Tag: elders

Mystery of the church

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed – Chapter 13 – Distinctives within the body of Christ

Mystery of the church

[Bible references: Acts 2:42-47; 1 Corinthians 12:17, 27; 2 Corinthians 5:20; 1 Peter 2:9]

What is the church?

As commonly used in current times, the “church” is a building to go to. In biblical terms it referred to an assembly of believers (called out ones).[1] How we understand this idea can influence our behavior. There are a few biblical metaphors that describe the church.

  • The body of Christ – This metaphor brings the ideas: that Christ is the head of the church, and we are His presence in the world, that each of us has a unique role in bringing Christ’s presence in the world. Our unique roles are distinguished by the spiritual gifts imparted to each of us to enable us to build each other in our faith.
  • A holy priesthood – This metaphor brings the idea that we have a relationship with God and can act as intermediaries.
  • A temple – This metaphor describes each individual as a stone in the temple and that it is all of us together who make up the temple, that is, the place where God resides on earth.
  • Ambassadors – This metaphor highlights our role in representing God’s to those not reconciled to God.

In the beginning, the organization of the church was not given in detail but seemed to be a cohesive group that “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer … had everything in common … broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts.”

Is the church more than a Jewish sect?

[Bible references: Romans 11:17; Ephesians 3:6]

At first the church was mainly a Jewish sect. Jesus focused his ministry within the borders of Israel and his disciples were mainly Jewish. After Jesus died, that situation did not change much until Jesus took definitive steps with Peter and Paul to reach the non-Jews (Gentiles). Until that happened, the church mainly consisted of Jews who happened to also be believers, and as Jews, kept up many Jewish practices. But when Gentiles started to be included, there was the question of whether they needed to become Jewish to belong. It took a council of the church to determine that Gentiles were not bound by the Jewish practices. But even after that council, the debate persisted.[2]

In the Old Testament, we are told that Israel will be a blessing to the rest of the world, but it was not revealed just how that would happen. In Ephesians 3, the apostle Paul explains that “through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.” And then in Romans 11, Paul explains that the Gentiles were “grafted” into the family of believing Jews, of whom Abraham is the root, so that the Gentiles may receive all the same blessings.

What is the visible and invisible church?

The invisible church consists of all those, past, present, and future, who have put their trust in Christ. Only God knows who they all are. The visible church is the groups of people gathered together as communities. Both believers and unbelievers may be in the visible church.

Some congregations/ denominations are very strict about how to interpret scripture and/or have a limited view of forgiveness, and so would put limits on who they would consider to be in the church.[3] Other congregations/denominations have an extreme view that all of society should be under Christian rule[4] and then misused Luke 14:23, “Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in,” that they would even resort to torture in order to persuade a people to make a “confession of faith.” Then there are those who think that everyone will ultimately be saved.[5]

Who has authority in the church?

As the church grew and spread throughout the Roman Empire, the natural development was to “institutionalize” the church, trying to make the church more effective with more formal organization. While the apostles were still alive, it was possible to unify the church around the apostles, but of course that was temporary.

Over time, different governance models emerged within the church as there was no model within the church except for the synagogue. In the episcopal model, there is a single leader, or bishop, who oversees a group of congregations and selects the pastors for each congregation. In the presbyterian model, there is a “plurality” of elders, who oversee a congregation or a group of congregations – the congregation may elect their pastor, but the Presbytery has to approve whoever is selected. In the congregational model, the congregation itself is its ultimate overseer and selects its pastor.

Some congregations are independent from one another, and some are affiliated with other congregations. The affiliation may be a denomination where there is strong oversight by the denomination over the individual congregations, but some affiliations are mainly an association for the purpose of sharing resources, but the association has no oversight function.

Some congregations emphasize the importance of maintaining apostolic authority by maintaining the transfer of authority of the apostles and trace the leadership of the church from one generation to the next beginning with the apostles.[6] The Roman Catholic denomination further emphasizes their authority is transferred from the apostle Peter, whom they think was given the most authority from Jesus. Other denominations will maintain that they are apostolic because of their faithfulness to scripture and therefore to the apostolic teachings.

One issue related to authority within the church is related to gender roles. Due to apparent conflicts in some Bible passages, two main views have emerged regarding the role of women in the church On one side, there is no restriction of ministry roles because of gender, but on the other side, women are restricted from any role in which they have spiritual authority over men.

What is the role of elder, bishop, deacon, priest?

The New Testament doesn’t clearly specify how to organize a congregation and that has resulted in congregations organizing themselves in a variety of ways. The New Testament does show examples of elders (aka bishops) serving as spiritual leaders of a congregation and deacons serving the physical needs of the congregation. Priests, in the Old Testament performed duties for God on behalf of the other people. The New Testament talks about Christ being the high priest for all of us but then talks about all Christians as being priests since we all have direct access to God and our role as Christians is to present ourselves as a living sacrifice to God.

The first denominations that emerged did keep the title of a priest, no longer offering the Old Testament sacrifices but rather now sharing the sacrament of the Last Supper. The Orthodox and Catholic traditions consider the bishops who oversee the priests to be the elders of the denomination. The priests are chosen to serve the sacraments, although they also serve in other ways with deacons helping the priests in carrying out the liturgy in the worship service or serving in other ways as well. In this context, the spiritual leadership of bishops or priests is recognized by the use of honorific titles such as Reverend or Father.

