The Assemblies Of The Early Believers - Part 2 - Finale

[Buff Scott Jr.]

The Assemblies of the Early Believers
[Theirs and Ours]
(Part 2 – Finale)

Pre-Explanation​

Nowhere in the New Covenant Scriptures do we find an example of any man being imported by a congregation of believers to function as THE minister, THE pastor, or THE preacher. And that is because the early believers ministered to and edified one another. They didn’t find it necessary to import a professional ecclesiastic to do their ministering for them. They exported men to evangelize, and supported them financially, but no one was ever imported to do what all believers should be doing—ministering to one another. In our contemporary scene, we hire and pay big bucks to a specialist to function as a proxy, the exact opposite of what the early believers practiced.—Buff.​

Who Breaks The “Bread of Life”?​

A “Church Bulletin” from Colorado tells it all. The “evangelist” announces his resignation and expresses his appreciation that God has granted him the noble opportunity of “ministering to the saints.” He has been with them five and one-half years and feels it is time to move on to other “evangelistic fields.” In his concluding remarks, he states, “We pray you will find a suitable man to break the bread of life unto you.”

The modern-day picture is conspicuous. The bread of life cannot be broken without the employment of a professional ecclesiastic. The saints would suffer from spiritual malnutrition without him. He’s the minister, the priest, the preacher, the pastor, and the orator. Shades of hallelujah, how far we have drifted! We now demand to be spoon-fed by a special feeder. We have not matured to the point of feeding ourselves. So we all gather at the church corral on Sunday mornings to warm pews while an imported hireling prepares our spiritual food and spoon-feeds us. Is it any wonder we haven’t matured in the faith?​

Let’s Get Down To Brass Tacks​

Any principle or practice we introduce in our assemblies today that either denies or interferes with the reciprocity of the saints, such as our “one another” exchanges or joint participation—as the scriptures define it—is a grave innovation. We ought to be reminded that if a congregation can import a man and pay him a big salary to do all or most of the public speaking, the same congregation can import another man and pay him a healthy salary to do all of the singing, and still another man to do all of the praying—for a salary, of course. Well, you get the idea. The principle that allows one allows the others.

To state it more explicitly, if importing specialists to feed the flock is heaven’s way, all of our gifts can be performed by proxy. As a result, all we need do is warm a pew and wait till heaven arrives. For, after all, we’re paying others to do our ministries.

The universal biblical principle, found throughout, is that in the assembly of the saints, all gifts are to be shared mutually. The “hired hand” interferes with and disrupts this principle. Do you suppose Paul had the professional minister in mind when he told the Roman believers they were “able to instruct one another” (Rom. 15:14)? Surely he was not referring to a one-man instructor! And was Paul coming off the wall with a lot of nonsense when he told the believers at Colossae they were to “teach and admonish one another” (Col. 3:16)? The one-man admonisher was nowhere to be found.
​

The Rule In Each Assembly​

In the early assemblies, there was a mutual exchange of praises, teaching, sharing, and singing. No one person did it all. The Thessalonians were told to “encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing” (1 Thess. 5:11). And there’s more. The point is: When we substitute this “one another” arrangement with a counterfeit system, such as the professional minister, we are guilty of disrupting heaven’s blueprint for spiritual growth. There’s no way to avoid this conclusion.

Take a look at our “house assemblies,” commonly referred to as “house churches.” Where’s the pulpit minister? He’s not needed! Why? Because all attendees contribute their share, as God’s grace abounds within them, and as He confers a diversity of gifts among them. Now tell me: Why in heaven’s name are we incapable of conducting our “church services” in the same fashion? The reason is because we have gone professional. We have abandoned common ground in favor of skilled specialists. We want the world to know how sophisticated and refined we have become. So we go all out to import the best and build the fanciest edifices. We have adopted idolatry, just as surely as we have substituted a bogus system.​

The End Or The Beginning?​

When will it all end? In the trash-heap of by-gone religions unless we wise up and address our deficiencies and get back to the basics of edifying and strengthening one another. The situation will not improve until and unless we rediscover the one another arrangement, as is so clearly defined in scripture. May God open our hearts and minds to do just that.




​

 

[Josheb]

The Assemblies of the Early Believers
[Theirs and Ours]
(Part 2 – Finale)

Pre-Explanation​

Nowhere in the New Covenant Scriptures do we find an example of any man being imported by a congregation of believers to function as THE minister, THE pastor, or THE preacher. ​

Do you see the irony of that statement?

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

No, but I see the irony of your question. Seriously.

 

[Josheb]

No, but I see the irony of your question. Seriously.

Explain to me the irony of my question.

 

[Hobie]

Since there's no peer-oriented, sibling-meeting practice in the exchange, I'll explain the irony.

The irony is that you, @Reformer, routinely drop into the Christian forums and post educational ops and treat all the readers as if you are the sole minister/pastor/preacher in the forum. You do not answer valid op-relevant inquiries, never discuss any disagreement, and routinely dismiss both under the auspices of not wanting to "debate" or argue," even though these forum in which you post are discussion boards!

I have discussed this, or attempted to discuss this, with you multiple times. Aside from the irony of you acting as the pastor to the entire forum whereby you instruct us all that we should be worshipping in house congregations..... the truth and fact of contemporary Christianity is that most of us worship in congregations that also have smaller house meetings in wherein the gifts of the Spirit move freely and in which the congregants minister to one another as peers.

You need to update your own experience and stop acting like the guy about which you complain. Join everyone here in this forum as a peer and learn from us through the manner in which the Spirit guides us as He meets your needs. Every interaction between any two posters has the potential to be a divine appointment.

