|
|
|
Topic: Will the Emerging Church Fully Emerge? - Frank Viola
|
|
Author
|
|
Moderator
Admin Group
Joined: 03/16/2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6133
|
|
Posted: 04/20/2005 at 4:41am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Will the Emerging Church Fully Emerge?
An Invitation for Serious Reflection and Open Dialogue
by Frank Viola
I am writing this article to my sisters and brothers in Christ, both leaders and non-leaders, who belong to what has come to be called "the emerging church conversation."
The influence of this conversation has been no less than incredible. So much so, that at least to my mind, it can be better described as a phenomenon. And it is picking up steam with each passing day.
I am a student of church history. My studies have led me to make the following observation: Every phenomenon and movement that has set out to reform or renew the church was born with profound shortcomings and weaknesses. And these shortcomings and weaknesses were never addressed until it was too late for them to be corrected. In my own lifetime, I have seen this to be true for the charismatic movement, the Jesus movement, the third-wave movement, and the house church movement . . . just to name a few.
Because the emerging church phenomenon is still in its infancy, its shortcomings and weaknesses can be addressed now. As Christians who have grown tired of the modern church, we have a brand new opportunity to change the course of church history. I realize that this may appear to be an outrageous statement. Nonetheless, it is true. We have been given a small window to see a complete overhaul of our Christian faith and to be faithful in honoring the heart of Jesus and the vision of the earliest apostles in our own time. This is why I write today.
Major Strengths of the Emerging Church Phenomenon
The following are themes within the emerging church phenomenon that I wholeheartedly applaud and am thankful for:
1. The emerging church phenomenon is exploring fresh ways to revamp and recontextualize the gospel message to postmodern people. Not only do I applaud this new emphasis, but I shamelessly admit that I have a great deal to glean in this area. Thus, I would like to learn more from those who have plowed further in this field.
2. The emerging church phenomenon has placed a long-awaited emphasis on community and relational faith.
3. The emerging church phenomenon has placed an emphasis on rethinking the modern church . . . its methods, its programs, its traditions, and its structure.
4. The emerging church phenomenon has placed a new emphasis on the Jesus of the Gospels opposed to the exclusive emphasis on the Jesus of Paul’s writings.
5. The emerging church phenomenon has placed a rightful emphasis on the importance of Body functioning.
6. The emerging church phenomenon has placed a new emphasis on the importance of narrative.
7. The emerging church phenomenon has dumped the modern penchant to always be certain in answering every spiritual question under the sun. Instead, it has rested content to embrace mystery and paradox in our God.
8. The emerging church phenomenon has re-ignited a healthy interest in the Christian mystics who emphasized spiritual encounter over against mere academic knowledge of God and the Bible.
I am absolutely thrilled to hear "ordinary" Christians, and even leaders talk about these themes openly and unashamedly. All of them point to crucial changes that the Body of Christ desperately needs today. Add to that, I become nearly euphoric whenever I hear of pastors leaving their entrenched positions to rethink the entire basis for their Christian existence. Such a courageous step is both impressive and worthy of deep respect.
Let me again repeat: We are in a season of church history where we face a small window of time for real and lasting change. A window for revolution in the modern Christian mindset and in the traditional practices of the modern church. A window that Christians 1,000 years from now (should Jesus tarry, of course) can turn their heads back to and behold the beginning of a drastic paradigm shift from an old leaking wineskin to a new wineskin hand-crafted by the Spirit of God.
But note . . . that window will eventually close. And it will close soon.
The emerging church phenomenon is promising, for it embodies many necessary contributions to a fuller embodiment of Christ and His church. At the same time, the weaknesses of the phenomenon, if not honestly and directly addressed, will reduce it to the status of all past renewal movements. Namely, it will end up spawning a new denomination or "movement" which simply puts a few Band-Aids on the church’s ills rather than excavating the root of its problems.
I would now like to list what I find to be the weaknesses of the phenomenon along with some bold questions that I hope will foster serious and open dialogue among leaders in the emerging church. Please note that this list betrays the essence and burden of my own ministry and the vision which drives me. Since I have written on these matters extensively elsewhere, I have cited where one can find these threads more fully unraveled.
Serious Weaknesses of the Emerging Church Phenomenon
By my lights, the weaknesses of the emerging church phenomenon are as follows:
1. The emerging church phenomenon has wonderfully articulated some of the major flaws of the modern church, yet like all of its predecessors, it has failed to identify and take dead aim at one of the chief roots of most of its ills.
I firmly believe that the taproot of most of the problems that plague the church in modernity is the clergy system. To put a finer point on it, Protestant Christians are addicted to the modern pastoral office. The pastor is the all-purpose religious professional in the modern Protestant church, both evangelical and mainline.
Please note that my critique is not an attack on pastors as people. Most pastors in the emerging church are gifted Christians who have a heart for the Lord and a genuine love for His people. It is the modern pastoral office and role that I believe is profoundly flawed, and few of us have ever questioned it.
Let me unpack that a bit. My experience in this country and overseas over the last seventeen years has yielded one immovable conclusion: God’s people can engage in high-talk about community life, Body functioning, and Body life, but unless the modern pastoral role is utterly abandoned in a given church, God’s people will never be unleashed to function in freedom under the Headship of Jesus Christ. I have had pastors vow to me that they were the exception. However, upon visiting their congregations, it was evident that the people did not know the first thing about functioning as a Body on their own. Neither were they given any practical tools on knowing the Lord intimately and living by His life. The reason is that the flaws of the modern pastoral role are actually built into the role itself.
The pastor, by his mere presence, causes an unhealthy dependence upon himself for ministry, direction, and guidance. Thus, as long as he hangs around delivering sermons, the people in the church to which he belongs will never be fully set free to function on their own in a church meeting setting. Further, the pastoral office typically destroys those who populate it. Jesus Christ never intended for anyone to shoulder that kind of enormous responsibility and power.
In the first-century church, there was no single pastor. The Protestant pastor (which includes the evangelical pastor, the mainline pastor, and the non-denominational pastor) evolved out of the Catholic priesthood. The pastor is essentially a reformed priest, and his role has no root in the original vision and story of the people of God.
In Century One, some of the churches had elders who played a shepherding role. But they did not dominate the ministry of the church, nor was the direction of the church exclusively placed into their hands (as is the case with many elder-led churches today like Presbyterians and the Plymouth Brethren). I believe that we are in desperate need to return to these first principles.
Time and space will not permit me to give historical and pragmatic evidence for the above statements, but I have addressed them elsewhere in great detail. I heartily invite my readers to explore both Scripture and church history for themselves and draw their own conclusions. (See my article Where Did the Modern Pastor Come From? http://www.ptmin.org/thepastor.htm along with my books Rethinking the Wineskin http://www.ptmin.org/rethink.htm and Who is Your Covering? http://www.ptmin.org/covering.htm .)
Pastors can wax eloquent all day about "facilitating," "mentoring," and "equipping" the saints. But here is the proof of the pudding: Let that pastor leave his congregation on its own without any stated leaders for six months to a year, and he will quickly learn how well he has equipped the church. Will that congregation be able to lead its own songs without a song leader or worship team? Will they be able to have gatherings that are under the Headship of Jesus Christ like the early church did? Will every member of the church be equipped to provide life-giving ministry to one another in those meetings? Will they be able to solve problems and make decisions together as a community?
Perhaps this thought has never occurred to you. But what I have just described is precisely what the church planters of the first century did routinely. They worked themselves out of a job. Not in pious rhetoric, but in reality.
Paul of Tarsus had a deliberate habit of spending anywhere from three months to three years with a church, equipping it to function in his absence. He would always then leave those churches on their own without a clergy. More on this later.
Question: Is it possible that in our efforts to bring renewal and change to the traditional church, we have never seriously taken a biblical, historical, and practical look at the legitimacy of the modern pastoral office? Can we at least experiment with another alternative . . . the ministry paradigm that we find in our New Testaments? For those of us who are inclined to delivering sermons and providing "leadership," do we have the integrity to freshly examine if the modern pastoral role and the giving of sermons week after week is truly equipping God’s people to function as members of His Body in a coordinated way?
2. The emerging church phenomenon has neglected the role of the itinerant church planter.
Over the last few years, I have observed a number of "laymen" leave their present congregations to start new "emerging churches." Strikingly, these laymen always become the pastors of these new churches. With a few minor exceptions, the wineskin proved identical to the old wineskin that they had left.
Let me enlarge this observation into a principle. The clergy-led institutional church is like a rubber band. No matter what it experiences in the way of renewal or reform, it will always bounce back to the same structure. It lives on fads and gimmicks. But when the smoke clears, it will always return to a pastor who preaches sermons to a passive congregation, a prescribed order of worship where God’s people are not free to function unhindered in the gatherings, and a building whose structural arrangement encourages people to be muted spectators.
With all of our emphasis on being faithful to incarnate the Kingdom of God in the world today, we have overlooked one important ingredient for having authentic church life that is clearly envisioned throughout the entire New Testament: The paradigm of how healthy churches were planted when the church was young, free, and pure.
I have addressed this matter in great detail in my book So You Want to Start a House Church? First-Century Styled Church Planting For Today http://www.ptmin.org/start.htm. To summarize very briefly, we discover the following compelling ideas given to us in the New Testament:
A. Church planters were men who have previously lived in an organic expression of church life as non-leaders before they were sent out to plant churches. One main reason: They needed to first experience that which they would pass on to others elsewhere.
B. Church planters were specially equipped to bring people into a living encounter with Jesus Christ, to teach them how to function in a church meeting, and to solve problems that the church would face in the future.
C. After the church planters had properly equipped the church to function under the Headship of Jesus Christ, they left those churches on their own without any stated leaders! (In some cases, the church planters would later return to acknowledge elders in the advent that God’s people would face a personal crisis, but elders never monopolized the ministry nor took the direction away from the church.)
