posted
Paul's listing of ministry gifts has been used to create the "professional clergy" idea, and is continuing in many ways in the simple church movement. "Who are the elders?"
But I recently noticed, that if you pull out Paul's parenthetical OT reference in Ephesians 4 it reads as if "each one" is an "apostle, prophet, evangelist or pastor teacher".
Here's the whole thing:
7But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. 8This is why it[a] says: "When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men."[b] 9(What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions[c]? 10He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.) 11It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
Here it is with the explanation removed:
7But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. 11It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
Can it be that every believer should be functioning as "preparers" of the body of Christ? That this is a "one another" verse - as in "building others up according to their need"?
That would fit better with the "royal priesthood" idea. It would also reinforce the idea that every "man of peace" should be held to the eldership standards, rather than seeing eldership as an elite status.
Then, every believer would not be asking, "Am I called to serve God's people as a maturer" but rather, "How can I serve God's people as a maturer?". And we'd would look at each person for which "grace/s" they have instead of "if".
We all have a ministry in the body of Christ but just as in the parable some recieve 5 talents and other but 1. So, we cannot place the burden of all to perform equal with high acheivers or we will end of discouraging them or worse, forcing them into fanaticism.
I believe the scripture you referenced show clearly that not everyone is called to the same duty being given different gifts. There still needs to be those who serve in other capacities such as clerical, grounds-keeping, hospitality, greeters, retainers, etc, etc...
The body has many parts but not all the parts perform the same tasks. There is some overlap just as there should be overlap in the church body so that nothing is deficient.
I would like to see some discussion if this is a new vein. What do others think?
posted
Hey Jeff, do you still have your Jeep? Snow will be a'blowin soon in those parts. We have relatives in Farmville.
Good point you make about 'overlapping' gifts and responsibilities.
LA, you nailed it, sister. The language of Eph 4 is indeed much more inclusive than most ever realize. A better translation would be "He gave gifts to mankind" - not just to men. (verse 8)
I also keep noticing a continual reversion toward hierarchical forms in the teachings of those who have supposedly left such things behind. I'll start something on this lamentable topic asap, whenever I can collect my sources - urls and quotations, you know. Strange thing, huh?
Yes, D, Strange indeed! Our tiny little community has been blessed with many who are very literate in the Bible -- in fact, everyone above age 12 is "competent to minister" to some degree. So, our gatherings feature great discussion, sharing and answers to prayer. Yet, several keep asking, "but who's leading it?" and "What's the plan?" The answer is, of course, "The Holy Spirit is leading it and there is no plan!" but that makes them uncomfortable.
It seems the defining characteristic of God's people here seems to be "fear" fear of doctrinal error, fear of someone bossing them, fear of doing something wrong. But I can't help but wonder if it would be better to move ahead and learn from our mistakes, rather than be paralyzed? Another lesson of the talents was "don't let fear run your life!"
Thank you both for your responses. Glad I'm not the only one who sees the "grace" as being more encompassing!
Call me cautious, but while I do think there is a time to move forward there is also a time to wait. Learning from our mistakes is not always advisable is it? Certainly, if we make mistakes it is good that we learn from them. But perhaps a little wisdom and thought might preserve us from many mistakes. For example, in some cases mistakes have resulted in millennium of consequences. Take the example of Abraham and Sarah whose impatience waiting on God led them to take things into their own hands. Or, the case of Jacob and the birthright. While we should not let fear run our lives we should strive to know God's will before we step out--perhaps presumptuously.
Not sure how you intended your comment regarding fear of doctrinal error to be interpreted but to me that is a big issue. In fact, to lightly regard knowing the truth is to lightly regard knowing Jesus who is Truth. People who are marginally spiritual (aka Christian?) will often say to me, "It doesn't matter where you go to church as long as you go." I disagree. Not all churches are equal. And, it only matters where you go if you wish to know the Truth.
(I guess I should fear if I should not know the truth. But we dishonor God by asking, "What is truth?" Don't we? With the Bible before us and the Holy Spirit as our teacher we can know the truth. The office of the Holy Spirit is to lead us into all truth. But since the language employs the word "lead" I assume we must follow.)
