There is one body and one Spirit, just as you have been called to one glorious hope for the future. Ephesians 4
Joyful family meetings with children of all sizes. Not a problem...
Our Lord - did he not entreat us to enter into his Kingdom as a child?
This caring couple is devoted to restoring marriages as well. Their ministry is called: Marriage after God.
I haven't read Hauerwas since the early 2000s. My last awareness of his work was Resident Aliens, which he wrote with William Willimon. I found Hauerwas' mindset in that book to be encouraging, prophetic, and a clarion call to change our ways. When asked to review Hauerwas' newest book, Jesus Changes Everything, I thought, "Wow, I wonder what he might have to say now."
For those unfamiliar with Hauerwas, he is not an Anabaptist in the birthright sense. Hauerwas is an American Protestant theologian, ethicist, and public intellectual.1 He taught at the University of Notre Dame. Eventually, he moved to Duke University. Born in 1940 in Texas to a bricklayer, his formative life wasn't a cakewalk. He was educated at Southwestern University, Yale, and the University of Edinburgh. Among his influences are Aristotle, Søren Kierkegaard, John Howard Yoder, and Michel Foucault. Hauerwas is a prodigious writer.
So why should Anabaptists be interested in Hauerwas? First, I think he gets two kingdoms in ways birthright Anabaptists have either forgotten or they’ve not plumbed the depths of for themselves. People born in the stream of Anabaptism hear "two-kingdoms" spoken of like an old-fashioned Pentecostal is conditioned to hearing and accepting thunderous "praise the lord" or "amen" every time a point is made at church. These touch points in some cases are "buzzwords" to which we’ve given little thought. However, for researchers like Hauerwas and myself, "two kingdoms" is like the pearl of great price, mentioned in Matthew 13:45-46. We both found this terminology later in our lives and sold all the former understandings to embrace this point that divides belief in a belief from a lived reality. Secondly, Hauerwas spent time with one of the most preeminent thinkers of the 20th century. Even though John Howard Yoder was later disgraced, the Anabaptist point of view was communicated. Hauerwas has been among the Bruderhof, though I am unsure of the exact depth of involvement.
I am not a light reader! When I read a book, oftentimes, it isn't worth passing on to others. I mark it up, bend page corners, and finally copy significant details into a database to use later. Thus, it takes me a bit.
I liked this book first because of what it said, which we will get to in a minute. Its trim size is a nifty 5 x 7 inches. It doesn't look commanding, like a tome from Dostoevsky or Dallas Willard. People will like this volume because it is approachable. Hauerwas' is straightforward as if he were talking to a high school student. Thus, Hauerwas' delivery is axiomatic. The content is like a lush pasture in the Spring. One feels enveloped by the writer, not smothered by intellect or pushiness. Chapters are crisp, rarely beyond 3-5 pages.
Hauerwas starts talking about the kingdom of God almost without any more introduction than we would get if we read scripture directly. But then he weaves modern stories into the fray as if to say somebody else understood the import. The kingdom of God is about "following Jesus" with a reckless abandon that shows itself in contrast to the ways of men. In the first chapter, he relates the story of Koinonia Farms, an interracial experiment in Georgia of the 1950s. A pair of brothers, Clarence and Robert Jordan, became divided over applying the New Testament teaching in real life over just observing and appreciating it as nice sounding.
How many people do we know who appreciate the Bible or even the New Testament but can't find the fortitude to apply it in real life? I suppose we could label such as hypocrisy. But it illustrates many we know—even within Anabaptism—who only give lip service to the truth. Hauerwas is laying an axe to that specific tree, which is a reality that is accepted and allowed in many places today.
Hauerwas maintains a full-court press against the idealism of religious passivity—which deals in platitudes and smiles—while denying entry into the fracas of life as Jesus' disciple. If you follow Jesus, you won't get a crook on your nose by looking out the screen door. But you will get nicked up by stepping out from behind the safety of that screen door into the free-for-all of the world. It is only in the fracas of the world that contrast will ever take shape as the fruit of God's Spirit is illustrated. It is borne out in our lives and interactions with the unregenerate world. Hauerwas borrows Bonhoeffer, who said it (faith) is a matter of being "dragged out of our relative security into a life of absolute insecurity—that is, in truth, into the absolute security and safety of the fellowship of Jesus."2
Hauerwas encourages us to come out from the safety of "church" (a little safety nest we've created for ourselves), conflating it with what we see as Ekklesia in the New Testament. Jesus—and Stanley Hauerwas—are asking us to wade out into the ocean of what Jesus wants to do where our security is Jesus himself. We've made a panacea of "church" experience, whereas Jesus wants us to be His contrast to a world bent on evil and going down the tubes. This can't be done by navel-gazing in pews in the fortress of timber, shingles, brick, and mortar.
Hauerwas exposes our anemic view of love. "If Christ was but a preacher of love, one wonders how he could have ever ended on a cross – for who is going to object to that kind of preaching? He is nailed to the cross because his love is the revelation of God's righteousness, which brings pain and change and calls us to extend the have to those we cannot seem to love."3 Wow! What an exposé of churchianity today, even within the better end of it in conservative Anabaptism? We prefer our fences, mutual admiration, and folks who look like us to wading out into the world to love those who may be unlovable, but certainly, folks we wouldn't usually choose to love.
Again, Hauerwas is cutting off the limb we commonly hang out upon. Contrast means that there is a difference, it can be detected, and that the difference is present to that which it contrasts. This is the problem for most forms of Christianity, which hole up in buildings whose constituents never seem to differentiate themselves from the world other than in exteriors and talk. Hauerwas points to this issue. Much radicalness in our circles stops at "what we don't do." We've conflated radicalness with we don't dress like the world, do "entertainment," or drink, with thinking we’ve upheld the radicalness of Jesus and our forefathers, who both paid a heavy price for being quite different than we’ve become.
