psalmum habet, doctrinam habet,
Otav cuvepxhc0e, ekactoc yalmov exei, didaxhv exei,
Hotan synerchesthe, hecastos psalmon echei, didachen echei,
When you assemble, each person a psalm brings, a lesson brings,
The habet = exei = echei 'has' it to present.
apocalypsin habet, linguam habet, interpretationem habet ...
anokaluyiv exei, glwccav exei, epmhveiav exei ...
apocalypsin echei, glossan echei, hermenian echei ...
a revelation brings, a tongue brings, a translation brings ...
In my opinion any of these things had could be termed a logoc = logos. A logos
does not refer to a detached 'word', but to a coherent statement on one
subject, maybe about like our word 'paragraph'. The pericopes in Matthew
through John, for example, were sometimes termed logoi.
In the Vulgate Greek words transliterated into Latin abound.
Sive lingua quis loquitur,
Eite glwcch tic lalei,
Eite glosse tis lalei,
If in a tongue someone (he or she) speaks,
Any indefinite pronoun leaves the way open for more than one to act as
described, but nevertheless the form of expression here features, or pictures,
only one individual. The 'two or three' therefore seems to refer to what the
one, lone individual speaks. Quis is singular. Loquitur is singular. Tic = tis
is singular. Lalei is singular.
secundum duos aut ut multum tres et per partes,
kata duo h to nleictov tpeic, kai ava mepoc,
kata dyo e to pleiston treis, kai ana meros,
by two or at the maximum three, and singly,
What words should be understood, or mentally supplied, with the 'two or three'?
Let him speak two at a time or at the most three, and that one by one. A plural
subject in the previous verse would have read tivec lalouci = tines lalusi.
Above Paul had already mentioned 'five utterances'. The Latin translator could
have had duos in mind as agreeing with an ellipsed logos or sermones.
et unus interpretetur.
kai eic diepmhveuetw.
cae heis dihermeneveto.
and let one person translate [completely].
The writer proceeds with the concept of a single individual, for he specified
eic = heis 'one'. An accurate account of the statement requires us to admit
that only two individuals have been introduced to this point, the one who
presents the tongue and the one who interprets it.
Si autem non fuerit interpres, taceat in ecclesia
Eav de mh h diepmhveuthc, cigatw ev ekklhcia,
Ean de me e dihermeneutes, sigato en ecclesia,
Again, interpres is singular. Dihermeneutes is singular. Sigato is singular.
Taceat is singular. This focusses the mind even more strongly on the singular
tic = tis, the subject of tic lalei = tis lalei. If there is not a second
'one' < eic > unus to handle this job, let him or her remain quiet in the
assembly.
sibi autem loquatur et Deo.
eautw de laleitw kai tw 0ew.
heauto de lalito cae to theo.
and rather to oneself let him or her speak and to God.
Again the heauto is singular. The lalito is singular.
Now, it is true enough that the subsequent statements about prophets was not
similarly expressed in the singular.
Prophetae autem duo aut tres dicant et ceteri diiudicent.
npofhtai de duo h tpeic laleitwcav kai oi alloi diakpivetwcav.
Prophetae de dyo e tris lalitosan cae h[o]i all[o]i diacrinetosan.
and prophets two or three must (= leet them) speak and the rest evaluate.
It would seem unlikely nonetheless that the 'two or three' would differ in
meaning from the sense that it had above, with regard to speaking in a tongue.
Its import will have been already fixed in accordance with what it meanat
regarding the speaking in tongues. When a prophet speaks, he must one at a time
present at most three statements and offer an opportunity to have it confirmed
or denied by any other present.
Quod si alii revelatum fuerit sedenti,
Eav de allw anokaluf0h ka0hmevw,
Ean de allo apocalyphthe cathemeno,
But if to a second person information comes, i.e. who is seated,
Alii is singular. Sedenti is singular. Allo is singular. And cathemeno is
singular. This reverts to singular forms, and therefore, with regard to any one
prophet, it creates an analogy to the tongue-speaker and interpreter above.