Protestant traditions vary. Anglican and Episcopal congregations retain the title of priest, while in other Protestant traditions congregations are led by pastors or elders.[7]

In some congregations, the pastor is considered to be the elder and the lay leaders are considered to be deacons. In other congregations the pastor is considered to be a teaching elder (if that title is used) while the lay leaders are considered to be ruling elders, or just elders. Some congregations are governed primarily by the pastor, some by a group (plurality) of elders, and some by the congregation itself.

What is the function of a creed?

As explained at the beginning of this chapter, there is much of God that is beyond comprehension. So, when God revealed himself through the prophets, the revelations were more in the form of stories and the interactions of God with the world than a spelled-out theology. That type of revelation requires us to do some of amount of interpretation as we try to better understand God, and that process of interpretation has been the function of the church at large. However, some individuals in the church came up with teachings that seemed to be more than minor differences and actually opposed the more accepted teachings of the church. Those ideas were considered to be heretical. Over time, to combat the heresies that arose, the church developed abbreviated teachings of the church called creeds.

As conflicts within the church developed, different sets of creeds started to emerge. The Protestant section of the church caused even more divergence with the creation of more detailed creedal statements called “confessions of faith,” while other congregations claimed to be non-creedal, stating that the Bible as a whole was their creed because creedal statements are limited and could never present a comprehensive theology of the church.

How can broken people within broken congregations can be instruments of God?

[Bible references: Romans 7:7-25; 1 Timothy 5:10; 2 Timothy 2:21; 3:17; Ephesians 2:10; Colossians 1:10; Hebrews 13:21]

In this time between the Kingdom has come and is yet to come in full, even those of us who trust in Christ have wills that are internally divided between the desire to do good and the desire to do evil. Despite our brokenness, God still desires to use us to accomplish His will on earth. He did not remove the mandates given to us back in Genesis. We may be broken instruments, but God knows how to use broken instruments.

Is the church an Organism or an Organization?

[Bible references: Matthew 28:16-20; 1 Timothy 3:1-6; Titus 1:6-9; 1 Peter 5:1-3]

When Jesus gave the command to “go into all the world” he didn’t specify how to do it, particularly how they should organize themselves to do it. They were to be his body, that is, his hands, feet, legs, eyes, ears, etc. on the earth to continue to do what he had begun. He left no instructions that we know of on how to organize themselves to complete the mission.

The apostles did have the model of synagogue that they could refer to.[8] The first people they reached out to were already in synagogues. But the Bible makes no specific mention of them using that model to organize themselves. In the apostles’ letters to churches and individuals that we have preserved in the Bible, there are some details from which various organizational models have been proposed, ranging from congregation choosing their own leaders to leaders over the congregations choosing leaders for each congregation.

What the Bible is clear on, is the qualifications for those who would lead the church. Some of those qualifications are to be blameless, even tempered, hospitable, to love what is good, to be disciplined, and to encourage others with sound doctrine. The biblical focus seems not to be on how leaders organize their congregations but on the qualifications that those leaders should have.

[1] Biblehub. “1577. Ekklesia” Bible Hub biblehub.com/Greek/1577.htm

[2] Marcos, Juan. Gutierrez, Bejarano. “The Judaisms of Jesus’ Followers” (Chapter 10, The Church Fathers and Jesus Oriented Judaisms) Yaron Publishing, 2017. Nazarenes held orthodox beliefs except in their adherence to Jewish law. Not deemed heretical until the fourth century. Ebionites, possibly a splinter group from the Nazarenes held that circumcision is necessary for salvation.

[3] This “rigorist” viewpoint was held by various people such as the “Novationists” (third century) and “Donatists” (fourth century).

[4] This idea is known as Christendom. Mere Orthodoxy mereorthodoxy.com/christendom-1200-words-give-take/

[5] Encyclopedia Britannica, “Universalism” Encyclopedia Britannia www.britannica.com/place/Universalism

[6] Encyclopedia Britannia “Apostolic succession” Encyclopedia Britannia www.britannica.com/topic/apostolic-succession

[7] Whitaker, Alexander. “The Protestant Problem with Priesthood” The North American Anglican 8 June 2020 northamanglican.com/the-protestant-problem-with-priesthood; Patheos “Leadership”

[8] Burtchaell, James Tunstead. “From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices in the Earliest Christian Communities” Cambridge University Press 1992 (pp.349-352)

Reflect

The quality of church governance is more dependent on the quality of the leaders than the type of governance structure. What qualities do you think church leaders should have?

Observe

Read 1 Corinthians 12:17, 27; 2 Corinthians 5:20; 1 Peter 2:9. How does the different metaphors for the church help you to understand the church?