I hope you dont think of me in that way my brother, reminds me of when my teeth grind during a brain freeze frosty.....

 

[Josheb]

I hope you dont think of me in that way my brother, reminds me of when my teeth grind during a brain freeze frosty.....

Are you in the habit of telling other Christians what to think and how to live the Christian life without tolerating any discussion of your views?

John 3:19,21 NIV
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil....... But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.


My appraisal of the op is not a function of what I think. Some posters openly come to teach but never learn. They say this. It's not a secret. It's not a product of the readers' interpretation, either. In @Buff Scott Jr. 's case this is something I've brought to his attention many times over what probably amounts to a decade (maybe longer). Randomly pick any half-dozen threads and see if there's much, if any discussion between author and respondents. Now do the same with your ops.




Am I wrong to observe this op asserts Buff as "The pastor, or THE preacher," in obvious observable marginalization that "interferes with the reciprocity of the saints"? Does this not beg the question, "Does the op practice what it preaches?"

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

JoshebB, I’m looking over all of your complaints and negatives to ascertain if any of them are beneficial enough to justify a response. I think we’ve been down this road before. We can argue “till the cows come home” and fail to reach a consensus. My preference is dialoguing, not fussing and complaining. Apparently, you have more time on your hands to do both than I do.

Additionally, there are occasions when I am lost for a reason to reply to many of your diverse doctrinal details. Currently, we’ll play it by ear, if you wish. On most of the items discussed, I know where you stand and you know where I stand. It would perhaps be helpful to hear from another reader or two on this matter. I’m open to reading them.​

 

[Josheb]

My preference is dialoguing, not fussing and complaining​

That is untrue. Anyone can look at the history of your ops and readily verify the lack of "dialoguing." In point of fact, a deliberate decision NOT to dialogue about this op was just made because this op is not about dialoguing. This op is an apologetic for the house church model, a model I readily affirm and have affirmed with you multiple times.

Are you now dialoguing about the house church model?

No.

My preference is dialoguing, not fussing and complaining.​

LOL! Then post #8 should do something more than fuss, complain and make excuses. It should dialogue about the house church model and address the irony of hierarchical ops that tell others how to worship. It is possible to broach and discuss the house church model without indicting - fussing and complaining - about modern practices. Try it on occasion .

Apparently, you have more time on your hands to do both than I do.​

This is the internet. The posts do not go anywhere. Whatever time is needed to post your half of any dialogue can be taken with any op, but that does not happen. There are, in fact, threads like this one, or this one, that can be dialogued any time you choose. None of them are going anywhere.


A single, very simple observation has been made: This op is ironic because it expresses a point of view that is the exact opposite of what is demonstrated. It preaches the peer-orientation of the house church model, but ops like this one do so by telling others how to live the Christian life without any peer-oriented dialogue! You see that, yes? Dialoguing specifically on the house church model was the only response that would have proved the op had any veracity and my observation questionable but that isn't what happened.

I’m open to reading them.​

Lurking is not dialoguing.

My preference is dialoguing, not fussing and complaining.​

Prove it.

The thread is not going anywhere. It will sit here for years waiting for some dialoguing. I will even provide a pair of non-critical specific point for dialogue:

1. Archeological records show the first building built specifically for the purpose of corporate worship was built around 120 AD. It was an addition built onto a a larger house, apparently the dwelling of someone wealthy enough to own a house, and the house where Christians met (someone like Lydia, perhaps - see Acts 16). It is estimated to have supported more than 50-60 people at a time, whereas most house-located meetings served half that many. Beginning about 100 years later, Christians began converting entire homes as official places of worship, often serving more than 100 Christians in a corporate gathering. About 100 years during which entire buildings were dedicated to corporate worship pagan places of worship began to be converted. As the number of Christians increased, so did the need for larger spaces in which to congregation. That is the basic evolution of how dwelling for Christian service began.
2. If the New Testament model is the model to be emulated, then meetings as large as 30 people are acceptable, and groups possessing elders, deacons, and a presbytery are acceptable.
3. As I have often noted (but has never been dialogued) many congregations do both "churchianity" (as you call it) and small-group, home-based gatherings. I happen to fellowship in such a congregation and have done so in different denominations for 40+ years. I host a group in my home.

In this forum my handle is Josheb, not JoshebB. I do not know what the purpose was using JoshebB, but it is not dialoguing, and it does not serve the house church model here in the forum. Every time you post about the house church model in any forum, the opportunity to post in a house-church-model manner avails itself, but that rarely happens (if ever). Every op on this subject creates the opportunity for you to demonstrate how that in a Christian discussion board! For now, there are three very op-relevant non-critical points listed above. Without fussing or complaining, discuss one of them (or all three of them). Do what you can to demonstrate the veracity and efficacy of the house church model in a Christian discussion board and thereby prove a preference for dialoguing. Otherwise, the chronic lack says you do not practice what you preach.

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

Josheb, I appreciate your efforts to set things right and for reading me. I enjoy reading and evaluating what you write, although on occasions we do not see alike. But that’s okay - and acceptable. So it was with many of the early believers. We each have our individual personality and method of presenting what we view as biblically factual and/or feasible.

We should not feel hurt, upset, or “out of sorts” when matters don’t go our way while exchanging views. One brother noted, “This is indeed a discussion forum.” I might add it is not a forum to be divisive, mean and ugly when someone does not like the technique someone else is using to express his views or comments. So let us be brothers, not enemies. I will not always have time to respond to all of your comments and questions, as noted earlier. I suggest we both be patient with each other and avoid becoming perturbed.​