This strongly reinforces what has been said above about the likelihood
that the two or three refers to statements. For any one prophet who offers two
or three statements, the next in the audience to volunteer anything will have
been only a second individual. Perhaps Paul insinuated a plural of
prophets, because he found prophetic ministry more to be desired than tongues
in the assembly.
prior taceat.
o npwtoc cigatw.
ho protos sigato.
the original speaker must refrain.
Prior is singular. Taceat is singular. Protos is singular. And sigato is
singular.
Potestis enim omnes per singulos prophetare,
Duvac0e gap ka0' eva navtec npofhteueiv,
Dynasthe gar cath' hena pantes prophetevein,
Since you can all one by one prophesy,
This seems to reinforce the view that 'two or three' refers to logoi, because,
if the intent had been to limit the number of speakers, why would he observe
that all persons in the assembly might have their turn? Nevertheless, ca0' eva
= kath' hena could mean "one utterance at a time." But, even if it
does, the navtec = pantes 'all' leaves the impression that they all, not just
two or three, could participate.
ut omnes discant et omnes exhortentur.
iva navtec mav0avwciv kai navtec napakalwvtai.
hina pantes manthanosin cae pantes paracalontai.
so that all may be informed and all may be encouraged.
[278] Didache 11:10-11.
[279] Hebrews 8:6.
[280] I Corinthian s13:9.
[281] Jeremiah 18:7-11
[282] II Kings 20:1-11.
[283] Romans 12:6.
[284] Numbers 16:12.
[285] I Samuel 3.
[286] John 11:46-53.
[287] Matthew 28:18-20.
[288] James 1:22
[289] I Peter 2:2
[290] I Corinthians 12:28.
[291] Psalm 119:11.
[292] Acts 17:2, 17:17, 18:4, 18:19, 19:8-9
[293] Matthew 22:46.
[294] Luke 2:46-47
[295] Galatians 1:8.
[296] Acts 20:29-30.
[297] Jude 1:12,
[298] II Peter 2:13.
[299] Revelation 2.
[300] II Corinthians 11:12-33.
[301] I Timothy 1:19-20
[302] Romans 10:9-10, I Corinthians 15:12-20,
[303] Acts 20:29-30.
[304] Titus 1:20-11.
[305] I Timothy 3:2.
[306] Acts 29:31.
[307] I Peter 5:13.
[308] I Peter 5:3.
[309]MENTORING LEADERS IN HIERARCHICAL SOCIETIES. George Patterson and Galen Currah. Copyright 2003. Posted to NTCP discussion list on Wednesday, November 19, 2003.
[310] I Corinthians 9:19-23.
[311]Ralph D. Winter, ed. Perspectives On the World Christian Movement: A Reader. William Carey Library, Pasedena, CA, USA. Copyright 2003. p. D--89. From an article entitled The Spontaneous Multiplication of Churches by George Patterson.
[312] I Corinthians 3:1-2.
[313] Ephesians 6:4, Deuteronomy 6:7; 11:19,
[314] I Corinthians 14:31, 24.
[315] Romans 12:4-8, I Peter 4:10-11.
[316] Tertullian's Apology. (Roberts-Donaldson) Translated by S. Thewall. Available at: <http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/tertullian01.html.> Emphasis added.
[317] This is the opinion of Bill Thurman, PhD., a retired classics professor: a Greek and Latin scholar.
[318] Matthew 26:30. Mark 14:26.
[319] According to "Bryan" in a private email entitled Re: Congregational Singing? Music in HC? October 6, 2003.
[320] I Corinthians 14:26.
[321] Psalm 22:3.
[322] Matthew 18:20.
[323] I Timothy 2:5.
[324] I Corinthians 14:2-17.
[325] I Corinthians 14:27-28.