Throughout the book, Hauerwas presses the idea of an "alternative social ethic"—the kingdom of God. As Anabaptists, we believe the kingdom of God is a now reality (as well as a greater eventuality). However, Hauerwas challenges even Anabaptist with the living of it. "What kind of order was Jesus talking about? What kind of social alternative? This was a voluntary society: you could not be a citizen of it simply by being born into it… This was a society with no second-generation members.4 This is a tough word for most conservative of modern Anabaptists who commonly lean on adding to the faith is just raising a family in the church community.
Hauerwas shares in relation to this theme, "To be a disciple of Jesus is to be grafted into a new family that Christ has constituted."5
But how many "new disciples" come into our circles this way?
Hauerwas continues, "The kingdom of God grows by witness and conversion."6 Sections like this will prove to be an admonition to those in Anabaptist circles who have relegated "witness" to the way we live, think everyone sinful will admire and come running. Yet when we read Matt. 28:19-20, which is never quoted in this volume, it says, "go" make disciples, which is an intentionality we need to square with.
Most original Anabaptists were quite evangelistic. They preached, traveled, and witnessed wherever they went about Jesus' love and the need to repent and enter into a kingdom of discipleship. This trait has been lost, and while Hauerwas doesn't harp on it, his hints cannot be missed.
As a continuation of his "alternative social ethic," he makes this statement, "The way for the world to know that it needs redeeming, that is, it's broken and fallen, is for the church to enable the world to strike hard against something that is an alternative to what the world offers."7
I dearly appreciate this point. My former tradition would stone someone saying such because they want an easy pass through the world to kick the bucket and go to be with Jesus, where it's all good for them. For Anabaptists, however, most tend to staying away from the world. A friend of mine—coming into conservative Anabaptist circles went to a well-known conference. During the presentation, a widely known Anabaptist figure exclaimed, "Anabaptist suffered tremendous persecution, and we're not going back." This is a reoccurring attitude—stay out of the fracas, but be upstanding moral—but remain aloof.
Hauerwas is laying an axe to both notions. To be understood as God's kingdom is not only to be differentiated—which Anabaptists have a fair understanding of—but also to be available to the world as a constant reminder of what it is not. We can't hole up in the country and our religious structures and be Good Samaritans only when we can't escape it.
Concluding Thoughts:Hauerwas' book will be salty—even for those who have embraced conservative Anabaptism. It will be like walking on glass for nominal church people. Hauerwas is like the kindly old grandpa who says what we might not like to hear. One of the things I appreciate most about this book is that Hauerwas didn't fall into the typical ditches of the false dichotomy of politically liberal or conservative coloring of truth. The old Amish proverb says that there are two miles of ditches for every one mile of road. Many renditions of the "kingdom of God" in Anabaptist circles often fall into the social gospel (social justice, cultural equity, trying to make the world a better place…). Hauerwas stays clear of the ditches of this left vss. right trap to present an alternative that the world will not try to replicate and often will persecute because it can't stand being reflected in contrast. Hauerwas draws this point into sharp focus—an admonition for us in the degenerating days in which we live to yet still be "in" the world in order to contrast to it.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley...
2. Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, ISBN 978-1-630608-157-1, pg. 8
3. Ibid, pg. 19
4. Ibid, pg. 41
5. Ibid, pg. 63
6. Ibid, pg. 63
7. Ibid, pg. 115
Notable Quotes:
Jesus calls us to join a community that is formed by a story that enables its member to trust the otherness of the other as the very sign of the forgiving character of God's kingdom.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 17
If Christ was but a preacher of love, one wonders how he could have ever ended on a cross – for who is going to object to that kind of preaching? He is nailed to the cross because his love is the revelation of God's righteousness, which brings pain and change and calls us to extend the have to those we cannot seem to love.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 19
What kind of order was Jesus talking about? What kind of social alternative? This was a voluntary society: you could not be a citizen of it simply by being born into it… This was a society with no second-generation members
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 41
He (Jesus) gave them a new way to deal with problems of leadership - by drawing on the gift of every member.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 41
Charity is not about removing all injustice in the world, but about meeting the need of our neighbors right where we find them. And Christ shows us who our neighbors are. He expects us to bind up the wounds of those right before us.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 57
Christians do, and are obligated to, have a concern about the societies in which they exist, but our task is not to make (force) the world apart form Christ in the kingdom of love. Our task is to be a community where charity takes the from of truth. We must first be a people that is shaped by the story that sustains charity in a world where it cannot be sustained.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 58
Thought we must, in the interest of charity, ask the state to live up to its own standards of just, we must never delude ourselves into thinking that the justice of the state is what is required of us as people formed by God's kingdom.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 58
This is why the church is to be a community of charity. "See how they love one another," the pagans said of the Christians.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 58
To be a disciple of Jesus is to be grafted into a new family that Christ has constituted. Stanley Hauerwas Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 59
Rather, the kingdom of God grows by witness and conversion. Through such growth Christians will discover sisters and brothers we did not know we had.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 59
Today's church simply is not a soil capable of growing deep roots.
Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 79
The way for the world to know that it needs redeeming, that is its broken and fallen, is for the church to enable the world to strike hard against something that is an alternative to what the world offers. Stanley Hauerwas, Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 115
…the church and Christians must be uninvolved in the politics of society and involved in the polity that is the church. Stanley Hauerwas Jesus Changes Everything, pg. 117
Just remember that church eldership and leadership were moving targets in the early years. Brotherhood slowly gave way to higher and lower class of Christians - the clergy and laity.
At first, Christian elders or seniors were bishops or overseers. Later some became "the bishop".
