What is Church? Part 1

By Anthony - February 22, 2008 – 11:06 am

This post is published by permission from the author Steve Gregg. This is from a teaching outline used at the Great Commission School
What is ChurchI. According to Scripture, all Christians belong to the universal church (I Cor 12:13 Eph 4:4-6), which is an organism (not an organization) left on earth to communicate Christ’s message and to continue his work in his absence (John 14:12-14/ Acts 1:1, by implication). I believe that this Church is a spiritually created and defined “body,” comprised of a diversity of members who are gifted and placed in spiritual relationship to one another by the sovereign Spirit of God (I Cor 12:11-12 /Phil 2:1).

II. There is a local “sampling” of the universal body of Christ in every locality wherein “two or more” persons have come to faith in Christ and gather together for mutual edification and cooperative ministry (Matt 18:20).

A. All the believers in a given locality are the united local expression of Christ to their sector of the world.

B. No divisions are to be tolerated among them (see point 6 in part 2).

C. In the New Testament, the ‘locality’ of the church was defined in terms of city boundaries (I Cor 1:2/I Thess 1:1/Titus 1:5.). In our own day of clustered cities and suburbs and of improved transportation, the definition of ‘locality’ might conceivably be extended beyond the borders of a single city or town.

III. In some localities, the local sample may consist of such a large number of believers that they cannot all meet in the same building. The result is the clustering of smaller groups into various congregations or ‘house churches’ (Rom 16:5, 10, 11 /Col 4:15 w/Philemon 2).

A. Since Paul addressed his letters to all the Christians in a given city (Rom 1:7/Phil 1:1/Col 1:2), it is a fair inference that the various smaller clusters in the city enjoyed a certain amount of unity Read the rest of this entry »

Who are the Elders?

By Anthony - February 21, 2008 – 6:02 pm

Who are the Elders?This is the second installment of my post on church leadership.  Upon further study into scripture, I see that what we refer to as a Pastor is part of church leadership. Biblically a Pastor is an Elder who labors in word and doctrine (1 Tim 5:17).  He is an Elder among other Elders, but not the Elder over Elders. In other words, in the bible there are some distinctions between the Elders in their specific roles. In the 1 Timothy reference above, Paul says Elders who lead well (as opposed to those who don’t) be worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine, as in (Pastor -teacher Eph 4:11). There is an obvious distinction between some Elders and Elders who are the laboring teachers or preachers. The Elder who works for the gospel’s sake, fulltime,  should get paid (1 Cor 9:6-14). While other Elders, who are qualified leaders — gifted by the Spirit, able to teach, but not really fulltime “employees” of the gospel; rather, they have other jobs, yet still have a role in the church. Paul drives this point home in verse 14,

“Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.”

This would imply that every church should have (at least) one Elder who dedicates his whole time to word and doctrine, and not be bothered with the restraints an outside job puts on him. For the local assembly, the obvious benefits of having a dedicated, full-time pastor are tremendous. Some modern-day “bi-vocational” pastors effectively weaken their congregation when their attention is occupied by another job. The smallest of churches cannot afford to support a fulltime Pastor, so a side job is often necessary until the church is able to support him. However, based on scripture, the church should strive to reach this goal of supporting the pastor fulltime, and of course the pastor himself needs to be modest and make sure he is not over burdening the church unnecessarily with financial requirements.   

The equality of all Elders, regardless of role, is apparent in the Bible when we look at examples like the Jerusalem council where the decree was given by the apostles and elders(Acts 15). Peter was an Elder but never let on that he had any more authority than any other Elder (1 Pet 5:1). Of course he was Read the rest of this entry »

You Might be a Liberal…

By Derek - February 21, 2008 – 2:00 pm

The following statements were extracted from a viral email I received. I edited and modified some.

1. If you believe that capital punishment is murder, but abortion on demand is just a procedure, you might be a liberal.
2 If you believe employers and corporations create oppression and governments create prosperity, you might be a liberal.
barbara streisand
3. If you believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. Nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists, you might be a liberal.

4. If you believe that there was no such thing as art before Federal funding, you might be a liberal.

5. If you believe that global temperatures are less affected

Read the rest of this entry »

Who are we to Judge?

