No careful student of the early congregation of believers can fail to be impressed with the simplicity of its worship and functioning. Imbued with a fervent zeal, motivated by a common purpose, possessed of a deep love for each other, “all the believers kept together” and “among all those who had embraced the faith there was but one heart and one soul” (Acts 2:44; 5:82). In such a company each felt under compulsion of spirit to do all he could to edify his fellows. None served for gain. Those who had personal property and real estate sold their possessions and distributed to all who had need; no one thought of threatening the needy with eternal destruction if they did not support a privileged class.
In the original church of God there was no distinction between clergy and laity. God’s clergy (portion or lot) consisted of God’s laity (people). Every member of the “laity” was a member of “the clergy” and vice versa. Every person in the divine arrangement was a minister of God. One “entered the ministry” by coming into the Christ. The holy and unblemished church can never be restored until those who love the Lord recapture in the fullest sense the picture of a “priesthood of all believers” free from the taint of a special caste.
The religious world in general has lost the pattern of the corporate worship of the original community of baptized believers. The early church gathered around a table; the modern church sits before a pulpit. The Lord placed the table in the church so it could remember its debt to him; the clergy placed the pulpit in the church to bring it in debt to them. In the early church they all spoke one by one; today all the speaking is done by one. Then the spirit was kindled; now it is quenched. Then they claimed to love each other and talked about Jesus; now they claim to love Jesus and talk about each other. In those days all exerted an effort to exhort; now all must be exhorted to exert an effort.
The primitive disciples did not ask the world to come and get the gospel, they took it to them. They gathered to eat the Lord’s Supper, then scattered to preach the Word. Wherever there was a Christian and a sinner, there was a gospel meeting. They announced the glad tidings to masters and mistresses, friends and neighbors. They did it simply but fervently. They told about Jesus, his death and resurrection. They testified of their faith in him. They preached him in chariots along the road, in prison cells, by river brinks, in private homes, in hulls and in synagogues. The whole earth was their auditorium, the thing at hand their pulpit.
Read the rest here
Lionel,
How I agree!
We could do with some young Christians who think the way you do in Australia.
I say we build tables and not buildings. Then we can use all those billions to take care of the poor, widowed and orphaned!
Hey wouldn’t that make Christianity a pure and undefiled religion?
This is what James and John spoke about keeping us pure in our religious practices and strong in our faith toward Christ.
I’m intending on bringing this in for discussion in the bible study group that meets at my house. It’s time to really get serious about being the “church”!
Gentleman,
This quote shook me in my boots and gave me goose bumps! What is even more exciting is the fact that you guys loved it.
I am still blown away by Carl Ketcherside especially when you consider the history of his Denominational background.
In your structure, is there a need/place for full-time pastors? Also, what does Paul mean that “those who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel?”
Thanks for the thought-provoking posts.
Hey Smith,
It wouldn’t mean local elders, it would most likely mean evangelist/apostles. He tells the Elders of Ephesus in Acts 20 to work with their own hands. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Smith,
My Pastor is full time; however, it is not because he is our pastor it is because he is an evangelist/high school minister (not our youth but the whole city).
Do you suggest that Paul’s “tentmaking” example is to be the norm for the elders, based on verses 34-35?
Lets look at the verses Smitbaptist:
I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. 34 You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me 35 In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”
Paul says:
1. I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel (I demanded nothing to preach the gospel to you)
2. You can see that with my own hands that I took care of myself and my companions (I was self-sufficient and not only that my fellow brothers who were with me didn’t ask you for anything either)
3. IN ALL THINGS I have shown you (or I provided an example of how you are to live) that this is how we must help the weak.
4. He finishes it off by quoting the Lord Jesus “it is MORE blessed to give than to receive”.
So let me ask you a question.
What do you think Paul meant? Realizing that Paul’s longest tenure was in Ephesus (3 years or so) he was there and as he functioned as an aposlte/shepherd he didn’t receive one dime from anyone he ministered to. Now should we follow apostolic tradition or man made?
Brother Woods,
We certainly must follow apostolic teaching and not man-made. I’m just asking is Paul’s example in Acts 20 to be normative for NT local churches? Certainly, we should “demand” nothing for the ministry. Paul also states that elsewhere where he mentions support for ministry. Based on your phrasing, is the support of a full-time ministry a man-made concept? What about 1 Corinthians 9?
I accept each of your points above (1-4). I’m just asking is that the only NT model, meaning it should be normative for all local churches?
By the way, I certainly have seen the excesses of pastoral pay packages. But I don’t want to be out-of-balance in my rejection of such abuses.
Thanks for your time.
If I say that Paul is saying as a directive to “protect the flock from wolves” then my exegesis leads me to say yes unless that person travels outside of his home area and because of the work of his ministry must live off of the resources of others; however, if you can get a job then you should. Now many may disagree but if I cancel out the pay as normative I have to cancel out the wolves as normative and watching after the flock. What do you think? See where I am going? I don’t think I can embrace one sentence as normative and reject the other one.
Yes, that’s helpful. I think I see where you are going. I would say that “protect the flock” is a command, while his tentmaking was an example – not a command. I suggest that because Paul’s speaks of giving up entitlements in 1 Corinthians 9. To provide an example is not the same as issuing a command.
Again, what do you think is going on in 1 Corinthians 9?