At the same time many, many congregations (churches/denoms) have taken hold of a creed and have refused to progress. They admit that truth is progressive but their faith, apparently, is not. They do not take hold of present truth and therefore languish in old traditions and foundational truths. In some cases they have actually turned around on the Protestant road and marched right back to the mother church. I guess they walked too slowly to follow Jesus and the light grew too dim for them to follow. But they saw the dim glow of man-made embers behind them and decided to go back to Egypt.
The door was open but now that door has closed (and no man can open it) because they did not follow Jesus in His heavenly ministry. If there is any hope for them now it will be on an individual basis. I guess this is one reason so many are leaving the churches. They are tired of the milk. And in many cases the milk is so old by now it has soured.
(BTW, David, Yes, we still have the Jeep. My wife really loves her Jeep. She won't trade up nor let me drive it. She thinks it's her Porsche SUV. With its V8 it can really get up and go! She has over 100k miles on it now. I took it out in the snow to see how it handled and it was very predictable and manageable. But I still wouldn't trust it too far. Ice is ice!)
posted
Many years ago, when I was a single father of four, the Lord showed me clearly that I would ALWAYS be - wherever I went - alone or with others - an Ambassador of the Divine Government of God. I was, alone or with others, ALWAYS The Church. Why? Because I was a "Called out one," The Ekklesia in Greek, appointed to establish that government wherever I went. As you may already know, the original Ekklesia was a council of Roman men sent into a conquered territory to teach the conquered people HOW to become citizens of the Roman Empire. Get the similarity?
As "The Church," I was ever in the presence of the watchful, compassionate, guiding eye of my Elder. His name? Jesus, the Christ. He is the Anointed Head of The Church. He led my comings and my goings and loved me without condition. He trained me how to be a spiritual man and, by His example, taught me how to minister to others. In so doing, they would come to know their King.
In the House Church Movement, as I read the Blogs and chat room comments, far and away the most revealing comments I read have to do with Church leadership. The arguments on both sides are quite compelling and convincing. Human elders? Freedom from elders? Women elders? The arguments go on and on. In our Adamic nature, it seems we WANT a leader. It reminds me of 1 Samuel when the elders of Israel told the prophet Samuel that they wanted a king like all the other nations. The had a theocracy - God was their ruler - but wanted a leader they could elect (kings aren't elected; they're born). If they could elect him, they could UN-elect him. they could overthrow him if they so desired. God agreed and gave them Saul, but NOT without warning them that a king would take their sons to fight his wars, their daughters to do his bidding, and would tax them silly. They weren't phased by the negatives and God gave them their lousy king. Things were never the same after that, that is, not until The Church came into being. Even that hasn't gone exactly as planned.
Personally, I can see the necessity for such eldering individual leaders - those who are mature in the faith who are prone to compassionate, prayerful servant-style oversight. However, I can't help but wonder if we take comfort in such human leadership, frankly, because of our own lack of intimacy with the person of Jesus. In great part, I don't think most Christians really KNOW Him. We have great knowledge ABOUT Him from the Scriptures, even memorizing the Bible. We believe in Him but the devil does as much... and trembles! Sadly, far too many so-called "elders" are not functioning according to Scripture. Instead, they have "Elder meetings" that are nothing more than business functions. Compare this to the early Church in Jerusalem, where we discover that the apostles were the elders, the first human leaders of the Church. In Acts 6, we are told that there arose a problem in the Church (do NOT envision a building when you read that word) regarding the distribution of food to the widows. This matter was brought to the apostles, who urged the church to appoint seven men to serve as a solution to the problem. But the apostles said on that occasion that their own task was two-fold: "We will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word" (Acts 6:4 KJV), i.e., to discover the mind of the Lord. Sound like YOUR elders? Elders...does that sound like YOUR get-togethers? My own experience with "elders" - and I have been one so entitled (though not functioning according to my biblical model) - was that these were the CEO's of the institution we referred to as "church" and, far too often, wound up doing nothing short of an all-male gossip-session. Another group with whom I "eldered" rarely spent mpre than three minutes in prayer and rarely met at all.
