Understanding Authority Part 3

The following is an email that raised some very good question on the authority articles and the reply. It is published unedited, except for a few grammer corrections (on my side) and the use of an alias name. Published with permission.



Hi Andre

I read your Blogs about Authority and consequently ran for my bible! I understand totally what you are saying and completely agree... I think!

Firstly, Surely the point of being a 'body' of Christ is that we are one, not independent 'members' and even though the fingers may get it's instruction directly from the head, it requires the presence of the arms and neck etc to successfully implement that instruction...?

Secondly, how does an New Testament church which has no 'official' authority deal with deception or rebellion. The idea relies on each member receiving absolute clarity in hearing from God and as we all know, we all make mistakes! Where does the buck stop? Who takes responsibility for guiding the body?

A child who has a bad parent should surely still obey it's parent, regardless of the quality of the parent's decision making? Or should I say regardless of the parent's teaching style? Would the church not run the risk of falling into a place of hopeless rebellion without someone calling the
shots?

As I understand it, life is a test and isn't submission one of those tests?

One more question - the new testament church we spoke about is referenced from the Greek word Ekklesia, correct? My lexicon describes this word as: a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly. Is this public assembly which we call church supposed to run under an organic authority or is it an incorrect translation of the Greek word in
the first place?

I am certainly not questioning your teaching, but would love to hear further insight into your revelation!

God bless
Theopolis

Reply

Hi Theopolis, Thanks for the feedback.
You asked such good questions. Often, before one gets to the core of what something really is, one has to strip away the layers of what it is not. I feel that what I started in these articles is the beginning of the 'stripping' stage and by no means a complete description of N.T. church. Whoever does not have questions after reading it, certainly did not read it correctly.
Here goes!

"not independent 'members'"
There is nothing that makes me fall in love with people as much as understanding this gospel. The revelation of our identity draws me to others and the community that forms in that way is certainly part of what God desires. Jesus gave us a clue as to how big it could be 'where 2 or 3 is gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.' Paul, in one of the rare occasions in which he speaks of the actual gathering of the church makes it crystal clear that the gatherings were small enough for each member to individually contribute a song or a word of encouragement etc. Every church in the N.T., without exception, met in a home.

Conclusion: I agree, God's idea is community. We do see a very different community in the N.T. church than much of what we see today. It was much closer to an extended family. If you think of a family - there are occasions that bigger meetings are called as with a wedding. These celebrations, however, happens occasionally, not weekly. The core is a small group. And families don't need organisations to keep them together.

"how does an New Testament church which has no 'official' authority deal with deception or rebellion"
Every cult that ever formed was as a result of one person having undue influence on the opinions of others. It was the very existence of official authority that led to deception.
When you are part of a family where every member is able and encouraged to speak his/her thoughts, it brings an immediate balance and natural guard against deception. I have no illusion that leadership developed and still develops in house type churches, but they are organic in this way: When a person speaks in line with the mind of God, his words carry authority; when he speaks out of his own, his words do not carry authority. Therefore authority is fluid and makes it much easier for everyone to recognise and deal with deception. Without official appointments people will recognize leadership by maturity, meekness and servanthood. No one will be able to impose their thoughts on others because of a superior position in such an environment.

"Where does the buck stop?"
With each individual member. This is one of the greatest weaknesses I see in organisational type authority. Individuals abdicate there personal responsibility by just blending in. Scripture continually stresses individual accountability, here's one example:
Rom 14:8-10None of us are permitted to insist on our own way in these matters. It's God we are answerable to--all the way from life to death and everything in between-- not each other. That's why Jesus lived and died and then lived again: so that he could be our Master across the entire range of life and death, and free us from the petty tyrannies of each other. .....Eventually, we're all going to end up kneeling side by side in the place of judgment, facing God.
Rom 14:13 Forget about deciding what's right for each other

"Who takes responsibility for guiding the body?*
The Head; the one and only Head. Eph 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
It's interesting that throughout history, revival and growth took place when the organisations lost control. Today in China, India and Argentina the greatest christian movements are happening without any official authority. Simple people are simply believing what the Word says and living it. Jesus said: 'I will build my church' - I think we often did not trust Him and tried to do it for Him.

"As I understand it, life is a test and isn't submission one of those tests?"
Submission is beautiful. The core meaning is to allow yourself to be persuaded. Godly submission is voluntarily and to be present in all relationships Eph 5:21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. True submission needs no hierarchy or superior position to exist. It's an attitude that I am even able to display towards my children.
There is however a very dangerous type of submission that will suck the very life out of you. Paul spoke about such a type of submission in the book of Galatians - the type that brings one into bondage and robs the individual of personal freedom - something(individual freedom) that God is passionate about.
Gal 2:5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.

Ekklesia
ek-klay-see'-ah
From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.

The meaning of the word has changed over the centuries of use. Specifically the term 'public' was not assumed originally, although it is not excluded either. Most references in the N.T. is to a local assembly in a house. (There are also references to the universal church - beyond location and time, but thats not the focus of our discussion now - added later)
Rom 16:5 And the church which is in their house. Salute Epenetus, my beloved: who is the firstfruits of Asia in Christ.
1Co 16:19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house, with whom I also lodge.
Col 4:15 Salute the brethren who are at Laodicea: and Nymphas and the church that is in his house.
Phm 1:2 And to Appia, our dearest sister, and to Archippus, our fellow soldier, and to the church which is in thy house.

The meetings that occured in public places, especially in the very beginning, has no sign of official organisation. It was spontaneous, creative and useful for a time to evangelize. The temple(only one in Jerusalem) was a natural location for people to gather and so if you had some good news, thats where you went to share it. Later on we see Paul occasionally visiting synagogues, but for the exclusive purpose of evangelizing. As soon as it became apparent that they did not want to hear from him any more, he left.

It might be useful to mention that there is nothing wrong with organising a meeting or an event that is christian by nature. It is when we somehow develop this into a permanent organisation and then call it the church that it is contrary to God's word. Organising stuff is fine and sometimes necessary, but calling an organisation church is far below the vision of scripture.

If we look at the root words from which ekklesia comes from, it is the word 'origin' and 'from'. It is as if the revelation of our origin awakens us and draws us into a new appreciation of one-another.

Thanks so much for your thoughts and don't hesitate to keep them coming.

I want to end with a some words Jesus Himself spoke that meant so much to me:
Mat 23:8 "Don't let people do that to you, put you on a pedestal like that. You all have a single Teacher, and you are all classmates.
Mat 23:9 Don't set people up as experts over your life, letting them tell you what to do. Save that authority for God; let him tell you what to do. No one else should carry the title of 'Father'; you have only one Father, and he's in heaven.
Mat 23:10 And don't let people maneuver you into taking charge of them. There is only one Life-Leader for you and them--Christ.
Mat 23:11 "Do you want to stand out? Then step down. Be a servant.
Mat 23:12 If you puff yourself up, you'll get the wind knocked out of you. But if you're content to simply be yourself, your life will count for plenty.


Love
Andre

http://eclesia.blogspot.com