By Derek - February 11, 2008 – 11:06 am

Death Penalty in AfghanistanSo they execute people for blaspheming Islam in Afghanistan.
Read story

So what? It’s their country and that’s what they believe; who are we to tell them what to do?  In the US we allow child-rapists to roam free. We let double murderers off the hook, and call it entertainment. We allow people to blaspheme whatever they want, and call it free speech. Those are our ways, the American way; “viva Las Vegas”, and all that crap.

In other words, we have our own problems and stupidity is displayed in our justice system every day. The idea that we are some how superior to these “primitive” cultures and can tell them what to do is asinine. I used to believe that too, but now I realize how absurd it really is. For example, Secretary Rice says,

“I do think that the Afghans understand that there are some international norms that need to be respected”

International norms? Do these International norms supersede a country’s constitution? Do they over-rule their religion? Where is this “planet earth constitution of norms”? When was it written? I never signed up.

Do we really think we can tell other countries that they may not enforce their laws because we don’t like them? This is the way we Americans like to act, as if we are God’s gift to the world of politcal idealism.  I am not a leftist, anti-American, liberal by any means; I am a Christian conservative, but I am tired of this foreign policy which makes it ok for us to tell other countries what they can and cannot do.

A long time ago, Americans got tired of being told what to do by a foreign power and we stopped it by declaring our independence and fighting a war over it (cir. 1776). Now, we force ourselves on other countries much like the British empire did 200 plus years ago. We need to cut it out and mind our own business.

What Kind of Certainty Does Christianity Offer?

By Derek - February 9, 2008 – 1:37 am

Ultimately, the certainty of Christian Truth is found only in the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. From the outside, this is purely a subjective interpretation of truth. An unbeliever hearing such a testimony has no way of empirically testing this sort of assertion. However, one is not left without a test at all. The ultimate ‘test’ of the certainty of Christianity lies in the true conversion of the soul.

If a man were to become a true believer then a spiritual dimension enters in and confirms the Truth of the Christian claim. At that point, it is no longer a subjective matter to the believer because the confirmation comes from something other than one’s ‘self’ and it is this attestation of spiritual certitude that is universally experienced by all true believers. Thus, the gap between apologetic argumentation and true belief is faith. The apologetic arguments can lead one to a limited level of probability in the sense that Christianity is ‘probably’ true; but faith is necessary at some point to fill in the gap between probability and certainty.

Pastor? What Pastor?

By Anthony - February 6, 2008 – 11:21 am

Pastor - shepherd As a disclaimer, I want to first state that these views will not line up with the popular view of church structure. I am not deliberately trying to offend any particular denomination or organization. However, I feel that the bible is being ignored for the sake and man-made ideas.

Pastor

1.a minister or priest in charge of a church.

2.a person having spiritual care of a number of persons.

3.to serve as the pastor of: He pastored the church here for many years.

I would say that these 3 definitions line up pretty well with the popular view of a pastor. Notice the singular headship these definitions apply to this position. The version of the Bible I am using is the NKJV, and I only see the word pastor used once in the New Testament. That reference would be in Ephesians 4:11. In this verse it states how some are given into different roles in the Church. All roles in this list are plural and in every local church there are probably more than one. Although, in the Bible I can’t find the position of pastor as a singular leader of a local church I do see elders. Elder references within the church can be found in the following verses:

After reading these verses regarding church leadership, you may notice that the position of pastor Read the rest of this entry »

Know Your Role

By Anthony - February 6, 2008 – 12:41 am

mlk1.jpgHas anyone ever told you to “Know your role”? I’ve been told that before and it’s not an easy pill to swallow. Sometimes we mean well by going above and beyond what we are called to do but it’s not exactly what God has in mind for us. By the way, when God doesn’t have something in mind for us, it’s because He  didn’t create us for that. I understand how hard it is to discern the will of God, but sometimes it’s obvious. When I became a Christian I felt as though God wanted me in His word constantly. I got caught up in edifying conversations constantly and even some short debates. I am not the shy type in public and would even bring up the importance of Christ’s forgiveness to strangers. While I was still praying for God to show me how He wanted me to serve Him, a friend said that it was fairly obvious and that I was to evangelize. I agreed. When I started to prepare and go out to evangelize it felt right. Sometimes others help us see what God has for us.