No detailed strategic plan, but promises and presence

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed – Chapter 12 – Launching the church

No detailed strategic plan, but promises and presence

[Bible references: Genesis 12:1-4; Matthew 13:15; 26:56; 26:69-74; 28:16-20; Mark 16:1-3; John 20:19; 12:31-36; Acts 1:4-9]

When Jesus had ascended to heaven, he had left a group of bewildered disciples who had no idea about the kind of enterprise they were going to launch. They were all missing pieces of the puzzle. Although Jesus had been explicit about his suffering and dying and resurrecting, the disciples did not fully grasp what had happened until they witnessed his appearance after the resurrection. A few days before his crucifixion, when he told about the death he would die, i.e., “when I am lifted up” which people knew meant crucifixion, the people protested saying they knew that the Law said the Christ remains forever, so how could that be?

Even the chosen apostles were unprepared. Upon Jesus being arrested, they fled and hid and, in the case of Peter, even denied knowing Jesus. They fearfully gathered behind locked doors, not knowing their next steps. Even those women who were close to Jesus thought they needed to anoint his deceased body. The words of the prophet Isaiah, “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes and understand with their heart,” seemed to apply just as fully to Jesus’ closest disciples.

What the evidence displays is that the program and order of Christian communities originate in direct continuity with the synagogue communities of Israel … These communities had assemblies, elders, presiding elders, deacons and a full program of worship, common policy-making, social welfare and interurban alliances. They lacked the authorization to govern themselves on behalf of the empire. But in other respects they developed patterns of community organization that were traditional to their Jewish origins and members.[1]

Even after his resurrection, when Jesus appeared again, he apparently did not give any instructions about how to organize the church, particularly for the next 2000+ years. The evidence we do have shows that early church organizational structure was based on the organizational structure of the synagogue. In fact, the first explicitly Christian assemblies were split offs from the Jewish assemblies. What they did have, and what they and their successors did build on, was the liturgical and governmental structure of the synagogue.

Jesus instigated no characteristic new organization or anarchy among those who shared faith in him. They proceeded from where they found themselves. And they found themselves in the synagogue. The synagogue became the church, not by dint of a new social format, but in virtue of new convictions within its members. It developed and adapted and consolidated and searched for its own authenticity. We claim here only that to study the energetic development we must know that it proceeded form the organization of the synagogue. [2]

In fact, there seemed to be some hints that the final consummation of the kingdom would occur in their earthly lifetimes. The main preparation of his disciples seems to have been spending time with Jesus, listening to Jesus’ descriptions of the kingdom of God and seeing (and sometimes participating with) Jesus in the inbreaking of the Kingdom through teaching, healing, compassion, and casting out demons.

After the resurrection Jesus spent times with various groups of his disciples during the next forty days. Then just before he was to “ascend to heaven,” he gave his apostles one last charge. “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth. Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Before he was to visibly leave the earth, he had given the promise to be with them … always. The living God was not going to be present in a physical body nor would the living God leave any instructions in a written document, instead the living God would be present by means of the Holy Spirit.

[1] Burtchaell, James Tunstead. “From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices in the Earliest Christian Communities” Cambridge University Press 1992 (pp. 334-336)

[2] Burtchaell, James Tunstead. “From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices in the Earliest Christian Communities” Cambridge University Press 1992 (pp.349-352)

Pharisees

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed– Chapter 10 – The Class of Apparitions

Pharisees

[Bible references: Matthew 5:20; Luke 13:31’ John 3:1-15]

The Pharisees developed out of the scribes who were copying the writings of Moses and, in doing so, were concerned with knowledge of the law, as well the writing of the prophets who came after Moses and the traditions of elders (rabbis). They were also concerned with how to interpret the law to make applicable to everyday life and there were many teachers of the law who wrote commentaries on the law, and the Pharisees also studied these commentaries. The people identified as rabbis came from this group.

The Pharisees became more identified with the everyday people, as opposed to the Sadducees who were identified with the wealthy ruling class. It is not known exactly when the Pharisees were identified as a group but may have happened as their opposition to the teachings of the Sadducees developed.

Jesus had a lot of interactions with the Pharisees. Most of what is recorded in scripture is confrontational, but the dynamics were more nuanced and could be misunderstood. By the times of Jesus, there were two main schools of rabbinic thought: the rigorist school of thought, led by Shammai the Elder, insisted on getting every detail right, particularly in the area of cleanliness, and was beyond the possibility of normal Jews to live out; the humanist school of thought, led by Hillel, was more intent on getting the spirit of the law right and was therefore within the realm of normal Jews.[1]

Another nuance had to do with the normal culture of conflict within Judaism (after all, ‘Israel’ means ‘wrestles with God’). It would have been normal for the scribes and Pharisees to question this new teacher, Jesus, and test his knowledge to see if he knew what he was talking about, although there may be a question about their motives – was the testing done to gain understanding or was the testing done to try to discredit Jesus. We shouldn’t forget the time that some Pharisees warned Jesus about Herod’s plot to kill him.

[1] Johnson, Paul. “A History of the Jews” Harper Perennial 1987 (p 127)

Observe

Read John 3:1-15. A closer reading of scripture shows that Jesus did not just have a confrontational relationship with the Pharisees but had a more nuanced relationship. This can be particularly seen with Jesus’ interaction with Nicodemus. Describe the type of interaction between Nicodemus and Jesus.