OK, on this subject of catacombs and death, don't forget what became of the betrayal money given to Judas. It was eventually redeemed and used to purchase land for burial grounds.
And?
This shows that material things have their proper place and that the early church did indeed buy property, though on rare occasions and not comparable to the modern church mortgage.
The great issue is what you are doing wherever you are - not where you are. With respect to honoring God. He doesn't dwell in man-made temples and through faith He is in reach of all who call upon his name.
As an amateur historian, I realized that church history could be long and tedious for many. In 2011 I compiled as much as I could condense and keep interesting as possible into this book. Printed copies can be purchased on Amazon, but I thought some on this site might be willing to use the PDF to be downloaded freely here.
An endless maze of underground tunnels where early Christians buried their dead, hid, and gathered for worship. These passageways go for miles and are filled with ancient art and inscriptions. This one is under the City of Rome. Almost forgotten for a thousand years.
If you like hanging out with the dead, this is your kind of place.
Enterprising souls soon found a lucrative market for the "bones of the martyrs". Proof that human nature has not changed.
The subterranean inscriptions - do they teach us anything about church leadership? Yes, they do. I will bring these forward very soon
Hi David. Your timing on this post, as usual, is most excellent. Just a few hours before you posted this, I posted my thoughts on a related CS Lewis YouTube video to a small group of my Christian friends. We consider ourselves misfits because none of us fits well into the traditional Christian mold, although some still do attend an institutional church. Anyway, the video that I watched was titled "The BRUTAL Truth About Why You Never Fit In - And Why It Will NEVER will". It's taken me far too long to learn the lessons from this video, but the video itself is not responsible for my transition out of the institutional church. Instead, it affirms my choice, as have so many other signs from God. As I seek answers to where God would have me be, I look to Scripture to keep me on the narrow path.
Rather than rewrite my thoughts for this group here, I am posting my thoughts to my small group verbatim. As always, feedback is welcome...
Hey there fellow saints, I think that this video from CS Lewis (link below) is something that we can all relate to in some way. It's about the difference between fitting in and belonging. I have seldom ever fit in, and even in those times where I have felt like part of a tribe then I've still been somewhat of an outsider, never quite walking in step with those around me. I've come to a place in my life where I avoid gatherings outside of my immediate family, mostly because the conversation seems shallow and awkward. Seldom do my Christian friends want to talk about things that are meaningful and eternal. If you mention Christ, you might get a knowing head nod and an acknowledgment that Jesus is Lord of all Creation, but little more
Our group here represents the first time that I've ever felt like I really belonged somewhere. I love that we truly see ourselves bound together as members of Christ's Body. For myself, I feel free from the requirements imposed by being a member of a specific church or denomination. You have all accepted me as I am. I have found my home here. For that I am eternally grateful
I like the part later in the video where CS Lewis says that God didn't save us so that we could fit in but rather so that He could bring us out and set us apart from worldly standards and expectations. I think that the video makes an important point that this doesn't mean that we should live as hermits, but rather that we need to be aligned with God's will regardless of the circumstances
So here is the video for your edification - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF3tV21YsWs
From his autobiography, Surprised by Joy:
The idea of churchmanship was to be wholly unattractive. I was not in the least anticlerical but I was deeply antiecclesiastical.
…But though I liked clergymen as I liked bears, I had as little wish to be in the Church as in the zoo.
It was, to begin with, a kind of collective; a wearisome “get-together” affair. I couldn’t yet see how a concern of that sort should have anything to do with one’s spiritual life. To me, religion ought to have been a matter of good men praying alone and meeting by twos and threes to talk of spiritual matters.
And then the fussy, time-wasting botheration of it all! The bells, the crowds, the umbrellas, the notices, the bustle, the perpetual arranging and organizing. Hymns were (and are) extremely disagreeable to me. Of all musical instruments I liked (and like) the organ least. I have, too, a sort of spiritual gaucherie which makes me unapt to participate in any rite.
Very interesting and informative. It would be good if someone could compile these facts in a form more compatible to today's readers.
This extract is from a real church history book written by a real scholar with a real D.D. As you have noticed, in today's world, unearned doctorates are given out like candy bars to unlearned clergy.
This tiny pdf file (330k) - these few pages could have a great effect and actually free up 10's of billions of dollars each year if put into practice. I pray that it will happen. These words are merely echoing the teachings of scripture regarding needs-based financial assistance for those in the Christian communities.
Not just the money is what is in view. Many so-called laymen must be called up for duty. A duty which they will come to love, I know.
Never forget that when one person is elevated above others - the influence of others is lessened. Therefore Jesus urged us not to call any man master. And not to be as heathen who order their affairs by rank. "You are brothers."
We are not blaming any individual today. Let God be the judge. It is the traditional system itself which must be adjusted. Or overhauled in a major way.
If you are in a hurry, just scan the the high-lighted text in the above document.
Can you or someone you know refute the thesis of this interesting book? I think not. But if so, please be our guest.
We're are not here to discuss partisan politics. Important though it is - it is not our focus. Try to put that aside and examine this clergy person's words as she scolds a world leader who was recently visiting her church.
By the way, in a biblical meeting format no-one gets to pelt another with words. Everyone had a right to speak. To reply, to question, or to say Amen. See 1 Corinthians 14.
This Bishop is very subtly seeking to justify a slave-class who will do the dirty work for others. For others who are presumed unable or unwilling to do it for themselves.
Yes, the church is called upon to be a relief agency. Individual Christians also will eventually be asked: "What did you do for the least of these?" This will involve time and money. It will also take courageous Christian pastor/teachers who echo the apostle's doctrine and declare: If any man will not work - neither should he eat. Likewise, those not providing for their own families (ands widows) - they have actually left the faith.