Hey Smithbaptist,
This is what I was saying here:
If I say that Paul is saying as a directive to “protect the flock from wolves” then my exegesis leads me to say yes unless that person travels outside of his home area and because of the work of his ministry must live off of the resources of others; however, if you can get a job then you should. Now many may disagree but if I cancel out the pay as normative I have to cancel out the wolves as normative and watching after the flock. What do you think? See where I am going? I don’t think I can embrace one sentence as normative and reject the other one.”
Barnabbas, Peter, Paul, John, and others were evangelist/apostles who traveled outside of their working environment. For example Peter was a fisherman, to preach the Gospel in some area where fishing was not available would leave him broke, busted and disgusted. So I am not arguing against men and women who travel abroad to do missions work (I believe missionaries should make their money off the Gospel) or evangelists (I believe they should make their money off of the Gospel) or apostlic ministers (church planters) I believe they should also. However when someone lives in a community for 40 plus years, raising their families and never traveling (they are home elders like the ones Paul is talking to in Acts 20) then I believe that they can work for a living and should. They should be a blessing both spiritually and monetarily not a burden. As Paul says “it is better to GIVE than it is to RECEIVE”
Lionel,
I cannot thank you enough for the link to this article and book.
Awesome!
kg
I agree with a lot fo what Jon Zens has to say on the issue:
Jon Zens: “The Congregation organizes itself (I Cor. 11:33-34; 14:39-40; 16:2-3) Disciplines fallen members (I Cor. 5:3-5; 6:1-6) Warns the unruly (I Thess. 5:14) Comforts the feeble (I Thess. 5:14) Supports the weak (I Thess. 5:21) Abounds in the work of the Lord (I Cor. 15:58) Admonishes one another (Rom. 15:14) Teaches one another (Col. 3:16) Prophesies to one another (I Cor. 14:31) Serves one another (Gal. 5:13) Bears one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:2) Cares for one another (I Cor. 12:25) Washes one another’s feet (John 13:14) Loves one another (John 13:34-35; 15:12,17; Rom. 13:8; 1 Thess. 4:9) Is to be devoted to one another (Rom. 12: 10) Shows kindness and compassion to one another (Eph. 4:32) Edifies one another (Rom. 14:19; 1 Thess. 5: 1 lb) Bears with one another (Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:13) Exhorts one another (Heb. 3:13; 10:25) Incites one another to love and good works (Heb. 10:24) Encourages one another (1 Thess. 5: 11 a) Prays for one another (Jas. 5:16) Offers hospitality to one another (1 Pet. 4:9) Fellowships with one another (I John 1:7) Confesses sins to one another (Jas. 5:16)”
“With dramatic clarity, all of these “one another” commands incarnate the decisive reality that every member of the believing community is to bear the responsibility of pastoral care in the assembly. Leadership, therefore, is a corporate rather than a solo affair. The idea that elders exclusively direct and rule the affairs of the church, make decisions for the assembly, deal with all of its problems, and supply all of its teaching is alien to Paul’s thinking and bereft of Biblical support. Stated simply, the New Testament knows nothing of an elder-ruled, elder-governed, or elder-directed church. And it knows even less about a pastor-led church.”
“The ministry of the whole Body is to overshadow the supervisory/exemplary role of the elders, it would make our churches far more healthy and vibrant. The elders, being the more mature brethren, are merely responsible for modeling pastoral care by nurturing their younger brethren in Christ (Acts 20:28-29; Gal. 6: 1; Heb. 13:17b). And their goal, along with the prophets, teachers, and evangelists, is to empower the saints to take responsibility for the flock along with them (Eph. 4:11-12, 1 Thess. 5:12-13). (Elders can simultaneously be prophets, teachers and evangelists; but not all prophets, evangelists, and teachers are elders.)”
“While some believers take the lead more than others due to their peculiar gifting and relative spiritual maturity (i.e., the elders), the emphasis of the NT is upon the responsibility of the entire assembly, Thus, leadership and pastoral responsibility fall upon the shoulders of every member of the church rather than upon the back of one person or a select group. In God’s ecclesiology, brotherhood precedes, exceeds, and overshadows eldership. “
_______________________________________________
Hutch: Once we get away from the false notion of a one man pulpit and a seated priesthood, those who Lionel is referring to as “home elders” should not be so busy with their duties of being an example to the church that they cannot hold a full time job. In fact it is my opinion that they should not be any more busy serving in the church as any other believer priest. The congregation is responsible for doing the works of the ministry and elders are merely another vital part of that congregation as a whole. Since a healthy congregation will have prophets, teachers, evangelists and elders, there should be plenty of folks able to teach and speak in each gathering so that there is no need for one individual to be preparing and presenting 3-4 one hour long monologues per week. I think it prudent that one of the elders should bring a short message each week along with messages from the other teachers and prophets.
A think a lot of times we can easily fall back into the idea of the unbiblical and man made structure of one man teaching each week from behind a pulpit.
Brother Hutch you said,
This is where it is at. I believe if Ephesians 4:11 is properly practiced the priest will function properly which will then free the Elders up to function properly. When pastors burn out it is due to two things (which I think I will post about in reference to Eph 4:11) 1. Unbiblical expectations from untrained congregants and 2. Unbiblical perception of obligation to fulfill those unbiblical expectations.
Any takers?