Question: Is it possible that the emerging church phenomenon has neglected to look at the way churches were planted in the first century, and instead, has opted to follow the path of modern missionary movements and traditional pastoral systems? For those of us who are considered "church leaders," are we confident enough in our ministries and in the ability of God’s people, as well as the Holy Spirit, to abandon our congregations without stated leaders like Paul of Tarsus did . . . and really test the effectiveness of our ministries? Can we, pray tell, at least begin to dialogue about this matter openly and seek to discover if in fact God has rooted some unchangeable principles of church planting in His Word? Principles that may be worth returning to in our time?
3. The emerging church phenomenon has overlooked what Paul calls "the eternal purpose" (Eph. 3:11), which is God’s ultimate intention in creation and redemption.
It has been my observation that the entire thrust of the emerging church phenomenon is rooted in how best to meet people’s needs. Consider the hot topics in the emerging church conversation today: "How can we better evangelize the lost?" "How can we better live out the ideals of the gospel of Jesus," "How should we treat the homosexual?" "How can we better articulate the gospel in a postmodern context?" "What is the place of artists in the church?"
All of these questions have as their underlying root the meeting of human needs. I do not mean to demean this, for the gospel certainly addresses the needs of humanity. However, there is a need in God, too. That need does not correspond to a deficiency in Himself (for He is all-sufficient), but it rather flows out of the desire of His nature. Paul calls this need "the eternal purpose" or "the purpose of the ages." And the church, as dreamt in the heart of God, stands at the heartbeat of this ultimate intention. I have read reams of emerging church articles, but never once have I seen an article (or a chapter from an emerging church book for that matter) that discusses or brings light to the eternal purpose of God.
Describing the eternal purpose of God is beyond the scope of this article, though I have addressed it elsewhere. But I wish to end this section with some searching questions:
God conceived a purpose in eternity past. And that purpose was the very motivation for the creation wherein we stand. Do you know what that purpose is?
God’s eternal purpose is His magnificent obsession . . . it is that which drives and consumes His very being. Can the emerging church emerge from emphasizing how to better meet the needs of humanity to a conversation on that all-governing purpose which stands at the center of the beating heart of God?
4. The emerging church phenomenon shares a common trait with most of Christendom in that it is largely built on theory with little practice. For instance, there is a great deal of high-talk about Body functioning, community life, and equipping the saints for ministry, yet I have seen little to no fleshing out of these spiritual realities in any form among those who carry on loudly about them. While I applaud the gains that some emerging churches have made in providing more freedom to their members during a church service than the garden-variety institutional church, in my assessment, these churches have moved just a few inches forward on a very long road.
Allow me to enlarge this point a bit. About two months ago, I received a phone call from a well-known leader in the emerging church. His words to me were, "Frank, I’m really discouraged. There’s a lot of talk about community life, Body functioning, and Body ministry among us, but I have not been impressed with what I’ve seen along these lines."
I agreed with him totally. But then I responded, "I believe this is a major weakness of the emerging church conversation. I certainly don’t claim to have all the answers, but I’ve been emerging from the institutional church for almost 20 years now. I’ve made a lot of mistakes and failures, but I have also made many wonderful discoveries along the way. This journey continues till this day. But I can say this without flinching: For the last seventeen years, I have been gathering with Christians outside the organized church. Without exception, all of the groups that I have gathered with or have worked with personally have known the pains and joys of community life in bed-rock reality, they have all had consistent meetings under the Lord’s Headship without a leader or facilitator, they have made decisions together, and they have solved their own problems . . . all without a pastor, or a group of selected men to rule them, and without a song leader or worship team."
The man never inquired further.
This leads me to a set of thorny questions: If we are humble enough to admit that a great deal of the emerging church conversation is arm-chair philosophy, can we be humble enough to sit with those who have had some practical experience in these matters and openly dialogue about them?
Is it possible for those churches that have traveled a few feet in the right direction in "liberating the laity" to not excuse themselves from examining the vast remaining tract of land to be traveled?
How will the church of Jesus Christ ever be visible on this earth in any wide measure if those whom God has called and gifted to help equip God’s people are never willing learn from one another and seek to put into practice the vision that burns in their hearts? Are we each left to independently reinvent the wheel . . . every-man for himself? Or does this really boil down to a blatant unwillingness to abandon the clerical system which continues to control God’s people? Are we blithely opting for more Band-Aids simply because it is convenient?
5. While the emerging church phenomenon has placed a much needed emphasis on the Jesus of the Gospels, it has focused on imitating His outward conduct instead of exploring His internal relationship with an indwelling God which was the source of His conduct.
Studying the earthly example of Jesus Christ and trying to imitate it is like trying to create an orange out of whole cloth by studying the composition of a natural orange in a laboratory. An orange is the fruit . . . the natural outcome . . . of the life of an orange tree. In the same way, Jesus’ earthly conduct was simply the fruit of a life lived in communion with an indwelling Father.
Jesus said clearly that He could not live the Christian life: "Without my Father, I can do nothing." What, then, was the taproot of His selfless lifestyle? He gave us the answer in John 6:57, "As the Father has sent me and I LIVE BY MY FATHER, so he that eats me shall live by me." Jesus Christ had an internal relationship with His Father who indwelt Him.
For you and I to try to live the Christian life is like expecting a cat to set a dinner table, bake a cake, eat it with fork and knife, and wash dishes. The cat is the wrong life form to carry out these activities; hence, it is impossible for a cat to display human conduct. Jesus said as much when He told His followers, "Without me you can do nothing."
The secret to Jesus’ extraordinary life on earth was in His partaking of His indwelling Father and living by His life. In the same way, the secret to imitating Jesus is no different. It is found in partaking of our indwelling Lord and living by His life.
Can we be honest enough to admit that trying to imitate Christ’s earthly life is a study in failure? Is it possible for us to take a fresh look at the Lord’s earthly life by examining His internal walk as the pattern for us to imitate? For what the Father was to Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ is to you and I. Note His words: "As the Father has sent me, so I send you" (John 20:21) . . . "As I live by the Father, so he that eats me shall live by me." (John 6:57). It is my opinion that these words embody an entire world for Christians that has been virtually unexplored.
6. While the emerging church phenomenon has done a stellar job in emphasizing narrative in the Gospel story, it has neglected to take seriously the value of the narrative of the entire first-century church as a necessary model for interpreting the New Testament.
Most of us who are part of the emerging church phenomenon take the New Testament seriously. Nevertheless, we are all handling a New Testament whose letters are out of chronological order and whose books are divided up into chapters and verses. This makes understanding the social-historical context and setting of the New Testament writings virtually impossible to grasp. And it opens the door to such spiritual hazards as isolated proof-texting to "prove" doctrines and theological systems.
Since the Protestant Reformation, we Christians have been taught to be reductionists when it comes to Bible study and individualists when it comes to applying the words of Scripture. The emerging church phenomenon has not fully shed itself from these two misguided tendencies. Consider these two thoughts which are open to challenge and dialogue:
A. The New Testament must be approached holistically if it will be understood in its right context. That is, we must step back and see the whole picture before we can properly understand the frames which make it up.
B. The Christian faith is intensely corporate. For instance, the vast bulk of the Epistles in the New Testament are written to churches . . . corporate bodies of believers who knew a shared life together, and not to individuals. (Out of the 21 Epistles in the New Testament, only 5 were written to individuals. And 4 of those 5 were written to Christian workers.)
Point two opens up another universe altogether that I believe must become part of the emerging church conversation. That is, living the Christian life does not work except in a shared-life, face-to-face community of believers.
When a person understands the first-century narrative, they are keen to learn that all the passages in the New Testament on transformation are not addressed to followers of Jesus as individuals. They are instead addressed to communities, a la, "churches" in the first-century sense of the word. Consequently, warming a pew and listening to sermons does not transform us. Neither does standing near a pew or chair, with hands lifted, and singing praise songs led by a worship team or music director. Transformation occurs when a community of believers discover how to behold the Lord together and live their lives in a shared way.
It seems to me that what is needed, then, is a brand new approach to the New Testament. A holistic approach wherein we understand the story . . . the narrative . . . that lies behind all of its writings. Unless we have a good grasp on how the story of Acts chronologically interacts with Paul’s letters and the other letters of the New Testament, we will continue to make the common mistake of taking verses out of their historical context and misapplying them in a misguided quest for relevance. (For more details on this subject, see my article Needed: A New Approach to the New Testament http://www.ptmin.org/needed.htm and The Bible is Not a Jigsaw Puzzle http://www.ptmin.org/jigsaw.htm. I have also created a reconstruction of the entire narrative of the first century church in chronological order in my book, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church, from Destiny Image Publishers, http://www.ptmin.org/untold.htm .)
This leads me to some terse queries. Would it be worthwhile for those of us who are "emerging" to also emerge in the way we approach the New Testament? Is it possible that grasping the narrative of the story of the early church as a background to all the Epistles can revolutionize our understanding of God’s written Story and bring us further along in the church renewal/restoration effort? Is it possible that if we continue to take the individualistic, reductionist approach to the New Testament that has dominated the Christian landscape for centuries, that we will continue to make the same mistakes that our forefathers have made? Can we . . . and should we . . . utterly abandon the "cut-and-paste-stitching-verses-together-proof-texting" method of Bible study and sermonizing, and seek to embrace something better?
7. The emerging church phenomenon, like all preceding reform/renewal movements, has emphasized a bundle of Christian "its" and "things," instead of the Person of Jesus Christ.
In my opinion, if we were to examine the broad canvas of Christian movements and denominations throughout church history, we would discover that each one paints with a very fine brush. For one movement, the brush is evangelism. For another, it is social justice and acts of mercy. For another, it is praise and worship. For another, it is Bible study and doctrinal/theological accuracy. For another, it is the power of God, the gifts of the Spirit, signs and wonders. For another, it is changing the political system. For another, it is spiritual warfare and intercessory prayer. For another, it is personal prophecy. For still another, it is end-time theology (eschatology). And on and on it goes.