By the way, I would like to hear a "Christian Nationalist" admit that the Nanny State is largely due to the monumental failure of the Christian church, particularly in its use of money. I hope this admission comes soon.
The true church must immediately divest itself of all profit-making schemes involving the Story. Be it for "preaching" or charging for christian music or books. These latter items can easily be distributed for free. So why put them behind a paywall and limit the audience? The plain answer is greed. Those outside the church figured this out long ago. And they kept walking.
Out-of-the-institutional church people have a golden opportunity to take matters into their own hands. And cut the middle man (or woman) out.
We must overcome evil with good. Every Christian must be or become a minister (servant) in Jesus' name! If you haven't noticed - trouble is everywhere.
Our Lord declared: Freely you received - now freely give. Not: Freely you received in order to repackage and turn a profit.
Jesus Christ - the greatest story ever... sold.
David,
With all the good Christians already do in this world, we need more freedom to do more. Not to earn our salvation, but to enjoy it to the full! The limits that modern traditional structures place on us often pleases our flesh, but they steal away our joy in Jesus!
Paul wrote to Timothy: :
2 And the things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, these entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also. 2 Tim 2:1-3 NASB
Can there be anything more wonderful than the flow of the River of Life coming forth from one to another, and then all over again? Yet, our traditions often keep this blessing for a special class of individuals.
This is very interesting. I have not thoroughly studied Clement, but I remember his concern for heading the wisdom of the elders in Corinth. Campbell is saying that he is fighting to keep out the "one man rule" over the congregations as well.
One of my favorite writers has a fine blog. And a facebook page too. Do check them out. Trust me, you will not be disappointed.
Dan Beaty has been a Christian for quite a while and has served in many voluntary ministries. Along with his faithful wife Brenda.
He has embarked on several self-financed international mission trips and published several free books, too. Prior to the internet, he sent out monthly Christian newsletters to thousands of eager children here and abroad.
I can only wish that there were an army of like-minded Kingdom workers.
You are asking a question which few others, at this time, even care about. In their minds the role of the elders is to help the pastor do the work of the ministry.
Shepherding is a big deal in the mind of Jesus. "Peter, do you love me?" Then "feed my lambs". Thus we read that the elders who were appointed to the shepherding task were done so "with prayer and fasting."
Likewise in the mind of the apostle: "This is a faithful saying. ANYONE who desires to be an overseer desires a good work."
A work, a duty - not an office. And I inquire: Does not Satan strive to keep Christians from their duties, obligations, and responsibilities???
What we can agree upon is that the natural man cannot get enough hierarchy. Nor enough money to go with it. Therefore we see the pattern of "preachers" being "called" to larger churches. Seldom smaller ones...
Like many scholarly works, Alastair Campbell's Elders - Seniority book began as a university thesis. He describes his goals here, a couple of years before the book was published. Naturally, by the time of publication, some of his views were slightly modified (corrected).
Modern scholarship is finally undergoing a much needed shift regarding the identity of the elders. And a more biblical position, I might add. Needless to say, "modern scholarship" and the "seminary / clergy system" are inextricably tied together. They are not going to bite the hand which feeds them.
Welcome Dr. Trice. Would you happen to be a descendent of Jehu? He couldn't find the brakes either. Haha.
Yes, we can do all things in the unstoppable name of Jesus the Christ.
This site is open source. After the manner of the ancient synagogues and early churches. So please do not hold your peace. Give us a word of exhortation when you can. We look forward to it.
The lookout reported, “He has reached them, but he isn’t coming back either. The driving is like that of Jehu son of Nimshi—he drives like a maniac.” 2 Kings 9.
After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the leaders of the synagogue sent word to them, saying, “Brothers, if you have a word of exhortation for the people, please speak.” Acts 13.
I always tie everything that we do back to our lack of understanding of the depth of our sin, Dan. When you say that believers will defend the system because they feel that it does a lot of good, what you're really getting at is that we can somehow manage the sin in our lives rather than confess it and turn it over to the One who paid for it all. In today's church, the prevailing attitude is that we only need Jesus to fill in on those rare occasions where we slip up. This runs counter to "the good old days" where preaching was all hellfire and brimstone. Neither of these is a correct view of the Gospel. Preaching that God just wants to destroy you if even your toe crosses the line fails to show mercy and grace. Preaching that God is somehow a buddy who covers our tracks speaks to how we think that we can save ourselves. Either is a form of self-righteousness that is not supported in Scripture.
David, you wrote:
"Jesus did not believe that making merchandise of the truth was a delicate matter. Imagine the tables and money pots flying through the air. And the stinging whip of the Son of God finding it's mark.
And remember - the profiteers were breaking no laws. They thought they were "serving the Lord". And aiding in "worship".
Have you ever wondered why Jesus permits the exploitation of His message and His people? I am reminded of a line in Mel Brook's movie, "Oh God." John Denver's character asks God, played by George Burns, "Why do you allow all the suffering in the world?" The answer was, "Why do you?"
This struck me the first time I heard it many years ago. People are willing to be exploited today as they were then, but Jesus is not here in a physical body to stop this.
Sure, unbelievers see what is going on in many churches, but most believers I know will defend the system in the name of all the "good" that is accomplished by it.
Hello my brother. Always great to hear from you. And where we might disagree, you're probably right. Haha.
Jesus did not believe that making merchandise of the truth was a delicate matter. Imagine the tables and money pots flying through the air. And the stinging whip of the Son of God finding it's mark.
And remember - the profiteers were breaking no laws. They thought they were "serving the Lord". And aiding in "worship".
Jesus looked into their hearts and saw their motives. Just as the apostles looked into the greedy hearts of Ananias and Sapphira and Simon Magus. Not to mention all the false teachers who were teaching: "Godliness is GAIN".