[326] I Corinthians 14:27.
[327] I Corinthians 14:23.
[328] Psalm 33:3.
[329] II Corinthians 11:2.
[330] Matthew 13:28.
[331] Matthew 5:29-30.
[332] II Samuel 12:7-15.
[333] I Corinthians 12:21.
[334] Romans 12.
[335] I Corinthians 5:1-3.
[336] I Corinthians 5:3.
[337] Exodus 12:15.
[338] Joshua 7.
[339] Deuteronomy 13:1-5; 17:1-7, 12; 19:11-13. Leviticus 20:10
[340] I Corinthians 10:17.
[341] Matthew 18:17.
[342] I Timothy 1:13.
[343] II Thessalonians 3:14.
[344] I Corinthians 2:10.
[345] Matthew 18:15.
[346] Isaiah 42:3.
[347] Hebrews 12:12.
[348] Romans 6:11-14.
[349] I Corinthians 5:2.
[350] I Corinthians 6:3.
[351] I Corinthians 5:5.
[352] I Timothy 1:20.
[353] Matthew 23:8.
[354] Galatians 1:8.
[355] Romans 2:24.
[356] II Corinthians 2:7.
[357] Proverbs 13:24. Hebrews 12:5-9.
[358] I Corinthians 5:2.
[359] Matthew 7:3.
[360] Matthew 7:15. Matthew 24:11, 24. Mark 13:22. II Peter 2:1. Revelation 2:2.
[361] Ephesians 4:11.
[362] Matthew 7:16.
[363] II Peter 2. Jude.
[364] Jude 1:19.
[365] Matthew 28:19.
[366] John 14:23.
[367] John 15:12, 17.
[368] II Corinthians 11:2.
[369] Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance: See dictionary entry 1173.
[370] Mark 6:21.
[371] Luke 22:21, John 13:28
[372] I Corinthians 14:37.
[373] Genesis 14:18.
[374] Exodus 12:21-51. Leviticus 23. Numbers 9.
[375] Matthew 26:29. Mark 14:25. Luke 22:18.
[376] Revelation 19:9.
[377] I Corinthians 14:21-22.
[378] I Corinthians 1:26.
[379] I Corinthians 11:22.
[380] I Corinthians 11:33.
[381] I Corinthians 12:12.
[382] John 13:18.
[383] Mark 2:26, Acts 11:3.
[384] Mark 2:17.
[385] Acts 10:15.
[386] Galatians 5:2.
[387] I Corinthians 5:5.
[388] Jude 4, 12.
[389] II Peter 2:13. Exodus 12:5. I Corinthians 5:7.
[390] I Corinthians 11:32.
[391] I Corinthians 5:12-13.
[392] I Corinthians 5:6.
[393] Romans 16:23.
[394] I Corinthians 11:20.
[395] I Corinthians 5:11.
[396] Mark 14:22-26. Matthew 26:26-30.
[397] Matthew 26:22.
[398] John 13:23-29.
[399] I Corinthians 11:34.
[400] I Corinthians 14:20-21.
[401] I Corinthians 16:15
[402] I Timothy 3:6.
[403] Matthew 19:23-26. Mark 10:23-26.
[404] Matthew 6:24. Luke 6:13.
[405] Romans 15:26
[406] I Corinthians 1:26-27.
[407] Acts 6:1-6. Acts 2:45; 4:34-35.
[408] II Corinthians 8:15.
[409] Romans 15:26-28. I Corinthians 16:1-3. II Corinthians 8:4-15. Galatians 2:9-10.
[410] I Corinthians 11:22.
[411] I Corinthians 11:30.
[412] I Corinthian s 11:21-22, 33.
[413] Luke 14:13-14.
[414] Mark 6:8-12.
[415] Luke 22:35.
[416] I Corinthians 9:14.
[417] Philippians 4:15-17.
[418] Acts 18:1-3.
