Home » Discussion Area » Bible Issues » a difficult question
| a difficult question [message #5590] |
Sun, 15 March 2009 20:20  |
 wishing34
Messages: 216
Registered: March 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Greetings,
I am interested in comments/opinions regarding the following idea.
Thanks for your time in advance.
If we accept and/or justify Christianity without functioning
apostles then we are practicing a form of Christianity that
is different from the original.
Our new "variant form" of Christianity should be questioned
as to validity.
Thanks,
Jman
|
|
|
| Re: a difficult question [message #5596 is a reply to message #5590] |
Mon, 16 March 2009 00:24  |
 |
william
Messages: 1474
Registered: January 2006 |
Senior Member
Administrator |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, jman wrote:
>
>
> Greetings,
> I am interested in comments/opinions regarding the following idea.
> Thanks for your time in advance.
>
>
>
> If we accept and/or justify Christianity without functioning
> apostles then we are practicing a form of Christianity that
> is different from the original.
>
> Our new "variant form" of Christianity should be questioned
> as to validity.
>
> Thanks,
> Jman
> _______________________________________________
>
Hello Jman, glad to have you aboard!
Concerning your question... I don't think that Christianity should be
defined by either the abundance of, or lack of apostles/prophets, etc., on
the scene. Besides, even if it *is* defined by this, what can we do about
it? Kinda like what Jesus said to Peter--" what is that to thee? follow
thou me."
More later, got to run!
Blessings,
William
_______________________________________________
|
|
|
| Re: a difficult question [message #5598 is a reply to message #5590] |
Mon, 16 March 2009 04:23 |
|
william
Messages: 1474
Registered: January 2006 |
Senior Member
Administrator |
|
|
I'm back with a little more time now...
You may be going in a totally different direction so feel free to kick me
out of this tread if it isn't relevant! <grin>
Most of us have a perception of how the early church operated, how it was
organized, how it functioned, etc.. Sometimes we idolize this or that
aspect as if the church we read about in the NT was exactly what is should
be throughout history.
In fact, if I were asked today what I thought the church should be like, I
would immediately point to the NT Church as the model. Eventually I hope
to see something resembling what I've read about!
That said, a pretty good case could be made that the NT church was an
evolving church.
They started off in an upper room, waiting for the promise of the Holy
Spirit, in one accord, and praying much.
There didn't seem to be any structure, and apparently there was very
little understanding, concerning how they were going to proceed.
Act 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room,
where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and
Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon
Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
Act 1:14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication,
with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
Next Peter, apparently based upon his own understanding of scripture,
produces a plan to fill Judas' post.
Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples,
and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and
twenty,)...
They end up casting lots between two men both of whom they felt were
qualified.
Acts 2 brought the infilling of the Holy Spirit-- the empowerment for
ministry!
Next:
Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and
fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Five things characterize the next step in this 'evolving' church.
Preaching, teaching/doctrine, fellowship, the breaking of bread, and
prayers.
This isn't a bad place to start with a modern-day version of the early
church. Get baptized in the Holy Spirit, find some anointed
preaching/teaching, fellowship with the saints, break bread with them and
pray a lot!
Next in the evolutionary process was something we just don't want to
emulate--selling all, giving it to the whole body and having all things in
common from that point on.
Act 2:44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
Act 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all
men, as every man had need.
Act 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and
breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and
singleness of heart,
Act 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the
Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
After a little outside ministry (healing & preaching) and persecution in
Acts 3-4, the subject of having all things in common is once again brought
front and center as the NT pattern emerges (no relation to the 'emerging
church' movement of recent years). Like I said, this particular aspect of
the early church is rarely mentioned as something 'we need to get back to'
when we talk about NT Christianity... but hey, who am I to be pointing
this out. I will say that this stage of development produced the first
two deaths as folks grappled with the whole idea of communal living. Maybe
it's just too painful to think about or maybe this part of the
evolutionary process is kind of like the appendix and now isn't as useful
as it once may have been! (I did read something in a Wikipedia article
about the appendix, but of course that isn't a reliable source for info.)
Anyway, the rest of Acts 5 deals with the things we want to see returned
to the church.
A major step in the evolving church occurs in Acts 6:
Act 6:1-5 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was
multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews,
because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Then the
twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is
not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.
Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report,
full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.
But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of
the word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude...
Here a very practical need became apparent and was just as quickly
resolved by a practical solution... seven guys to handle the widows... no
sexism here... men serving women!
Not one to limit himself to serving tables, Stephen, after hands were laid
on him goes out and emulates Peter and pays for it with his life. (Are we
willing to do the same... or are we emulating those we used to deride--
those who seem to be content with 'sitting around waiting to go up through
a hole in the sky'?)
I could go on and on through the book of Acts and show how the church
continued to evolve and adapt. (Especially interesting is the governmental
aspects of the NT church.)
This process seemed to continue through the epistles and beyond, but the
point I am raising is this:
Was this evolution of the Church finished by the time the biblical
writers laid down their pens, or does it continue?
The OT 'church' (term used loosely) did not seem to be yoked with many
'evolving' aspects... it was more or less set forth in a 'take it or leave
it' sort of way (i.e. not progressive). That might be a good way to
express it... a static setting forth in OT times, verses a progressive
revelation (seemingly) for the NT church.
Blessings,
William
_______________________________________________
[Updated on: Mon, 16 March 2009 04:36]
|
|
| |
| Re: a difficult question [message #5600 is a reply to message #5599] |
Mon, 16 March 2009 14:57 |
|
william
Messages: 1474
Registered: January 2006 |
Senior Member
Administrator |
|
|
Jman,
I think I see where you are coming from in that you believe (I believe, we
all believe) that the ministry gifts of Eph 4 are set into the church and
are to be a vital part of the church/s until Jesus comes back. The
problem, as I see it, is that God is the one who gives these gifts to
men... they cannot be worked up.
Starting with this premise we can either conclude that God isn't giving
these gifts anymore or He is giving the gifts and they aren't being used.
If it is the latter then I think that perhaps the reason we are not seeing
these gifts is due in large part to ignorance. The gifts don't come with
a detailed instruction manual as to the best way to use them!
I'm of the opinion (read the Women in Ministry/Women in Leadership threads
for a better explanation) that these Eph 4 gifts are not gifts of
leadership per se, but rather ministry gifts. However, I think that the
lack of leadership has been the main hindrance to the restoration of the
operation of the gifts within the church.
We seem to be in a catch-22 situation, leaders come from those who have
the gifts, and the gifts don't seem to operate unless there is an
atmosphere created by the leaders...
Blessings,
William
_______________________________________________
|
|
| | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Nov 4 06:28:42 UTC 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00922 seconds
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
E-mail to friend 