As for tax exempt status, we'll be thinking more about it. It's a government subsidy obviously. But for what? Most churches are not truly "non-profit" at all. Rather, they are businesses "for profit". When the profits stop - they cease to exist.
Rather than non-profit, I think of them as being non-prophet...
You said, "Yes, these are delicate subjects because we are talking about the livelihoods of well-meaning although misinformed people.". But is this really a delicate subject? You are being much more charitable than I would methinks. But I'd better shut up lest I lose any sense of grace whatsoever :-(
What do you think would happen if churches and charities were no longer tax exempt? Would the madness stop?
Every child, deep within, desires the approval and blessing of their parents. Likewise when other older ones show true interest in a child, it goes a long way.
As if yesterday, I can remember my Christian neighbor taking me and my brother out on the lake in his boat. We were poor by today's standards and did not have access to a boat nor did our friends.
On Sundays, at the church meeting, I remember a realtor who always sought me out and gave me a piece of chewing gum each week. It meant a lot.
And an uncle who had US Postal Service First Day Covers sent to me about every month. These are official envelopes which celebrate a new stamp. I became interested in stamp collecting which taught me about history and geography.
Uncle Jim lost all his hearing on a battleship in WW2. He was told that he should look for a factory job. He had other plans, though. He learned to read people's lips and few knew he was deaf.
He became a safety instructor for coal mining at WVA University. Decades later, I also worked in the coal fields as a delivery driver for UPS. When coal miners mentioned to me that they went to WVA for their yearly training. I would ask them if they knew James Stone. Several times they replied in the affirmative with a big smile.
I'm sure there were others - these are the first who come to mind. These were truly caring "elders" who acted out of good instinct. Money for "ministry" was definetely not in the picture.
Now, I must also seek to be a blessing to others. The fatherless and the widows are everywhere and they are hurting - not to mention the homeless.
And I must thank the Almighty for my sheltered background. Imagine this: Among my high school friends, I was not aware of any who came from a broken home. And among my neighbors, all the men around us were practicing Christians. I lived on the campus of a Christian College, you see.
Good memories!
Here for your examination is a keen essay which could truly and immediately change the whole church - not to mention the whole world.
Money - misappropriated. And hierarchy, forbidden in Scripture, have been a big hindrance to the spread of the Gospel and to our beloved Saviour's Kingdom as well.
Yes, these are delicate subjects because we are talking about the livelihoods of well-meaning although misinformed people.
The key to unlocking this subject is the phrase "needs based".
And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. Acts 4:35.
The early churches, often small and meeting in homes, did not supply salaries for all the elder men (elders) or elder women. Only those who qualified received assistance. 1 Timothy 5. Likewise for those itinerant evangelistic workers who were "in the field".
Notice how the clever author of the essay cloaked his name to avoid blow-back in his own day. A. P. Brother stands for: A poor brother.
Notice also the magazine title which published this article: Millennial Harbinger. Obviously, they expected good things in the future and were thus highly motivated by their optimistic views. Unlike today, where pessimism usually reigns.
As always, you must be logged into this site in order to download your own free pdf copy.
We should do everything in the name of Jesus Church or Lord Jesus.
Colossians 3:17 states
And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.
Baptism is a deed, therefore, therefore, the water baptism has been ministered in the name of Jesus Christ or Lord Jesus (Acts 2:38, Acts 4:12, Acts 19:5, Romans 6:3).
If you are in praying it is in the name of the Lord Jesus ..
If you are casting out spirits it is in the name of the Lord Jesus..
Please stay blessed and safe
Michael
Ephesians 2:20 states
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Therefore, Jesus Christ has left his witnesses and the word to follow.
There are questions and answers in the scriptures that teach to our souls.
In Acts 2:37-38
V37 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?
V38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptised everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Obedience is better than sacrifice...
Tod,
Thanks for bringing this up:
"So please, to those reading this... your time spent getting to know a younger person is not in vain. Whether that kid comes from a great Christian home with loving parents, or they come from a troubled home with nothing but bad influence, every kid needs to know that their choices do not define who they are. Every human being, by the nature of being created in the image of God, deserves a minimum level of respect. If the young person in your life knows that you have their best interest at heart then you can share anything with them, especially the Gospel. After all, if there was ever a story of unconditional love and acceptance, Christ's suffering and death is it"
Wouldn't it be wonderful if seniors could see themselves an army of God's warriors in their manner of praying and giving of themselves to younger people who are hungry for compassion and love?
I like this. I like it because it is true. I like it because it shows God's great mercy and love. I like this because it is needed as much today as it ever was
After leaving the institutional church almost three years ago, I was first wracked with doubt about my place in the kingdom. After all, who was I to speak for Almighty God? I had been trained for decades to believe that only those who were ordained by the church had the authority to be considered as elders. Yet when those same elders pushed me away from the fellowship of believers, I knew that this couldn't be right. What I experienced was not Biblical. It had all of the hallmarks of the kind of self-righteousness that we reject as Christians. Jesus didn't die to fill in the gaps in our own righteousness. He died to substitute His righteousness for ours
I've never been much of a guy to follow the rules. My instinct is always to do what is best, not what is easy or expedient or expected. When it came to church, it was one of the few places that I deferred to authority because I thought that it was God-ordained. But when I saw my church behaving more like a cult than an assembly of believers then it was time to question things. What I discovered is exactly as you describe, Dan. Being picked as an elder from a slate of candidates does not make one wise or experienced or even qualified in the Biblical sense. Those things come from the school of hard knocks as it were. Those who have learned the hard lessons have not only the duty to share them with those who are younger, but it's a joy to do this as well
This line really gets to me...