All of these brushes represent Christian "things." And they are just that . . . "things." They are Christian "its." Subjects about the Lord with which to become engaged, at best. Or with which to become obsessed, at worst.
But where are those who paint with the all-inclusive brush and talk about the Person of Jesus Christ? Where are those who are not talking about "its," "things," and "subjects" . . . but who are talking about HIM in depths little known and explored? And not just talking about Him, but who are presenting and ministering Him to His people?
Earlier I stated that I have read reams of emerging church articles. While many of them reveal fresh thinking on many subjects, I discovered something missing in virtually all of them:
The centrality of Jesus Christ.
I remember reading a few emerging church articles not too long ago, and I actually counted how many times the Lord was mentioned. In one article, which was quite lengthy, He was mentioned once. In another, He was never mentioned at all!
By contrast, if one were to read the letters of Paul with a careful eye, they would find his pen dripping with Christ. Take, for instance, his letter to Ephesians and Colossians. Try counting how often Paul mentions His Lord in a single chapter. It is mind-boggling!
What is my point? Paul had a living encounter with His Lord that shook him to his foundations. A ministry was born out of that encounter. And that ministry was a Person! Paul did not occupy himself with Christian "things." His occupation was the Lord Himself. And this glorious Lord embodies all things spiritual.
May I venture a searching question to my fellow ministers in the emerging church? Is it possible that we have missed the main point of our faith? Are we simply passing on the worn out tools we have been given by our evangelical forefathers on how to know the Lord? ("pray and study your Bible" . . . "pray more and study your Bible more!") Could there be new tools to know our Lord deeply and practically? If there are, are we open to discover them together? And are we willing to experience them before we preach them to God’s people?
Do our writings and messages betray an intimate familiarity with the One who indwells us, or are we merely engaging in subjects, issues, topics, things, and its? Are our ministries one of giving LIFE . . . which is Christ Himself, or do we betray a vague familiarity with this glorious Person? Are we educating God’s people on "subjects" about the faith, or are we bringing them into a living encounter with Him . . . the likes of which will consume and captivate their hearts for the rest of their lives?
Challenge and Invitation
In the mid-20th century, Swiss watchmakers had the corner on the world market share of watches. But that changed when one of their own countrymen came out with a revolutionary new idea: The quartz watch. He presented this idea to the Swiss manufacturers and they laughed at him. They concluded it could never work, so they refused to patent the idea. Seiko, on the other hand, took one look at the quartz watch and the rest is history.
The power of a paradigm had so influenced the Swiss watch manufacturers that they could not understand the new concept of the quartz watch. Because the quartz watch had no gears, no mainspring, and no bearings, they rejected it. Their present paradigm did not allow for the new innovation. The net effect was that they lost the leading edge on watch making and they were forced to lay off thousands of workers. It was all because the quartz watch did not fit into their world view. It did not fit within their paradigm. They did not appreciate the new way because they were blinded by the old way.
It is my strong conviction that a similar paradigm shift concerning the structure and practice of the church as well as church planting is absolutely crucial if the Body of Christ will reflect the dream in God’s heart and have any significant cultural impact. Or to put it another way, a serious rethinking of the modern pastoral role, the way that churches are planted, the centrality of Jesus Christ, the taproot of Christ’s earthly conduct, the narrative of the first-century story, and the eternal purpose of God are all necessary if the emerging church has any hope of fully emerging.
So consider this article as both a challenge and an invitation for patient dialogue and fellowship among leaders, authors, bloggers, and members of the emerging church community.
It would bring me great joy to have the opportunity to discuss these matters with those who have been captured with the call to emerge. For perhaps in doing so, we can learn from one another and take advantage of the present window of change that God has set before us.
You may reach me via email at Violabooks@aol.com (http://www.ptmin.org ) or by writing Present Testimony Ministry, PO Box 140370, Gainesville, FL 32614.
By the way, if you email, flames are not welcome ;-)
Frank Viola
Present Testimony Ministry
http://www.ptmin.org/
©2001 Present Testimony Ministry. All Rights Reserved.
Edited by News Room on 04/21/2005 at 5:11am
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 04/20/2005 at 6:11am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
This is really good! I am one who truly has done little or no reading or studying on this thing you call 'the emerging church movement' so a lot was new to me as reading it. I agree with what you say about what you call the modern pastoral office...what I have observed on my own and with little prompting nor 'reading up' is that many take the title pastor because it's familiar to all and as you said, just as every watch 'must have gears' every church 'must have a pastor' so men and women have bowed to this. However I do see an encouraging move for many who may still call themselves pastors or 'senior pastors' who in fact are not true biblical pastors...but they are moving deeper into elder roles (some of them) and truly, as you say the natural fruit is emerging.
Many who are titled 'the pastor' are in reality evangelists, apostles, prophets and yes, some are pastors too...I have decided long ago not to be misled nor offended by any title a person takes or refuses to take. I also don't get too shook up when people call me a 'this' or a 'that' used to make me angry and feel boxed in when people began placing labels on me...I won't get drawn into it any longer nor become upset when people choose a certain title...I am more concerned with knowing people after the Spirit and often He will reveal to me some or many of their true giftings...He must sort it out.
Maybe there will be a day to drop titles and for many this day has already arrived. This is a huge encouragement to see. But the huger encouragement is to see movement to being healthy functioning and so true you say it's not simply in filling a seat in an arena that full transformation occurs but in fleshing it out...and intimacy with God, fully immersed in Him, prayer, His word and in the breaking of bread...lives shared. Not setting boundaries and barriers when people invade our space but welcoming their invasion as the hand of God and pursuing, meeting what He will do next...
While I agree that the meat and bread of Christian life is not in the big meetings or the ones dominated by a single teacher or speaker. And I also agree this is sadly neglected or mismanaged (managed by men) still in our day..and I welcome learning more about the organic functioning...I also disagree that larger gatherings are only 'traditional' and may even be 'useless'. I think there is DEFINITELY a place for the general assembly and it has tremendous life and life changing potential and more so if the attendees are involved in ongoing more fluid gatherings and ministering to one another.
People will readily go to a concert, to a sporting event, to a show or a play in order to feed that need for the larger corporate experience. We have even seen enemy tools like Hitler use these huge exciting gatherings to change the thinking and the life of a nation...and to draw in folks into the more intimate groups of Nazi's...etc...I think this is more to do with how He created us...
Like in Revelation there are the ten thousands on ten thousands and thousands and thousands in the worship meetings there....but all aore one with Him and one another...the more one we are the more we will also get out of the larger gatherings....I see a movement in this direction in some corporate gatherings...
How often it's done or even the exact mechanics of it must be as individual as the group/s meeting together...and I think it's still in the very beginning stages of what it will be...but many places are mentioned the ten thousands and the angels also pattern this as they are seen by the shepherds...when we see heavenly worship revealed in OT and NT it can be quite large and awesome.
I don't really see that you've come out and told us this is not legitimate but I have met many who are thinking this is the case and I believe it's incorrect.
We also find Jesus and Paul making long teachings in various settings where only they addressed the group...I am not thinking off the top of my head of anyone else but on one occassion Pauls address was several hours long and a guy fell asleep and out the window...we don't see lots of people getting up one by one to teach there in that meeting...I am just saying that I believe there's a place for this as well, but a larger portion of the expression is more corporate/face to face with God and man without trappings...
I also agree there's really only one main 'issue' which would then cover most every thing else...HIS agenda, HIS heart, HIS presence...
|
Back to Top
|
|
Moderator
Admin Group
Joined: 03/16/2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6133
|
|
Posted: 04/26/2005 at 5:04am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Will the Emerging Church Fully Emerge? Part 2
nRn News
4. The emerging church phenomenon shares a common trait with most of Christendom in that it is largely built on theory with little practice. For instance, there is a great deal of high-talk about Body functioning, community life, and equipping the saints for ministry, yet I have seen little to no fleshing out of these spiritual realities in any form among those who carry on loudly about them. While I applaud the gains that some emerging churches have made in providing more freedom to their members during a church service than the garden-variety institutional church, in my assessment, these churches have moved just a few inches forward on a very long road.
Allow me to enlarge this point a bit. About two months ago, I received a phone call from a well-known leader in the emerging church. His words to me were, "Frank, I'm really discouraged. There's a lot of talk about community life, Body functioning, and Body ministry among us, but I have not been impressed with what I've seen along these lines."
I agreed with him totally. But then I responded, "I believe this is a major weakness of the emerging church conversation. I certainly don't claim to have all the answers, but I've been emerging from the institutional church for almost 20 years now. I've made a lot of mistakes and failures, but I have also made many wonderful discoveries along the way. This journey continues till this day. But I can say this without flinching: For the last seventeen years, I have been gathering with Christians outside the organized church. Without exception, all of the groups that I have gathered with or have worked with personally have known the pains and joys of community life in bed-rock reality, they have all had consistent meetings under the Lord's Headship without a leader or facilitator, they have made decisions together, and they have solved their own problems . . . all without a pastor, or a group of selected men to rule them, and without a song leader or worship team."
The man never inquired further.
This leads me to a set of thorny questions: If we are humble enough to admit that a great deal of the emerging church conversation is arm-chair philosophy, can we be humble enough to sit with those who have had some practical experience in these matters and openly dialogue about them?
Is it possible for those churches that have traveled a few feet in the right direction in "liberating the laity" to not excuse themselves from examining the vast remaining tract of land to be traveled?
How will the church of Jesus Christ ever be visible on this earth in any wide measure if those whom God has called and gifted to help equip God's people are never willing learn from one another and seek to put into practice the vision that burns in their hearts? Are we each left to independently reinvent the wheel . . . every-man for himself? Or does this really boil down to a blatant unwillingness to abandon the clerical system which continues to control God's people? Are we blithely opting for more Band-Aids simply because it is convenient?