Getting back to the Elder of my Church, King Jesus, just what kind of Elder is He anyway? Does He meet the qualifications we see listed in 1 Timothy 3:1-6? The tasks of these elders mentioned here, like the apostles in the church at Jerusalem, were two-fold: (A) the ministry of the Word; teaching, preaching, studying, learning the Word of God and (B) prayer, as they were to discover the will of the Lord Jesus, the Head of the Church, who was ever-present and ready to direct the activities of the ekklesia through the Spirit of Christ.
Here's how Jesus measures up to the biblical description of Elder:
The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of elder, he desires a noble task. (1 Timothy 3:1). That sounds like Jesus.
Now an elder must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher, no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money. (1 Timothy 3:2-3). Is He the husband of but one wife? Yes, she is the Bride of Christ and we are all her. She is a living organism, NOT a manmade organization, no matter how we attempt to make her so. He certainly meets all the other criteria as well. He's no drunkard but He has been known to turn water into wine!
He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church? (1 Timothy 3:4-5) As a parent, His children are downright saintly! In fact, we have been made holy. ...must not be a recent convert, or he may be puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. (1 Timothy 3:6) Recent convert? He started this whole thing!
Yes, as a shepherd, Jesus is perfect, even being referred to as "The Good Shepherd" by many.
So, you see, each of us - INDIVIDUALLY - had better have an established relationship with Jesus Christ, our High Priest and perfect Elder. If we are going to have human elders, they'd better meet the standards set in Scripture or else don't bother with them. In such cases, Jesus alone will have to do. In Acts 16, we see examples of Paul going around church planting but there are no references to the establishment of a Church government as we know it. Perhaps such individuals were appointed later, when Paul said they were ready, or they were raised up sovereignly by the Holy Spirit Himself from the midst of the Church (He's well able, you know).
I read a story about a woman in India who prayer-walked a village and ultimately established 50 churches in homes. No mention of elders in any of them.
I heard another story about a 17-year old Chinese gitl who was considered the "pastor" of 20,000 people. Again, no mention of an eldership team. Doesn't mean there wasn't one or that God didn't raise one up.
Apparently, there does NOT need to be any elders but Jesus present in order for The Church to do the work of the ministry - EVEN when we're all alone. I would not flee from the concept, but I certainly woud resist the urge to appoint anybody simply because they were old, rich, or had an imposing demeanor.
My opinion? I would NEVER recommend anyone as an elder who was not "raised up" from within the ranks of House Church. The danger exists that your group would wind up a mini-Church, exchanging pews for couches, slipping right back into Egypt, if you will.
posted
Sorry for hi-jacking but I have question on Eph 4:8 "When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men". I supposed it's from Psalm 68:18. However, Psalm 68:18 has "he has received gifts for men", not "gave gifts to men". Why? Yes, I have asked the same question many times, many places before - not sure if I have ever asked here in this forum though.
Interesting question. Hope this is a quick detour. I did a little research and the Hebrew words are as follows and can be translated as shown under each word.
code:
LAQACH MATTANAH ADAM ------------- ------------- ------------- to take gift man get mankind fetch lay hold of seize receive acquire buy bring marry take a wife snatch take away
So there are many ways this could be translated. But the tense is qal/perfect so perhaps the best translations are as follows:
1) to take, take in the hand 2) to take and carry along 3) to take from, take out of, take, carry away, take away 4) to take to or for a person, procure, get, take possession of, select, choose, take in marriage, receive, accept 5) to take up or upon, put upon 6) to fetch 7) to take, lead, conduct 8) to take, capture, seize 9) to take, carry off 10) to take (vengeance)
To me it seems that in the NT Paul is interpreting Psalm 68:18 as item #4--to take for a person. So then if Christ received gifts on behalf of mankind it stands to reason that He would deliver them to His church. Wouldn't this understanding agree with Ephesians 4:8? We might also say he accepted the gifts as a man, our brother, the last Adam--being that He is the only one worthy to receive any gifts by virtue of His perfect obedience to God's law.
It's interesting to note that the language employed in Eph 4:8 suggests that these gifts given to men were bestowed as wages. One could say that we have already been paid for our labors by the blood of Jesus.
It's late. Maybe someone will run with this, opening a new thread to expound on it.
Email this page to someone.