Please consider this: Somewhere in your circle there are younger people who could use your help
My experience over many years, especially these last few, is that younger people crave the affirmation that they get from older people. The younger generations are so extremely critical of themselves and their peers that it's a wonder that they can function at all. So they crave affirmation. Lots of us older folks lament that every kid gets a participation trophy for just showing up to an event, but when I see the kind of response that I get when offering a simple word of encouragement to a younger person then I think that maybe I understand a little. So often as I was growing up there was somebody there to help encourage me, so when this is missing for young people today then they will grasp at anything that comes along, even if that's a meaningless award
The best thing that we can do today as elders is to build trust. I have a number of young people that I know who listen to me not because they are forced to but because they want to. Because they know that I'm quick to encourage, they pay attention to me when I'm more forthright about my concerns for their lives. I've found it easy to establish trust because they seldom get any unconditional love from anywhere. Those of us who are older can provide that for them at no cost to us
So please, to those reading this... your time spent getting to know a younger person is not in vain. Whether that kid comes from a great Christian home with loving parents, or they come from a troubled home with nothing but bad influence, every kid needs to know that their choices do not define who they are. Every human being, by the nature of being created in the image of God, deserves a minimum level of respect. If the young person in your life knows that you have their best interest at heart then you can share anything with them, especially the Gospel. After all, if there was ever a story of unconditional love and acceptance, Christ's suffering and death is it
In the modern church the most important role in most congregations is that of the person who does most of the preaching on Sundays, the traditional pastor. Beside the preaching and providing most of the direction for the community, this person is expected to perform baptisms, the dedication of babies, weddings, and funerals whenever the occasion calls for them.
However in the New Testament book, the Acts of the Apostles, no such person is found. Of course, the apostles who were personally chosen and trained by Jesus were front and center in this history of the Early Church. After that, we see prophets and evangelists in action and important in establishing the churches.
The congregation at Jerusalem was organized and led by the 12 apostles. The second major center was North in Antioch of Syria, and was led by prophets and teachers, which were mentioned by name in Acts 13:1. This group was led by the Holy Spirit to send Saul and Barnabas out as missionaries. Saul, also called Paul preached the Gospel with Barnabas and later Silas, on many journeys across the Mediterranean Sea.
Whenever converts to Christ came together in any area, Paul appointed elders to lead them. This practice goes all the way back to Moses, who had taken upon himself more responsibility than was necessary. The Lord instructed Moses to gather seventy men of the elders — the older men of Israel, so He could impart the Holy Spirit's gifting of Moses to them. These unnamed men were to share the load with Moses. (Numbers 11:16)
Many historians believe that this was less of an office, but more of a charge. The appointment of an elder did not make one an elder. He was already an older man, but he was to be blessed and ordained to fulfill the duties that were already his.
Examples of this are found in both Acts 20:25-35 and 1 Peter 5:1-4. In Paul's last address to the elders at Ephesus, he charged them to:
"Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
(Acts 20:28 NASB)
In the older English language, the words "shepherd" and "pastor" were interchangeable. Thankfully, modern English translations have clarified the fact that the elders of the churches in Acts were the same people who were elsewhere referred to as "pastors," in Ephesians 4:11. Another source of confusion is the fact that the work of the "overseer," later took on the official sounding title of "bishop."
It is this simple: This same body of elders were held responsible of "shepherding," tending God's flock, and "overseeing," watching over them to protect and lead them by example.
Peter affirms this in his first letter:
Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, 2 shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; 3 nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. 4 And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.
(1 Peter 5:1-4 NASB)
Somehow we often miss the picture of the church as a family. The adults are the responsible ones. They are the ones who provide for the younger ones.
In all of this my hope is to encourage all of you seniors, men and women in the body of Christ. You have not only an opportunity, but a duty to put your years of experience to good use. In our society you might not get the respect that elders in the early church received. Maybe you have not earned it! Maybe you thought you should stay out of the way and let the "official" leaders make all the calls. Or maybe you are acknowledged as an elder in your church, but you are asked only to study the financial numbers in the budget or in the unfilled pews.
Please consider this: Somewhere in your circle there are younger people who could use your help. Maybe they don't even know it. It might be up to you to reach out to them and show some love and concern. Pray for them and seek the Lord's help for opportunities to serve them.
We all know it is easy to criticize and complain about the failures in Christianity. It is not as easy to share another's load as did the 70 elders of Israel. However, I believe our response to Christ's example and charge to us will elicit His response with the power of the Holy Spirit to fulfill that call!
Hello Brother Todd. Yes. The whole Protestant theory of worship truly needs an immediate upgrade. Fascinating research! Research down to the details and the granular level, I might add. Thank you for sharing Tom's work with us.
Worship should be all of life as we "pray without ceasing" and eat and drink (every meal) unto the glory of the Almighty. Thus, Our Lord informed us that we need not go here or there but rather to worship Him in spirit and truth.
If you don't know the name Tom Wadsworth, you may find yourself coming across it in the future. I'm somewhat reluctant to even mention his name for fear of elevating him as some kind of celebrity, which is certainly not my intent. Yet as I've watched him over the past few months, much of what he says really resonates with me and I would think anyone else associated with the house church movement. Most interestingly, he seldom says much about house churches. His thesis is that what we know as "church" today is not found in the New Testament. As best as I understand it, he believes that the primary purpose of the assembly is for edification of the saints, not for worship. He is able to trace how first century Christianity devolved from the house churches described in the NT into what today reflects the temple system of the OT along with its priests (clergy) and offerings (tithes). He discusses how Paul focuses on edification in 1 Corinthians 14 as the primary purpose of our gatherings, and how the synagogue was never a place where Christians gathered to worship but rather a place where Christians were recruited from among the Jews. He describes Christian gatherings as small meetings where everyone participates and uses the gifts that God has given to them for the benefit of the others in the assembly. He uses the term "one anothering" to say that Scripture has much to say about how we love and support one another. When I listen to this man speak (and he is indeed just a man, not a prophet or other elevated individual), I find his words, tone, and demeanor consistent with what the Bible has to say about our Christian gatherings. While I can't say that I fully agree with all that he has to say, I think that his thesis is well researched and that he is what may referred to as "an honest broker" for his fair treatment of the subject.