5. While the emerging church phenomenon has placed a much needed emphasis on the Jesus of the Gospels, it has focused on imitating His outward conduct instead of exploring His internal relationship with an indwelling God which was the source of His conduct.
Studying the earthly example of Jesus Christ and trying to imitate it is like trying to create an orange out of whole cloth by studying the composition of a natural orange in a laboratory. An orange is the fruit . . . the natural outcome . . . of the life of an orange tree. In the same way,Jesus' earthly conduct was simply the fruit of a life lived in communion with an indwelling Father.
Jesus said clearly that He could not live the Christian life: "Without my Father, I can do nothing." What, then, was the taproot of His selfless lifestyle? He gave us the answer in John 6:57, "As the Father has sent me and I LIVE BY MY FATHER, so he that eats me shall live by me." Jesus Christ had an internal relationship with His Father who indwelt Him.
For you and I to try to live the Christian life is like expecting a cat to set a dinner table, bake a cake, eat it with fork and knife, and wash dishes. The cat is the wrong life form to carry out these activities; hence, it is impossible for a cat to display human conduct. Jesus said as much when He told His followers, "Without me you can do nothing."
The secret to Jesus' extraordinary life on earth was in His partaking of His indwelling Father and living by His life. In the same way, the secret to imitating Jesus is no different. It is found in partaking of our indwelling Lord and living by His life.
Can we be honest enough to admit that trying to imitate Christ's earthly life is a study in failure? Is it possible for us to take a fresh look at the Lord's earthly life by examining His internal walk as the pattern for us to imitate? For what the Father was to Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ is to you and I. Note His words: "As the Father has sent me, so I send you" (John 20:21) . . . "As I live by the Father, so he that eats me shall live by me." (John 6:57). It is my opinion that these words embody an entire world for Christians that has been virtually unexplored.
6. While the emerging church phenomenon has done a stellar job in emphasizing narrative in the Gospel story, it has neglected to take seriously the value of the narrative of the entire first century church as a necessary model for interpreting the New Testament.
Most of us who are part of the emerging church phenomenon take the New Testament seriously. Nevertheless, we are all handling a New Testament whose letters are out of chronological order and whose books are divided up into chapters and verses. This makes understanding the social-historical context and setting of the New Testament writings virtually impossible to grasp. And it opens the door to such spiritual hazards as isolated proof-texting to "prove" doctrines and theological systems.
Since the Protestant Reformation, we Christians have been taught to be reductionists when it comes to Bible study and individualists when it comes to applying the words of Scripture. The emerging church phenomenon has not fully shed itself from these two misguided tendencies. Consider these two thoughts which are open to challenge and dialogue:
A. The New Testament must be approached holistically if it will be understood in its right context. That is, we must step back and see the whole picture before we can properly understand the frames which make it up.
B. The Christian faith is intensely corporate. For instance, the vast bulk of the Epistles in the New Testament are written to churches . . . corporate bodies of believers who knew a shared life together, and not toindividuals. (Out of the 21 Epistles in the New Testament, only 5 were written to individuals. And 4 of those 5 were written to Christian workers.)
Point two opens up another universe altogether that I believe must become part of the emerging church conversation. That is, living the Christian life does not work except in a shared-life, face-to-face community of believers.
When a person understands the first-century narrative, they are keen to learn that all the passages in the New Testament on transformation are not addressed to followers of Jesus as individuals. They are instead addressed to communities, a la, "churches" in the first-century sense of the word. Consequently, warming a pew and listening to sermons does not transform us. Neither does standing near a pew or chair, with hands lifted, and singing praise songs led by a worship team or music director. Transformation occurs when a community of believers discover how to behold the Lord together and live their lives in a shared way.
It seems to me that what is needed, then, is a brand new approach to the New Testament. A holistic approach wherein we understand the story . . . the narrative . . . that lies behind all of its writings. Unless we have a good grasp on how the story of Acts chronologically interacts with Paul's letters and the other letters of the New Testament, we will continue to make the common mistake of taking verses out of their historical context and misapplying them in a misguided quest for relevance. (For more details on this subject, see my article Needed: A New Approach to the New Testament http://www.ptmin.org/needed.htm and The Bible is Not a Jigsaw Puzzle http://www.ptmin.org/jigsaw.htm. I have also created a reconstruction of the entire narrative of the first century church in chronological order in my book, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church, from Destiny Image Publishers, http://www.ptmin.org/untold.htm.)
This leads me to some terse queries. Would it be worthwhile for those of us who are "emerging" to also emerge in the way we approach the New Testament? Is it possible that grasping the narrative of the story of the early church as a background to all the Epistles can revolutionize our understanding of God's written Story and bring us further along in the church renewal/restoration effort? Is it possible that if we continue to take the individualistic, reductionist approach to the New Testament that has dominated the Christian landscape for centuries, that we will continue to make the same mistakes that our forefathers have made? Can we . . . and should we . . . utterly abandon the "cut-and-paste-stitching-verses-together-proof-texting"metho d of Bible study and sermonizing, and seek to embrace something better?
7. The emerging church phenomenon, like all preceding reform/renewal movements, has emphasized a bundle of Christian "its" and "things," instead of the Person of Jesus Christ.
In my opinion, if we were to examine the broad canvas of Christian movements and denominations throughout church history, we would discover that each one paints with a very fine brush. For one movement, the brush is evangelism. For another, it is social justice and acts of mercy. For another, it is praise and worship. For another, it is Bible study and doctrinal/theological accuracy. For another, it is the power of God, the gifts of the Spirit, signs and wonders. For another, it is changing the political system. For another, it is spiritual warfare and intercessory prayer. For another, it is personal prophecy. For still another, it is end-time theology (eschatology). And on and on it goes.
All of these brushes represent Christian "things." And they are just that . . . "things." They are Christian "its." Subjects about the Lord with which to become engaged, at best. Or with which to become obsessed, at worst.
But where are those who paint with the all-inclusive brush and talk about the Person of Jesus Christ? Where are those who are not talking about "its," "things," and "subjects" . . . but who are talking about HIM in depths little known and explored? And not just talking about Him, but who are presenting and ministering Him to His people?
Earlier I stated that I have read reams of emerging church articles. While many of them reveal fresh thinking on many subjects, I discovered something missing in virtually all of them:
The centrality of Jesus Christ.
I remember reading a few emerging church articles not too long ago, and I actually counted how many times the Lord was mentioned. In one article, which was quite lengthy, He was mentioned once. In another, He was never mentioned at all!
By contrast, if one were to read the letters of Paul with a careful eye, they would find his pen dripping with Christ. Take, for instance, his letter to Ephesians and Colossians. Try counting how often Paul mentions His Lord in a single chapter. It is mind-boggling!
What is my point? Paul had a living encounter with His Lord that shook him to his foundations. A ministry was born out of that encounter. And that ministry was a Person! Paul did not occupy himself with Christian "things." His occupation was the Lord Himself. And this glorious Lord embodies all things spiritual.
May I venture a searching question to my fellow ministers in the emerging church? Is it possible that we have missed the main point of our faith? Are we simply passing on the worn out tools we have been given by our evangelical forefathers on how to know the Lord? ("pray and study your Bible" . . . "pray more and study your Bible more!") Could there be new tools to know our Lord deeply and practically? If there are, are we open to discover them together? And are we willing to experience them before we preach them to God's people?
Do our writings and messages betray an intimate familiarity with the One who indwells us, or are we merely engaging in subjects, issues, topics, things, and its? Are our ministries one of giving LIFE . . . which is Christ Himself, or do we betray a vague familiarity with this glorious Person? Are we educating God's people on "subjects" about the faith, or are we bringing them into a living encounter with Him . . . the likes of which will consume and captivate their hearts for the rest of their lives?
Challenge and Invitation
In the mid-20th century, Swiss watchmakers had the corner on the world market share of watches. But that changed when one of their own countrymen came out with a revolutionary new idea: The quartz watch. He presented this idea to the Swiss manufacturers and they laughed at him. They concluded it could never work, so they refused to patent the idea. Seiko, on the other hand, took one look at the quartz watch and the rest is history.
The power of a paradigm had so influenced the Swiss watch manufacturers that they could not understand the new concept of the quartz watch. Because the quartz watch had no gears, no mainspring, and no bearings, they rejected it. Their present paradigm did not allow for the new innovation. The net effect was that they lost the leading edge on watch making and they were forced to lay off thousands of workers. It was all because the quartz watch did not fit into their world view. It did not fit within their paradigm. They did not appreciate the new way because they were blinded by the old way.
It is my strong conviction that a similar paradigm shift concerning the structure and practice of the church as well as church planting is absolutely crucial if the Body of Christ will reflect the dream in God's heart and have any significant cultural impact. Or to put it another way, a serious rethinking of the modern pastoral role, the way that churches are planted, the centrality of Jesus Christ, the taproot of Christ's earthly conduct, the narrative of the first-century story, and the eternal purpose of God are all necessary if the emerging church has any hope of fully emerging.
So consider this article as both a challenge and an invitation for patient dialogue and fellowship among leaders, authors, bloggers, and members of the emerging church community.
It would bring me great joy to have the opportunity to discuss these matters with those who have been captured with the call to emerge. For perhaps in doing so, we can learn from one another and take advantage of the present window of change that God has set before us.
Frank Viola may be reached via email at Violabooks@aol.com (http://www.ptmin.org) or by writing Present Testimony Ministry, PO Box 140370, Gainesville, FL 32614.