[419] Luke 10:4, 22:35-36
[420] I Corinthians 9:18.
[421] Matthew 10:8.
[422] I Corinthians 9:19.
[423]I Corinthians 9:15, II Corinthians 11:7-13.
[424] I Corinthians 9:16-18.
[425] I Timothy 3:3. I Timothy 5:8.
[426] I Timothy 5:3-16.
[427] Genesis 18-19.
[428] Romans 12:13.
[429] I Peter 4:9.
[430] I Timothy 3:2. Titus 1:8.
[431] Ralph D. Winter, ed. Perspectives On the World Christian Movement: A Reader. William Carey Library, Pasedena, CA, USA. Copyright 2003. p. D--93. From an article entitled The Spontaneous Multiplication of Churches by George Patterson.
[432] Steve Atkerson, ed. Ekklesia: To the Roots of Biblical Church Life. New Testament Restoration Foundation, Atlanta, Ga, 2003. Printed 2003.
[433] Luke 12:33-34.
[434] Acts 4:34-37; 2:44-46.
[435] Matthew 23:14.
[436] Acts 6:1-5.
[437] I Timothy 5:3-16.
[438] Acts 11:27-30, I Corinthians 16:1-3, II Corinthians 8, Galatians 2:10, II Corinthians 9, Romans 15:25-32.
[439] II Corinthians 8:14-15.
[440] Romans 15:27.
[441] Matthew 6:1-4.
[442] Acts 3:2-3.
[443] Leviticus 27:30-34.
[444] Deuteronomy 14:22-25.
[445] Deuteronomy 14:26.
[446] Deuteronomy 14:27-29; 26:12-14.
[447] Numbers 18:24-28.
[448] Malachi 1:8-9; 3:8-11.
[449] Matthew 23:23-24, Luke 11:42.
[450] Acts 21:20.
[451] Numbers 6:1-21, Acts 18:18, Acts 21:20-27, Acts 6:7.
[452] Acts 15:1-30, esp. v. 23-29. Acts 21:25.
[453] Genesis 14:18-20, 28:22.
[454] Matthew 15:1-9.
[455] II Corinthians 9:7.
[456] James 3:1.
[457] I Corinthians 9:13-14.
[458] Galatians 3:24.
[459] II Corinthians 9:6.
[460] Romans 14.
[461] I Corinthians 5:10.
[462] I Corinthians 11:31-32
[463] I Timothy 5:19, Matthew 18:15-17.
[464]I Peter 5:2, I Timothy 3:3, Titus 1:7.
[465] I Timothy 6:5.
[466] Acts 13:1; 20:17; 18:22, 20:17, Romans 16:1, I Corinthians 1:1, Colossians 4:16, I Thessalonians 1:1, II Thessalonians 1:1, I Peter 5:3, Revelation 2:1,8, 12, 18; 3:1,7,14.
[467] Acts 21:17-18.
[468] I Corinthians 3:6.
[469] Ephesians 4:2-4.
[470] I Corinthians 12:25
[471] Ephesians 4:16
[472] Acts 2:46; 5:42; 8:3.
[473] Romans 16:4-5
[474] I Corinthians 16:19.
[475] Philemon 1:1-2.
[476] Colossians 4:15.
[477] I Corinthians 14:23. See also 11:17-18, 20, 33.
[478] Romans 16:23. Acts 18:8.
[479] Romans 13:1. I Peter 2:13.
[480] Acts 5:29.
[481] Matthew 10:16.
[482] Genesis 29:15-22. Exodus 22:16-17. I Samuel 18:21-27.
[483] Judges 14:10. Matthew 22:1-14. Luke 14:8-12. John 2:1-11.
[484] Deuteronomy 21:10-14. Judges 21:8-23.
[485] Deuteronomy 25:5-10.
[486] Genesis 2:23-24. Matthew 19:5.
[487] I Corinthians 10:29-33.
[488] I Thessalonians 5:22.