I must also be aware that I am human, and I have selfish desires that can get in the way of God’s plan for using me. I may try to make others proud by going beyond what God has for me. Although my intentions are good, my role is being redefined by what I think I should be doing. Maybe a tradition would make me feel as though there is a structure I should follow in my ministry. By being oblivious to everything except tradition I can leave those I am called to minister to in the dust.

If I were to assume that because God created me to evangelize, I should be a Pastor and maybe even a missionary I’d be wrong. If that path is made because of tradition and not God making it clear to me, I am wrong and my efforts to serve God outside of my role will fail.

In conclusion I would say to “know your role”. Take a look around you, is there a growing ministry you are involved in? Is God making it obvious how He wants you to serve Him? If so then forsake everything and follow Him. God Bless, and thank you for your time.

Boy Scouts Offending Sensitive Atheists… again

By Derek - February 2, 2008 – 11:35 am

ScoutsIn England, the Boy Scout organization known simply as “Scouts” are under fire again from troubled atheist groups who feel that the long-standing Scout oath discriminates against them. “…to do my duty to God and the Queen”, is the particular line causing the uproar. The European brand of Boy Scouts are more liberal about such matters and have made this line of the Scout oath with an implied, ‘fill in the blank’. The Scout guidelines state:

“The phrase ‘to love God’ and ‘duty to God’ implies belief in a supreme being and the acceptance of divine guidance and therefore the word ‘God’ can be replaced by ‘Allah’, ‘my Dharma’ or others as appropriate to suit the faith or religion of the individual concerned.”

Sounds quite liberal and tolerant, right? Wrong. Atheists claim that they have no one to do their duty to like other religious folks have. Therefore, they are forced to take an oath to a god they do not believe in. Read more about this story here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/31/nscout131.xml

Editorial

Here is a possible solution. In the great liberal-tolerance tradition, they should allow the atheist to pledge their duty to the one they really believe Read the rest of this entry »

Jesus is a Myth?

By Derek - February 1, 2008 – 11:57 am

Definition of Myth:

  1. a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature. 
  2. -stories or matter of this kind: realm of myth. 
  3. -any invented story, idea, or concept: His account of the event is pure myth.
  4. -an imaginary or fictitious thing or person. 
  5. -an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution. (1)

MythHistorically speaking, the evidence for the existence of a man named Jesus, Son of Joseph of Nazareth who lived between 4 B.C. and 33 A.D. (estimated) is overwhelming and immutable. No other historical person from the first century or earlier has had as much written about Him within 100 years of his life as did Jesus. There are at least 19 other texts from the first and second century outside of the bible from non-Christian writers and historians that talk about this man, and none of them ever once deny He existed. To believe that Jesus is a myth is to deny factual history. One has to have a legitimate basis to make an assertion that denies history, and there is none that even skeptical historians can rely on, therefore; they don’t. In other words, no one of any scholarly merit, even those who argue against the Bible’s claims, would even dare to assert that Jesus never existed. It is easier to claim Read the rest of this entry »

What is the meaning of this?

By Anthony - January 31, 2008 – 12:22 pm

MeaningBefore I was a Christian I use to struggle with the “purpose” of my life. The struggle came on slowly. I would say from about 13 years old, up until the moment I came to know Jesus the sense of meaninglessness and purposelessness intensified. I would often ignore it when I could. The question is, how did I get like that? I wrote it off as part of growing up, but the truth is that if I never came to know Jesus, it would still be with me and I would say by most standards I’m a grown man. I would like to examine for a moment how we are driven to this state.

Before we are even created God knows His purpose in our life. (Psalm 139:16 Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them. ) That would indicate that the “feeling” we have of purposelessness is a lie. This is a simple way to begin to scratch the surface on this issue. When we hit that age (mine was 13) when we begin to wonder more than “what is that?” but we venture into “what is the meaning of that?”, we seek to define things in reference to life.

We tend not to try to define life in general at that age, but what we do then has a huge effect on what happens later. At this point we can do one of two things; we can attach God’s purpose, or figure out Read the rest of this entry »