----------------------
|
Back to Top
|
|
Kathy Bippus
Senior Member
Joined: 01/25/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4741
|
|
Posted: 06/18/2005 at 10:55am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
This has really brought about some searching to know what is He doing, what is He saying and where exactly are we in all of this? While much of what has been said is true, I find myself truely saddened, a grieving that leads me to Him to hear what He is saying. I agree very much of the centrality of Jesus Christ, of course, He is the cornerstone of the church. We are instructed by Him, to learn of Him. So we are to learn of His fellowship with the Father and how He manifested the Father by His obedience in word and deed.
I would really like some dialogue here also, too come into more of an understanding.
I have seen , we all have I believe, how man has placed the pastor in a wrongful position and have made them the head of the `church'. As a wife and husband, I have seen the tendency for the wife to place a dependency upon the husband that God never intended there to be. A dependency upon that ONLY He should have. With it, the husband has been given a burden that he was never meant to carry. Almost instinctivly, he tries to rise to the occasion and there is a misappropriation of the husband and wife. A misplaced trust. We have brought this same mentality into the church. Instead of looking to Jesus, the Head, the Source, they look to the pastor as the head, the source. Just as instinctively, he rises to the occassion. Now only by way of example here.. The wife, the congregation, and the husband, the pastor, are both then reproducing self- centered, self- sufficient offspring, the fruit of the flesh in all their activities. The worship is worshipped, the offering is worshipped, the messenger and the message is worshipped.The gifts and the calling is worshipped. The very act of service is worshipped.
My question is this..Where is the intimate fellowship of the Holy Spirit? Where is the trust in Him who has been sent and indwells every believer, to teach and instruct, empower and showforth Jesus Christ, in, through and among us? In all of the emerging `out' of the doctrine of man made system, are we emerging `into' intimate relationship with the Holy Spirit? In so doing, the intimate fellowship, communion with Him, reproducing fruit that will remain. A fellowship which brings the abandoning of self thoughts and ways too the Lordship, Headship of Jesus Christ. Are we negleting this Person in the emerging? And are we discipling by word and deed to trust the Person of the Holy Spirit, to be in intimate fellowship with Him? As He is the One who leads `US' into all Truth.
Love in Christ, Kathy
__________________
In His Love
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/18/2005 at 11:27am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
A huge key here, Kathy is that according to Is 54 He is the Husband to us as a part of His Bride to the Bride as a whole. An elder of the church is nowhere required to be a pastor. I mean they could be a pastor or something else too. In fact, over the years we have seen that many who carry the title 'pastor' of such and such fellowship are in reality an apostle or an evangelist a prophet a teacher and so on. Also there are far more pastors in a church than the one elder pastor, or should be. The pastors nor the elders are to be the husband to the church in the sense it has operated. They are not to be the father of the church tho they may be fathers and truly Ron McGatlin is a father to me but he would flee from replacing God as my true Father. The men and women are not to be over and above. The structure of the assembly large or small was never meant to be a pyramid upholding a man's ministry or vision. All the rest supporting the man's vision and ministry.
If the entire group is lost and floundering without you then what you have built is your own kingdom.
If they grow beyond you and without you and do not lose strength nor focus in your absence then you have served as an elder and not as an overlord or lord protector or feudal lord.
This structire change will free many who are called apostles to regions and have been caged and trapped within a single congregation. It will open rather than close areas of influence. It will multiply rather than shrink. This will free all and will loose the Spirit of God to advance the kingdom which has not occurred yet to the degree it needs to.
|
Back to Top
|
|
Kathy Bippus
Senior Member
Joined: 01/25/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4741
|
|
Posted: 06/18/2005 at 4:08pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
I agree Denise, I was using the husband, wife relationship as an example. But there is that mindset in the church as well as the marriage. Instead of the being one under His Headship and submitting one to another, there is the ruling over and has been given by looking to man as head. I think what I am trying to get at is this...we have seen and at one point or another have been part of that system, that mentality. Now that we have emerged and/or emerging, are we merging into intimate fellowship, communion with the Holy Spirit? Because what I have seen is as Frank was saying, spiritual band aids. The house church is basically implementing the same type of government that was left. So I am questioning our purpose of emerging from to what? If we are not allowing the Spirit of God to have His rightful place in our personal lives as well as then relationally and corporately as the body of Christ. See what I am saying? I'm trying to explain my thoughts here : ) Are we emerging from tradition and doctrine of man made theology of government too Spirit led, Spirit taught, having the fellowship of the Spirit..His government?
I think our actions and mindset of government ( speaking of ruling and headship)in the church comes from a lack of fellowship with the Holy Spirit and therefore a lack of trust in Him. We have and are seeing the error of our ways, now what? I see so many stuck, not moving forward, not moving backward, in a limbo. As much as there is desire for more, there seems to be no motivating desire to take action to attain it. It is not without cost. It costs us something doesn't it?
Love in Christ, Kathy
__________________
In His Love
|
Back to Top
|
|
Larry Silverman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/30/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 5:59am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Kathy,
Might I suggest a book to you? It is, "The Normal Christian Church Life" by Watchman Nee. (Living Streams Ministry) This book was originally written in 1939 and I have a sneaking suspicion that God inspired Nee to write it prior to all of the persecution in China. The reason is that Nee's apostolic teaching put into a place a dynamic Church that has not only overcome severe persecution, but thrived in it to probably become the most powerful Church in history.
A large part of our ministry is to plant churches, mostly house churches. There is no way we are trying to repeat the mistakes of the past. We talk about the established church creating, "Prisoners of the pew in the Red Brick Building." We take very seriously the caution to not create, "Prisoners of the sofa in someone's living room!" As an itinerant, apostolic church planter I take very seriously an admonition that I sense comes directly from the Lord of the Harvest, "Do it right this time!" And... of course we can never forget the words of Jesus, when He tells us that the New Wine just won't work in the old wineskins!
I hope this helps some.
Be blessed Kathy and keep going forward.
Larry
__________________
Dr. Larry Silverman, M.C./Psy., M.Min., D.C./Psy.
http://www.larrysilverman.com
http://www.larrysilverman.blogs.com
|
Back to Top
|
|
Kathy Bippus
Senior Member
Joined: 01/25/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4741
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 7:02am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Blessings Larry and thank you for your suggestion to reading Watchman Nee's book.
I have two of his `The Spiritual Man' and `Sit, Walk, Stand' from my early years and they were both very enlightening and helped to lay a solid foundation. I will look for the book, hopefully I can find it online : ) I am in the middle of moving, so it may take me a few days to find it and begin reading, I look forward to it!
Again thank you, Love in Christ, Kathy
__________________
In His Love
|
Back to Top
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
Joined: 01/14/2004
Online Status: Online
Posts: -696
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 10:43am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Edited by Robin Paisley on 02/12/2006 at 3:24pm
|
Back to Top
|
|
Larry Silverman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/30/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 11:05am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Thanks for sharing this link for Nee's book Robin! For anyone interested in the current move of God, quoting Viola, "The Emerging Church," this book is a must read. It's great that it can be read online!
We must create the new wineskin as I'm sensing that the Lord is about to pour out His New Wine!
Thanks again Robin! You have blessed my day with this find today. I'm going to be sharing this with lots of people.
blessings,
Larry
__________________
Dr. Larry Silverman, M.C./Psy., M.Min., D.C./Psy.
http://www.larrysilverman.com
http://www.larrysilverman.blogs.com
|
Back to Top
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
Joined: 01/14/2004
Online Status: Online
Posts: -696
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 11:33am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Edited by Robin Paisley on 02/12/2006 at 3:25pm
|
Back to Top
|
|
Larry Silverman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/30/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 11:50am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
You know Robin, I'm really thrilled to read reports such as yours. To think.... Finding God on the ball field! How different it is, when we've been told that the only way we can find Him is to be in the Red Brick Building every time the door is open!
Unfortunately, I used to be one of those guys who used to preach that kinda of stuff! But, thankfully I've had the paradigm change that Viola speaks of. And you know what.... I'm finding that the more I'm going this way, the more my paradigms continue to change. This move of God is a mighty River. The thing that differentiates a river from a stagnant pond is the current. We're all on the journey of a lifetime. It will finally end when out rafts bump up to the Source of it all... His throne.
Blessings,
Larry
__________________
Dr. Larry Silverman, M.C./Psy., M.Min., D.C./Psy.
http://www.larrysilverman.com
http://www.larrysilverman.blogs.com
|
Back to Top
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
Joined: 01/14/2004
Online Status: Online
Posts: -696
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 12:26pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Edited by Robin Paisley on 02/12/2006 at 3:25pm
|
Back to Top
|
|
Steve Eastman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/14/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
|
|
Posted: 06/21/2005 at 11:20pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Denise, Kathy, Larry and Robin
Frank raises some interesting points about the emerging church paradigm. I think one reason the problems he mentions exist is that once we experience a new level of freedom in Jesus, we forget there is more because our new level is so much better than what we had. In my case, I eventually get hungry for more again and God leads me further.
It is very easy for a house church to be a miniature copy of a brick and mortar church, complete with liturgy. We have to unlearn so much to experience Spirit led services where Jesus is head. Several weeks ago I attended the Gene Edwards house church conference in Durham and it set a new standard for me. The young adults there flowed in the spirit as did the older adults. It was not business as usual. The speakers were so committed to the interactive mode that they encouraged "interruptions" of comments and questions during their teachings. I asked God to show me how to apply what I saw there.
As far as leadership is concerned, Jesus set the example. He was a servant leader, even washing the disciples' feet. He did not demand or accept an armor bearer to carry his luggage. He ministered to the disciples for only three years or so, then left the planet, sending the Holy Spirit to live within. Likewise, Paul stayed with individual churches only a short time, varying from several months to three years. He did not view his apostleship as a career that would support him. Many times he worked with his hands to supply his own needs. I believe it is the duty of the so-called five-fold ministry to work themselves out of a job. The people are not to remain as baby birds, waiting for their parent to drop a morsel into their mouths. The are to mature and to minister to others and to one another. Each one is to have a psalm, a tongue, a teaching, etc. Jesus, although Messiah, shied away from making an issue of it. He preferred for people to notice the anointing that sprang from his intimacy with the Father instead of commanding obedience from the office he held. Similarly, leadership in the church does not spring from an office, but from the trust and respect people have for what God is doing in a man or woman's life.