For those of you who are interested, Tom has many videos on YouTube. I started my journey with his seven part series on how we got worship wrong (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z84QJzWlRJc&list=PLBymWQLP-rkGoTzyS81-MIi5q63Aq4UgI&index=4). Each video is an hour long, so it's a big time commitment if you decide to watch. But I found it useful as it helped me understand that he's not anti-church. You also get a feel for his knowledge of Scripture and his love for the assembly. If you can't make a big time commitment, maybe try this interview instead - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF98WsWTe4o&list=PLBymWQLP-rkHrPqsD9piTIdqzLpgPiHJY.
I would be very interested if anyone else is familiar with Tom's work or if you've decided to watch some of his videos. I'd like to know what you think.
There are four passages in scripture which are viewed as references to particular house churches. Each one is associated with a woman! At least in part:
1 Cor. 16:19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord with the church that is in their house.
So you may wonder: Am I in favor of women pastors? My reply is that, according to the modern definition, I am in favor of no man nor woman occupying such a contrived position.
The great John Milton was correct when he wrote: New presbyter (pastor) is but old priest writ large.
Happy New Year to ALL.
It's interesting that you should mention 1 Tim 3:1. Last week as I was looking over elder qualifications, I was reading through the ESV when I saw this verse translated this way, "The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task." (emphasis mine) Yet the Interlinear Bible translates the Greek as such, "Trustworthy [is] the saying if anyone overseership aspires to of good a work he is desirous". So even then these translations, in attempting to make the translation "more easily understood", treat the word of God in a way that introduces error.
As my last church (OPC) was pushing me away from their fellowship a few years back (more the leadership than the members), there came a time when the elders were asserting their authority because they were ordained to their position. For a time, I considered making a similar claim since I had also been ordained as an elder in the Christian Reformed Church in the 1990s. Why, if their authority stemmed from their ordination, would I not have equal authority under Christ? I decided, however, not to play the game. Authority under the Gospel does not come from some magical incantation said at a special installation service of elders. It comes directly from Christ Himself through Scripture and the power of the Holy Spirit. Consider this... let's say I had a gambling addiction (which I don't) which was destroying my life and the lives of those around me. Would the lowliest of my Christian friends have any less of a right to speak with me about my problem than the pastor of my church? I think not! In all likelihood, I am more likely to listen to my fellow believer who I see as struggling with their own sin in their lives than to hear some high-and-mighty preacher who tells me how I should be living as a "good" boy for an hour each Sunday. The Bible is abundantly clear that there is only one Lord, and even then Jesus came as a servant, not a dictator as He has every right to be.
Ho poimen ho kalos! This is not Christmas cheer. Nor a line from a rap song. It demonstrates the definite article in the original text of Scripture. So, Jesus is THE shepherd. THE good shepherd. Emphasis on the THE, you see.
Hold that thought and consider the eldership in 1 Peter 5. There is no definite article there and should be none in the English translations either. It's become another subtle way in which the translators attempted to insert a two-tiered clerical caste upon the church of Christ. Here below is a better translation:
Notice also that the elders are already there - not imported from elsewhere or from a seminary. As the word elder is - so it means: older ones. Contrasted in this very passage with younger ones.
A good summary for your perusal from a commentary entitled: Reading 1 Peter, Jude, and 2 Peter, A Literary and Theological Commentary by Earl J. Richard:
Age indeed is what governs this church leadership passage! It would not completely rule out, however, younger ones who would naturally seek to develop their shepherding skills in view of their own future role as guides, friends, overseers, and examples. The only exception to this rule would be unconverted seniors or recent converts to the faith.
It does not require a mysterious, magical "call to the ministry." Oversight was to be so all-inclusive among the saints that it had become a faithful saying: "If ANY desire to be an overseer he desires a good work." 1 Timothy 3:1.
This is a big deal, people. Every day - every hour - every minute, good people are assigned to sit it out on the bench who should be out there - fully empowered in service of His Majesty - leading others onto the field in the game of life, ever moving into the Light.
Not to mentions the vast amounts of money which could be spent on better things. I'm talking 10's of billions per year spent on THE "pastor's salary".
A few days ago, I conducted a bit of a fun experiment that I think has ramifications on the future church. Since I've struggled for the last few years to find Biblical justification for church membership, I asked Google a simple question: "Is church membership Biblical?" Google quickly and confidently came up with a response (see below) which on the surface appears to give an answer to the question, but in reality just regurgitates the talking points that you'll hear from today's institutional churches. That's really no surprise since the Articial Intelligence (AI) algorithms that underly this response are good at collecting and summarizing information from across the Internet, but they are completely incapable of reasoning on that information. So the AI just trusts that what it finds by visiting all of the web sites on the Internet is "the Gospel truth". You only get counterpoints to the predominate answer by asking Google why church membership **isn't Biblical** (also below). AI can (and has) read the entire Bible, but it cannot understand such simple concepts as sin, the Gospel, and eternal life. It's just a soulless machine.
While the Internet can be a great place for learning more about God and His work through His Son, Christ Jesus, I would encourage everyone to be on their guard and use discernment when handling the information that they get from a search engine, just as you would from any other source. Going back to the first computer systems ever built, people have long trusted a computer printout to give them accurate information. While I believe that this is slowly changing, we are far too trusting as humans in that we easily believe everything that we see and hear. The online world in which we now live amplifies the situation. I believe that as Christians, our first and only truly trusted source of knowledge is Scripture. May God give us the wisdom to see the truth as He has revealed it to us.