Frank is definitely a forerunner. Most of us have quite a way to go to catch up with him, but he would be among the first to admit he does not have all the answers and is still seeking more of God. I am encouraged that Jesus will come back for a pure and spotless bride. For me, that suggests that we will get it together by submitting to him, learning to hear his voice and letting him use us. Apart from Jesus we are nothing, but with Him, we are his instruments for manifesting the heavenly kingdom on this earth.
Steve Eastman
Edited by Sheryl Eastman on 06/22/2005 at 6:06pm
|
Back to Top
|
|
Larry Silverman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/30/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
Posted: 06/22/2005 at 5:10am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Steve,
You wrote: "It is very easy for a house church to be a miniature copy of a brick and mortar church, complete with liturgy. We have to unlearn so much to experience Spirit led services where Jesus is head."
You have identified one of the greatest dangers of the house church movement. Sometime ago I met with the leaders of several house churches in a large, Mid-west city. I asked them a couple of frank questions, the key question being, what was their vision for reaching the lost of the town for Jesus? After some continued prodding on my part, it became painfully obvious that they didn't have such a vision. Some of these leaders had been meeting with the same people for nearly 20 years. I soon discovered that these were dis-contented people, most of them being hurt through the ministry of the organized church. Their message was pretty much the same for all of those years, "The fallacy of the organized church and the priesthood of the believer." They didn't want a pastor telling them what to do, so for 20 years they gathered every Sunday, licking their wounds, re-hashing their hurts, and telling each other that they didn't need leadership, that they were all priests and kings.
The other side of the coin is that there is for certain "government" established within the church. I fear that we have a pendulum that has swung a little too far one way! In our desire to be free, we have lost sight of the proper government that God has established within His Church. Especially those of us within the American Church, just plain do not want ANYONE telling us what to do! We have to keep in mind the word, "Balance." Just this morning I read the following, "Obey your spiritual leaders and do what they say. Their work is to watch over your souls, and they know they are accountable to God. Give them reason to do this joyfully and not with sorrow. That would certainly not be for your benefit." (Heb. 13:17 NLT) Of course we know that control freak pastors have beaten us over the head with this verse for eons. But the "balance" is.... this is a word from God!
God is raising up true servant-driven, apostolic ministry in these days. The chief function of this ministry is to: #1. Give the Church vision for their regions, etc. For example, I have no vision to plant and build a church anywhere. As we travel the country, God has given me burdens for many locals. But that vision never is to just plant a church. The vision is to completely monopolize that region for the Lord, to take dominion over that region. In Vision of Hope we call ourselves, "Citytakers." Our website is: www.citytakers.com #2. Keep the Church on pace so that the mistakes of the past will not be repeated. God is constantly reminding me of how much of the old wineskin I still have within me. So... I too make many mistakes in this area, but it is a constant growing process. For instance.... sometime ago, in a meeting in Cedar Springs, a sister asked for prayer for sickness. I immediately reached into my left, front pocket where I keep my oil bottle. As I had it my hands, just about ready to anoint her, I got stopped by the Spirit. He showed me my habit of always doing what I do. For instance, I move quite strongly in healing, I've had many healed over the past years. But..am I supposed to heal the sick or am I to teach, impart and release others to heal the sick?
So... the itinerant church planter that Viola talks of is essential in getting the vision cast, and seeing it come to fruition.
Once again, I really enjoyed your post and I'm really enjoying this thread.
Be blessed Brother!
Larry
__________________
Dr. Larry Silverman, M.C./Psy., M.Min., D.C./Psy.
http://www.larrysilverman.com
http://www.larrysilverman.blogs.com
|
Back to Top
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
Joined: 01/14/2004
Online Status: Online
Posts: -696
|
|
Posted: 06/22/2005 at 10:40am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Edited by Robin Paisley on 02/12/2006 at 3:26pm
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/22/2005 at 4:34pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
I am really getting a lot out of the input of you all! I do not look for a certain shape size or type of meeting place. I look for love and intimacy and a certain spirit. I look to see people really connecting in a genuine way. This normally involves smaller settings. But also look for openness and not closed-ness about them. Also ditto to Robin & Larry's latest. Look for Jesus. Where is He?
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/23/2005 at 5:29am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
I realize my words were a bit unclear....I meant there needs to be smaller type things involved in order for people to truly be intimate. This could be an organized regular home fellowship type expression or it could be more spontaneous such as just getting together with people and not having it be a 'programmed' affair.
The small intimate group of 120 rocked the world didn't they? In a similar way as we connect in truth and reality and not by some systemized or programmed thing then we will see this thing manifesting no matter the size shape or numbers in a particular setting.
He is stripping away religious structures and facades to reveal the wonder and glory of the reality that has been emerging within. Some of it has functioned as mulch or as cover growth as the beautiful real stuff has been growing and forming unseen. I think we will all be literally amazed and bewondered to find out what He has been doing in secret! It will be much huger and broader than we can begin to comprehend.
But it is not anywhere near complete without the going out and being thrust forth as well....this has always been demonstrated by Jesus and the early church. And when they stopped going out they were scattered forth by other means. He loves us and the world too much to continually bless anything stagnant. His patience and mercy are beyond comprehension....
|
Back to Top
|
|
Larry Silverman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/30/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
Posted: 06/24/2005 at 7:31am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Gang,
This dialog has been great.
I like what Denise wrote about it really doesn't matter where we meet, it's just the love and intimacy that we should look for. I fully agree.....but... (there's that ole' word..."but" again).
Here's the current problem. We, the American Church, have been moving in a total case of being brainwashed. Every Sunday morning, millions of people get out of bed and have this strange sensation come over them...."I MUST go to church!" It's like we're walking zombies... "I MUST go to church!" Now, I wouldn't have a problem with this if we instead had this sensation come over us...."I MUST BE the Church!" We have T shirts that we take out to our meetings with the pic of an traditional church building on it with the red circle and x out on it and it says in large red letters, "Don't Go To Church!" Man, does that cause a stir when you wear it into Walmart! But when people give you the strange look or question what you're about, you turn and show them the back, "Be the Church!"
The problem is that we've been going to church, attending church and not "being" the Church to a lost and dying world. In Cedar Springs we've been doing street evangelism on Sunday mornings (church time) for several weeks now. We can't get any "church people" help us, cause they just have to attend their perspective churches, yet every time we're on the street corner we've made several hundred people aware of the reality of the Living Jesus Christ. We're taking it out of the box, but can't get any "church people" interested in helping us. After all, it would be horrible if they were not in their church building everytime the doors are open!
OK... the New Testament pattern (model) is church meetings in the home, and apostolic meetings and evangelistic meetings in public places. There is not even one iota of a verse that says, go build a building someplace. Actually that issues was a non issue until around 300 A.D.
Secondly, remember I stated in a couple of the other posts that we need the apostolic ministry to help keep us going in the right direction. As the normal flow of American Christians is to "attend church" every Sun. morning, and that means going to a traditional church building, we should be working very diligently in suggesting other things... such as meeting with about 10 - 15 people in someone's living room. There we model some of the only Bible as far as the how to "do" church goes... I Cor. 14: 26-33. There we teach the people, impart to them the Holy Spirit's anointing, and then, possibly the most important thing... release them to fulfill their ministries. We don't try to raise up one single house church in a community, but, rather we plant hundreds of them. In a single neighborhood we could plant several. Then at given times we call them all together for apostolic meetings, or meetings of the "work." Here's where we worship, preach, teach, impart vision and continue to keep that vision fresh, teaching the Saints that they should be the dominant force within a local.
Denise, I fear that if we settle for less than this, what we are doing is perpetuating the green-eyed monster that we currently are dealing with... that is millions more, "attending church" and not "being the Church." I may really be a purest in my thinking on this, and God certainly does use many people and ministries that are housed in a "church building." But, I really kinda feel that if we would go back to the Bible... format and model to it as close as our current revelation allows, we will be on our way to becoming the dominant force within our communities.
Be blessed,
Larry
__________________
Dr. Larry Silverman, M.C./Psy., M.Min., D.C./Psy.
http://www.larrysilverman.com
http://www.larrysilverman.blogs.com
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/24/2005 at 7:10pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Larry! Well, as you know I have total respect for and belief in house churches. Having been involved in these sorts for a number of years.
I was thinking to supply a number of New Testament examples showing the variety of size location and mix of believers. I do have all the references should anyone require it. There were the 12,70 500 120 so far as specific numbers mentioned of Jesus' disciples who walked with Him during His earthly ministry. He habitually went to Synogougue but also they met in homes, outdoors, temple, in a wide variety of settings large and small. I would think He was modeling gatherings that they continued to model in Acts and on where they met in temple, synogougues, outdoors, homes etc. One group mentioned had a specific number of 3000 added to daily....who knows how massive those meetings were? And in I Cor we see when they gathered together and shared meals there were factions. Hard to have the number of factions mentioned with a strict 15 or so...and we see in James talk of various seating arrangements mentioned. This sounds like more than a circle of 6.
Cover to cover there's great variety and also amazing silence on the topics of specific places, styles or numbers of meetings. Though intimacy is always a highlight and there are two's and three's and family things and 10's and 12's nowhere do I see God making an issue of it.
Seems the structure change is an inward structure that manifests in the spirit and fruitfulness and holiness and love and living the cross. Way more inclusive and variegated than we can yet imagine!
What I look for is a reality and a Spirit and an openness more than a certain form or lack thereof.
Was prompted by God to watch a program I have never watched. It so defined this! Two women traded families. One was a vegan family in California and the other was a Cajun family on the Bayou.
The Vegan woman was on a mission so very intense to show the Cajun guy and child how far superior their lifestyle was. Her entire experience she did not embrace the culture or accept any part of it nor even really take time to connect with the people. All her interactions were about changing their beliefs...all about beliefs...she had no respect nor grace for the fact these people lived totally different from her but yet were as valuable as she and in many ways probably healthier despite her extremely healthy and disciplined life...
The Cajun woman respected the kitchen of the vegan woman and therefore did not cook meats in it. She embraced their lifestyle and ate vegan while there. She related to the family and friends. All their friends were vegan and they bombarded the lady with scolding about her wrong ways and all the reasons she was wrong...she thoughtfully listened but stood for herself as well. She found a point on which she thought she could connect. Not to convert them but simply to bring some understanding and they were totally blind to it. The kids loved her. She enjoyed herself for the most part (except the interrogation session) And she respected their ways.
When the two women met after the event, the vegan had reams of 'truths' she had written to 'set them free' from the 'terrbly wrong' ways they lived. She aguished and teared over it so very sincere and comitted. The Cajun woman went with thanks and friendship, a gained understanding that these 'are people too'. A good time she'd had....relationship vs beliefs....
I guess what I am saying here is, it's really the relationship and connecting and the life in Christ that's most important. The other stuff like stage props...and as Robin's been saying lately 'being in the moment' embracing and respecting and loving each other and ourselves. The real. My real might be in a different setting now than it was 10 years ago but I look to walk with Him and as confirmation...relationships and not beliefs..light and love
|
Back to Top
|
|
Ron McGatlin
Admin Group
Joined: 08/23/2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4141
|
|
Posted: 06/27/2005 at 8:01pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Praise God for the discussions on this thread. Thank you Larry and Steve for giving us such practical and valuable help as we all move toward the new/old. Thanks also to Denise and everyone of you for your help, your inputs and questions raised by your sincere comments. There is obviously lots of things being discovered and lots of things being altered in our minds regarding the reality of the rapidly changing landscape of what we call church.
We don't go to the church - We are the church
We owe much to the past models of church and the faithful leaders and saints who have birthed multitudes into salvation and created a foundation of believers that are now bringing forth further reformation toward the original New Testament church model.
The word church has a very uncertain definition in many minds today. When one person says church they mean one thing and when someone else says church it means a different thing. God is lifting up a new/old standard and many are seeking to see through their own personal religious fog to discover the new/old reality of New Testament style relationship with God and with one another.
One of the most difficult concepts for our minds to digest is that we don't go to the church, we are the church. The practical reality of this is indeed a large hurdle yet many are absorbing it. If we don't get this, then changing the size of the meeting or the location of the meeting or switching around some titles and so on may only lead to the same imperfect concepts that have led to where we have already been.
When we look without religious glasses or fog to the New Testament model of the church that Jesus really started in its embryo form and the disciples brought into being by Jesus working with them by the Holy Spirit, we find it looks much different from most church systems of today.
A great transition began at that time as the old covenant "church" or temple/synagogue was no longer to be the center or primary presentation of the kingdom of God on earth. A new covenant "called out people" (church) were to be the gathering that would become a living organism flowing the very continuation of resurrected life of Jesus Christ on earth by the Holy Spirit, forming Christ in gatherings of people joined by the Holy Spirit in spiritual relational networks (body).
Jesus went to the temple/synagogue in fulfillment of old covenant living before His baptism - before the Holy Spirit descended and remained upon Him. As His ministry matured He went to these institutions and revealed Himself as Messiah. At that point serious opposition to the transition began. The decision was made to throw him off a cliff instead of receiving the new covenant reality of Jesus the Messiah. The transition to new covenant church was not made in the old covenant institutions.
Jesus gathered disciples and began to model and bring forth the church "called out gatherings". Jesus gave his life on the cross, was resurrected, taken up into heaven, and returned to earth in the Holy Spirit to indwell His people thus establishing the NEW COVENANT reality of church.
Some of the early apostles continued to go to the old covenant institutions again and again to attempt to lead them to Jesus and the new covenant. Some people did make the transition with them. But the institution continued in the old covenant with Priest standing before the people offering sacrifices for the people and maintaining the old covenant way of form and shadow rather than transition into the reality of Jesus and the new covenant.
A great falling away occurred in the new covenant church. After a few centuries men began to change the ways of the church from what Jesus and the disciples had begun. Portions of the old covenant form began to be reestablished in the new covenant church.
A hierarchy of men ruling over the people was again brought forth and the division of clergy and laity was erroneously formed in the new covenant church. The new covenant was to include a nation of priests and kings. The headship of Christ living within the people by the Holy Spirit was replaced by a structure of men and their rules and rituals. This was a partial return to the old covenant system of Priest standing between the people and God. The resulting "church" was a perverted mixture of old and new. This created an opening for traditions of men and doctrines of demons to infiltrate the church.
Over a thousand years later the "great reformation" began a process of eliminating some of the old covenant ways as well as some traditions of men and doctrines of demons, from the new covenant church. We now can clearly see that it was not a complete reformation. In recent centuries and very recent decades, we have begun to see giant steps of more complete reformation toward becoming as the church that Jesus began.
One of the old covenant practices carried forward into the reformed church was the clergy laity division. The function and office of Priest was renamed the office of Pastor in most expressions of "Protestant Church". High Priest became Senior Pastor or Bishop and a hierarchy of men with various titles continued to stand before the people and rule over them. This old covenant practice mixed into the new covenant church hindered the power. love, and gifts of the Holy Spirit from flowing directly through the mature saints (elders) to the less mature saints.
The mature expression of the true new covenant church may not necessarily include the temples of brick and will surely not include a hierarchy of men standing as Priest between God and the people. We must not continue the old covenant ways in the new covenant church. Yes we will continue to reach out to the so called "institutional church" and continue to present the true Messiah, Christ Jesus our High Priest, Savior and King who lives now in His temple on earth. Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? (1 Cor 3:16)
Many unnecessary burdens are spawned by the perversions of the erroneous continuation of the old covenant headship concept of clergy over laity. In the new covenant church there are indeed spiritually mature people (elders) and spiritually immature people and there are servant gifts to mature and equip the people. It is always the work of Christ flowing by the Holy Spirit to do the work of these ministries. The clergy laity deception causes a few to stand as "Priest" to attempt to do the work of many that are only sitting in the pew and can therefore never mature. We are to all become priest and kings as Christ by the Holy Spirit is formed in us. We are to all mature and become "equippers" for the less mature around us by the work of the Holy Spirit.
The central foundation of the new covenant church is the believer in intimate relationship with God and with those around him or her. This means that the prayer closet and the living and dining rooms can become the main facilities of church. From there the church can flow to the office or shop and the mall or wherever. When the homes become the primary assembly then additional meetings can be held in rented halls, stadiums, brick buildings or any where as the many expressions of the city church can come together in glorious meetings of praise, prayer, and worship.
If we can get this, it is really good news, especially for many godly men seeking to serve God with all their heart as a Pastor (Priest) ruling over a congregation of pew sitters who have been trained to pay the Pastor to do the spiritual stuff for them. Why keep pumping a dry hole? It may be time to move to a new/old well with living water and return to the way Jesus and the disciples began.
God loves His church too much to allow the old covenant ways to exist forever robbing the church of the reality of the fulfillment of "Christ in you the hope of Glory."
I've recently discovered a good book written by David Newby from Australia. David has done research on the reality of the old covenant ways carried into the new covenant church and has good insight into this matter and some help in dealing with it. I am not trying to sell books but I believe this book to be a genuine help in bringing forth understanding of the history and the potential of the New Testament church. The book is called, "The Bubble Will Burst" by David Newby. You can get a copy here: http://archive.openheaven.com/bookstore/
Pursue Love It Never Fails,
Ron McGatlin
Edited by Ron McGatlin on 07/04/2005 at 5:57pm
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/28/2005 at 5:13am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
This is exactly what I was attempting to convey! Ron your ability to say this in such a clear concise manner is awesome! So many people for so long have seriously misconstrued my meaning when I have repeatedly said that the setting in which He determines to assemble His people in whatever size or configuration He decides is TOTALLY up to HIM. I refuse man made restrictions or rules any longer! I have searched it out and have run the gambit. He has taken me from the parks to the house churches to the marketplace and into the highways and byways and even here to this internet expression of His body. I have been in large and in small gatherings. I do not place restrictions on the physical makeup of the location of the meeting place.
It matters not to me whether the building met in is rented or owned or donated. It doesn't matter if there's no building at all or if it's a tent or a house. I see no requirements placed on this whatsoever. When we begin judging by outward appearances we always get into trouble.
I don't care if God gathers His people in the darkest of places....or the brightest for it's HIM and His light and life there. And if and when I am cast out this is of no concern. For the temple is HIS people. It's HIS choice how He decides to configure and assemble them.
One small church I was in met in a school building for a while. Just after us a jewish group met. Then was it a synogouge? Was it a government building? What was it? Was it His people gathering? The building was, yes, brick and mortar. It was rented. When we met there the building was not converted into the church. Rather His church was using the building as a backdrop, a stage. We went on to meet in houses and also for a time rented in a YMCA. This was just one group...then there were some gathering in the parks too...maybe for folks to fully comprehend this they must flesh it out...
So true! We do not 'go to' church, but we do meet and gather and ARE the church.
|
Back to Top
|
|
Kathy Bippus
Senior Member
Joined: 01/25/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4741
|
|
Posted: 06/28/2005 at 9:31am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Blessing all,
I am finally able to get back online..yay and thank you Lord! Wow, I have missed quite abit here and have some catching up to do. Firstly though, a holy (((hug)))) for ya's. Seems like I have been gone longer than a week!!