---
Google, is church membership Biblical?
Yes, according to most Christian interpretations, church membership is considered biblical, even though the Bible doesn't explicitly state a command to formally join a church; the concept is implied through the New Testament's emphasis on belonging to a local body of believers, submitting to church leadership, and participating in the life of a community of faith as seen in the early church practices described in the Book of Acts.
Key points supporting the biblical basis of church membership:
Early Church Example:
The Book of Acts portrays the early church as a united group where new converts were added to the church through baptism and actively participated in the community.
Church Leadership and Submission:
The Bible instructs Christians to submit to church leaders and elders, which implies belonging to a specific congregation where such leadership is established.
Corporate Body of Christ:
The metaphor of the church as the body of Christ suggests that Christians are meant to be connected and function as part of a unified body.
Church Discipline:
The ability to practice church discipline, where members are held accountable for their actions, is also seen as a feature of a local church community.
------------------------------------
Google, why isn't church membership Biblical?
Some say that church membership is not biblical because:
The Bible doesn't specify a membership process
The Bible doesn't require a specific process for joining a church, except for water baptism.
The Bible doesn't command increasing membership
Jesus and biblical writers don't command churches to find, make, or sign up members.
The word "membership" doesn't appear in the Bible
The word "membership" is a creation of religious leaders.
Membership creates division
Membership creates two classes of people within the church, insiders and nonmembers.
The structure of church membership is man-made
There's no compelling biblical justification for the structure of most church membership implementations.
The congregation can vote out elders
This can lead to "authority inversion" where the elders are subservient to the congregation.
However, others say that the Bible does provide a foundation for church membership, and that local church membership is one way to make visible the distinction between the church and the world.
Hi brother Cal,
Please let me say how sorry that I am that you are feeling lonely and disconnected. The Christian life is not meant to be lived this way. Also, your cult story sounds pretty horrific. However, it serves as a great reminder to the rest of us that following a single individual or even a group of people is not the same as following Christ as the Head of the church. What I found very interesting about my most recent experience with the institutional church is that the more I pressed the elders on their beliefs, the more I could hear the voice of the Pope coming through. It was a message that lacked both mercy and grace. Thankfully, by God's unyielding love for me, I was familiar with John 10:27 where Jesus says, "my sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me". So when my former church told me that I should leave the fellowship as they were unwilling to open the Scriptures and explain them to me, I knew that what they were telling me was not of God but of man
What for it's worth, I'm continuing to look for true fellowship with like-minded Christians outside of the church system. I have made a few friends, and I'm doing what I can to deepen those connections. My biggest fear at the moment is that as the size of any group grows, the interlopers begin to step in to cause distractions. It seems like anything good eventually takes a turn for the worse. Case in point... there is a YouTube channel that I found a few months ago that had some great content on how the church should conduct itself. Then suddenly last week, the content became all about a nationally recognized ministry and their perceived indiscretions. When I commented on one video about the content seeming rather gossipy, the response was that it was important that Christians not commit the specific sins that were called out in the video. That's all fine and good, but what I don't see is these same content creators calling out sins of their own and confessing them before God. It didn't take me long to realize that this was not a place for me to be. I mean, I get the fact that there is no perfect gathering of believers, but shouldn't we at least be trying to treat each other with mercy, love, and forgiveness rather than tearing each other down?
I am exhausted :-(
I saw this video yesterday and posted the following comment on YouTube...
Rather than trying to convince a guy like this that he's not following Scripture, I take the position that if you're arguing about church policy and not bringing Christ to me then you have no authority within the ekklesia. Hebrews 13:17 is a favorite verse of elders to justify their rule, but if you back up 10 verses to verse 7 then you'll find this... "Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith." Clearly, a leader is one who speaks the word of God - namely, our sinful state, our need for a Savior, and the redemptive work of Christ. I'm not sure what this guy's motivation is for his rant, but it's certainly not to teach the faithful about the suffering, death, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus.
This gets me right back to the ABCs of the church - Anything But Christ. All of these things are just distractions that get us bickering over theological positions and away from discussing our dear Lord and Savior. Do you think that this "pastor" really cares about the development of the faith of his flock? Should he not care more that people are gathering in the name of Jesus rather than worrying about how they gather? For anyone who wants to be a spiritual leader, besides being a Christian in the manner of 1 John 4, I believe that it's imperative that they view **all** Christians as equals since we are all equally sinful in the eyes of God. After six decades of being in the institutional church, God has opened my eyes to how destructive it is, especially the denominational systems which encourage division and mistrust rather than foster unity and edification.
Anyone who reads this informative review should receive college credit. A lot of it. :)
The title of the book is worth the price, no doubt. Truer words were never spoken than these: Jesus changes everything. Or as the writer of the book of Revelation states it: Behold, I make all things new!
I see from the internet book archives that this author was indeed a "prodigious writer." Much going back before the era of modern word processor and keyboard. How did he find the time to record all those words?
Jesus preached and taught the Kingdom of God. And to love one another. To serve others. And that He was to have the preeminence in all spheres. These were not mere slogans but Jesus himself walked the earth to demonstrate this new way of life.
We personally have not lived up to these standards. Nor has the church.
It would be quite interesting if Stanley Hauerwas had lived to see and to analyze the present state of cultural affairs. Many of which have taken us by surprise, to say the least.
Thank you Tim Price for this valuable review. I must add that you also are a pretty keen writer. And like Stanley, you are seeking to encourage others to follow in the steps of the Son of God, wherever those steps will take us.