Robin, thank you so much for the link. What a blessing!! : )
Love in Christ, Kathy
__________________
In His Love
|
Back to Top
|
|
Larry Silverman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/30/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 994
|
|
Posted: 06/28/2005 at 11:13am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Ron,
Thanks for letting us know about David Newby's book. I ordered one this morning and I have a feeling that I'll be pretty busy reading it right through once it arrives.
Be blessed,
Larry
__________________
Dr. Larry Silverman, M.C./Psy., M.Min., D.C./Psy.
http://www.larrysilverman.com
http://www.larrysilverman.blogs.com
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/30/2005 at 5:34am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Yes, Thanks Ron, Larry and Robin for all the referrals for various books and reading materials...when I am once again free to read books I will certainly read some of these. I love reading and always have...usually when I read an author I read ALL I can get my hands on by the person...but not free to read books just now.
Although I have read some of Watchman Nee's books did not read the one mentioned...HOWEVER...a friend of mine and her family became a part of one of his churches here in the USA. This was when I was still a part ofa rigid denominational church which pretty well rejected all other types and forms of church as being 'of the devil'. Had already begun reading CS Lewis and so knew he was Anglican. Also had wonderful believing friends who were Catholic and Greek Orthodox too, so God was already expanding my mind...so, anyhow my friends went off to join up with this group. Initially all Chinese but it rapidly grew in size and diversity. There were MANY good things there and I certainly had awesome times with that group. They probably fleshed out what is mentioned in the book. Being sort of a hands on learner this was good for me. There were large meetings at least once a week along with many large 'love feasts' meals shared. Outsiders were welcomed and treated the same as insiders. There were shared houses and properties and goods. There was a passion for taking it to the streets and at times it was focused evangelism. At other times it was simply worshipping and testifying on the streets. In many ways it was still a closed group, at least the one I got to experience, and yet there were many good seeds planted.
The one point on which I resisted was the point of which they urged me to become 'one of them' and that the true manifestation would only come through one of their groups. Having already been freed from a measure of that 'exclusivity' I was warned in my spirit not to go any further with that group but to keep the good and leave it at that point.
Then, in 1977 or so, at the time I was 18 God took me from the 'closed' denominational setting and dropped me into an independant charismatic setting with no titles or pastors but only elders...part of a loose regional network of groups like this with a variety of focuses and emphases who all met maybe 1ce every so often asa whole, also the elders met monthly....this group met in various venues including homes and rented facilities and parks even downtown Boulder. At this time too I was freely moving around to various denominational churches connecting with friends there. Most wouldn't consider EVER coming to our expression, but accepted me as a sister while rejecting the church I was in as not really even being a church.
I am thrilled that these sorts of churches have gained so wide acceptance and popularity, even exceeding in popularity over the religious forms of what many used to call church. In fact, the elders had it from the Lord that this thing would happen in this country. We didn't try and make it happen though.
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 06/30/2005 at 6:39am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Forgot to mention that the pressure to join that expression was so intense that my freind, who had been a 'best friend' from 3rd grade forward told me if I didn't join them we could no longer be friends at all. I know in my heart we still love one another, but after I definitively told her I would not become one of them she has never written me since. I do not condemn them for joining and it brought great fruit into their lives...but simply to say that to walk with Jesus in the path He has for us may create loss of closeness with treasured friends. In me this has worked a dependancy and trust on Him alone and I treasure relationships when they come but hold them lightly when they go. I was so very dependant on people that this has been a hard hard lesson. Finally learning it...this too is a part of reformation. Never be closed to people. Always be an open door but honor their right to remove themselves or you from their midst....trust Jesus He alone is the 'best friend' closer than a brother...
|
Back to Top
|
|
Steve Eastman
Moderator Group
Joined: 01/14/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
|
|
Posted: 06/30/2005 at 5:39pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
Larry, Denise and others
I came across one of the books mentioned in 1975--The Normal Christian Church Life by Watchman Nee. At the time, I was in a group in Roanoke, Virginia that was associated with the Discipleship Movement. It was a movement that began as a refreshing for the Body of Christ. Many people came out of dead institutions and yearned for deeper fellowship with God. We usually met weekly in a rented building, similar to a community center. One man assumed a mentoring role for all who wanted to "move on with God". Strangely enough, he also adopted many of the mannerisms and teachings of Kenneth Copeland, who, as far as I know was never part of the Discipleship Movement. The more one got involved in discipleship, as it was then practiced, the more one got into bondage. That shepherd, would get so involved in a person's life, that he would tell him what kind of job to get. Although I do not know of any cases where he told someone whom to marry, there were reports of similar incidents from across the country. I do not believe the major blame for the excesses of the movement should be placed on the national leaders, but on the local people who interpreted and tried to apply their teachings. Nevertheless, the national leaders apologized and admitted the excesses of the movement some years later.
Getting back to the book, it is amazing how God used it to break the near monopoly of control spirits. The shepherd had each of the committed men study Watchman Nee's book. The Normal Christian Church Life emphasized the plurality of elders, in contrast to what could be called the senior pastor paradigm. Nee based his analysis on Paul's missionary journeys starting from Acts13. Although the book might have been even better, if it had also looked at how other apostles conducted their ministries, it unearthed a lot of truth. It is amazing that God used the shepherd to unwittingly plant the seeds to disrupt his own "authority".
Today, I respect many of the men who were involved in the Discipleship Movement. They have regained their balance and moved onto better things. I still believe mentoring is important, but the time comes when the parent birds have fed the last morsel to their young. Then the young can reproduce and feed their own children. It is not supposed to be a one-way dependency forever. We are all to submit to one another, as God speaks through different ones at different times.
Thank God for Watchman Nee and The Normal Christian Church Life.
Steve Eastman
|
Back to Top
|
|
Lyn McSweeney
Senior Member
Joined: 03/15/2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5934
|
|
Posted: 07/03/2005 at 5:48am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
I would just like to say THANK YOU!!! to all who post in this forum, in this thread and others, how much it helps me to understand things would otherwise be a puzzle...
Love and blessings to all
Lyn
|
Back to Top
|
|
Denise Detwiler
Senior Member
Joined: 01/10/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2895
|
|
Posted: 07/04/2005 at 9:07am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
"Denise,
It should be pointed out that that place your friend went to was not a Watchman Nee church, since Watchman Nee does not have a church. The truth of your mistaken assumption, "part of one of his churches here in the USA", is that it was a Witness Lee church. The unregenerated Witness Lee operated by a central-hub "Local Church" with many outlets which was not according to Biblical locality. Scriptural locality means each locality is independent, without a central hub of an organization such as lsm/lc and its false teachings (http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/lsmlccult.htm): (1) pride of believing they were premade for salvation (calvinism), (2) modalism, calling the "Father the Son", saying the Godhead is a Person, even calling themselves God, (3) violent screaming mantra, (4) suing Christians for their faith, (5) of course false locality, and (6) altering Watchman Nee's writings, sinning bearing false witness."
Hello person, thanks for this information. The time we are talking about was 30 years ago, I was about 17 and I did not get too deep into the group. It could be it was, or developed into the sect or cultish group you are referring to. At the time I wasn't aware of many of the practices you are referring to. They did represent themselves as disciples of Watchman Nee and encouraged the reading and practices of the stuff in his books. This then would be very like what Steve mentions regarding the discipleship movement.
I loved Steve your story and how God worked within the very wrong system and set them straight. God is so like that! I have relatives who are Mormons going way back. Some of them have converted to Christianity and others have left the Mormon faith but yet have not come to real Christianity. One cousin joined a offshoot group called the Worldwide Church of God and when the leader became a true believer the entire group converted to Christianity and the bible. He is no longer living but he became a real Christian as did his immediate family and who knows how many others. He loves shining His light in dark places, doesn't He Steve?
He so loves and longs for us.....
|
Back to Top
|
|
Vicki Camp
Senior Member
Joined: 01/13/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 161
|
|
Posted: 07/04/2005 at 2:09pm
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
I just wanted to echo Lynn, and
say thank you........ this has been very good and enlightening reading
to me ,, especially the posts from you O.H. members.
I did read one of Frank Viola's
original pieces online back in about '98 - I believe it was titled 'New
Wineskin' (? - I'm not sure of title ), and has since been revised and
put into book form. Between that writing and also Harold Eberle's, 'The
Complete Wineskin',,, I was surely thrust into an all new
discovery mode at that time period !
Thank you for this vital discussion, and the personal insights shared....... - Vicki
__________________
~ Vicki C
WtV - Habakkuk 2:2,3
http://writethevision.org/
|
Back to Top
|
|
phil bethell
Senior Member
Joined: 03/21/2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 711
|
|
Posted: 07/21/2005 at 9:56am
|
IP Logged
|
|
|
DD-
You writing about your cousin who left the Mormon Church and eventually became a true Believer and led many others into True Relationship with Him as well? Well, where we live, we have many mormon's who live around us, and most of these are very good well-meaning people. We know as well some who live in Salt Lake City, former mormons, who have found JESUS and the Holy Spirit and are overjoyed!!
That to say this; We have been praying over the years that the Holy Ghost would start to burn inside the Mormon Church, the infastructure and organization is already in place, and could lead many millions to HIM in a new and meaningful way.
Today is the 'information age'. There has to be some/many curious Mormons saearching for the Truth. There has to be some who regularly read OH and othe enlightening info on the internet. They may be shut up feel threatened, but the internet could lead them directly to the Throne and into Jesus's lap!!
Hallelujah!! Lord, Make it Happen!!
ans Sreve Eastman;
You wrote "We are all to submit to one another, as God speaks through different ones at different times."
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!!
That statement may be the heart of the clergy/laity issue for me, as that simply does not happen in 98% of churches today.
Blessings,
__________________
'BEHOLD, the Bridegroom COMETh' ><>Mt 25:6 <><
|
Back to Top
|
|
|
|
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first
login
If you are not already registered you must first
register
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
