Why the focus on just a few people functioning (up front) in our gatherings?

[WilliamL]

12 hours ago, Sower said:

Why not take a poll to see how many attend a traditional assembled body of believers weekly, and are faithful to that body, not just in word but in deed.

I'm not the one who made the claim, you were. You focused on squeaky-wheel posters as though they are in the majority on WCF.

I'm not here to cast judgment on people in their widely varied circumstances. City folks can generally meet weekly, for others that is not so easy. My former Bread of Life Fellowship met yearly to minister at Rainbow Gatherings, and it was the most Spirit-filled fellowship to which I have belonged. But we came from all over the country, so weekly or even monthly meetings were out of the question. Each fellowship is unique; there is no formula for how often they should meet.

[Yes, and]

9 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

BTW: @AdHoc turned me onto what looks like a similar book by GH Lang called "The Churches of God."  In it Lang describes the process of this organizing in the first, second and third centuries. Had you heard of it?

No, hadn't heard of it. Based on a rather long review of it I read at Amazon it does seem to say similar things. This does not surprise me (as I said, "many different voices over the millennia.")

Another voice which decades ago had some impact on me on this topic was Dostoyevsky, in the novel-within-a-novel The Grand Inquisitor.

[Marathoner]

We should be willing to listen to what our brothers and sisters have to say, or read what they write as the case is here on Worthy. It's all part of how we love one another, yes?

Specifically, I'm listening closely to those whose experiences haven't been like my own. That's very important to me for many reasons, the biggest being the following:

The Lord is pleased to speak to me through the hearts of my brothers and sisters in Christ. He has done this many times over the years, and there is no complacency in the Lord for any of us. The one who speaks His words to me is one whom I struggle to understand...

Someone who is not like me at all... 

Yes, even someone whose words I might find offensive in some way when they are delivered. I might struggle with it for a long time. I might even try to forget what they said. I can be thick that way sometimes.

Ah, but what they said never truly leaves me. It never leaves me because those words are from the Lord Himself, and He is faithful to bring those words to my remembrance at precisely the perfect time. I trust those reading this will understand what I mean. 

So, over the years I have slowly --- and sometimes painfully --- learned that when a brother who offends me for some reason (the detail doesn't matter) speaks, that's a brother whom I need to listen to closely. What can I say?

There's no complacency in Jesus Christ. We shall be changed and conformed to His image one... step... at a time. Am I offended? Does the brother or sister in question remind me of what I abhorred when I was lost in the darkness of this world? Do they have what I never had? 

Yes to any or even all of the above? Wonderful! That's the one whom the Spirit chooses to speak to me. What they have to offer is from Him; the quicker I listen, the better. The sooner I overcome the offense, the better it will go for me. 

I hear those whose experience differs greatly from my own. I read what you write. I consider your words, and so I know that your grievance isn't something to be dismissed. Not at all. 

We should take great care of each other. Am I worried about offending the world? Of course not! The world hated our Lord first. But when it comes to you, beloved of the Lord, everything changes. 

Okay, so the Lord didn't raise me up in a church. That's something many of you have that I haven't. And the Lord has sent me forth on an often lonely and sometimes desolate path, walking through places that most (wisely) avoid... so what? That's only what He requires of me. It's my due.

It doesn't give me the right to criticize or castigate others for having what I never had, or never walking through dark places during evil times like I have. I'm certainly not the only one who has gone through such things.

No, I need to pay heed to what you say, and be careful not to treat you carelessly. I'm reading what you write. 

[Sower]

2 hours ago, WilliamL said:

I'm not the one who made the claim, you were. You focused on squeaky-wheel posters as though they are in the majority on WCF.

I'm not here to cast judgment on people in their widely varied circumstances. City folks can generally meet weekly, for others that is not so easy. My former Bread of Life Fellowship met yearly to minister at Rainbow Gatherings, and it was the most Spirit-filled fellowship to which I have belonged. But we came from all over the country, so weekly or even monthly meetings were out of the question. Each fellowship is unique; there is no formula for how often they should meet.

 

Yes I made the claim based upon the fourteen years here so often defending the "traditional" church from  church bashers running down how ALL the churches do not meet their standards naming their many reasons. Research my post history and you can read it. That is why I ask for a poll.  (I do not know how) I guess I am just a bit sensitive hearing why people here have to use that excuse to not assemble together. You have been here a long time and I'm sure you have heard it.

And I usually always preface this with that I am aware that there are the sick and the infirm, and many without transportation etc etc. I get it.

No church is perfect. But God's body will prevail with all the warts and wrinkles.
Though I have heard some here, but not  much about the benefit of belonging to an assembly of believers (church) and everybodies 'good' experiences on the plus side. Edification. So why belittle churches, and point out the sins of others. Aren't we supposed to be edifying one another, to say nothing of Christ's body of believers?
                The glass is also half full........

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.
 

 

[Vine Abider]

11 hours ago, Marathoner said:

We should be willing to listen to what our brothers and sisters have to say, or read what they write as the case is here on Worthy. It's all part of how we love one another, yes?

Specifically, I'm listening closely to those whose experiences haven't been like my own. That's very important to me for many reasons, the biggest being the following:

The Lord is pleased to speak to me through the hearts of my brothers and sisters in Christ. He has done this many times over the years, and there is no complacency in the Lord for any of us. The one who speaks His words to me is one whom I struggle to understand...

Someone who is not like me at all... 

Yes, even someone whose words I might find offensive in some way when they are delivered. I might struggle with it for a long time. I might even try to forget what they said. I can be thick that way sometimes.

Ah, but what they said never truly leaves me. It never leaves me because those words are from the Lord Himself, and He is faithful to bring those words to my remembrance at precisely the perfect time. I trust those reading this will understand what I mean. 

So, over the years I have slowly --- and sometimes painfully --- learned that when a brother who offends me for some reason (the detail doesn't matter) speaks, that's a brother whom I need to listen to closely. What can I say?

There's no complacency in Jesus Christ. We shall be changed and conformed to His image one... step... at a time. Am I offended? Does the brother or sister in question remind me of what I abhorred when I was lost in the darkness of this world? Do they have what I never had? 

Yes to any or even all of the above? Wonderful! That's the one whom the Spirit chooses to speak to me. What they have to offer is from Him; the quicker I listen, the better. The sooner I overcome the offense, the better it will go for me. 

I hear those whose experience differs greatly from my own. I read what you write. I consider your words, and so I know that your grievance isn't something to be dismissed. Not at all. 

We should take great care of each other. Am I worried about offending the world? Of course not! The world hated our Lord first. But when it comes to you, beloved of the Lord, everything changes. 

Okay, so the Lord didn't raise me up in a church. That's something many of you have that I haven't. And the Lord has sent me forth on an often lonely and sometimes desolate path, walking through places that most (wisely) avoid... so what? That's only what He requires of me. It's my due.

It doesn't give me the right to criticize or castigate others for having what I never had, or never walking through dark places during evil times like I have. I'm certainly not the only one who has gone through such things.

No, I need to pay heed to what you say, and be careful not to treat you carelessly. I'm reading what you write. 

Amen brother, amen!  And that is my realization more and more too.  I think at some point, the Lord will show us how much He has used ALL THINGS - everything and everyone - to speak to us!  And especially through the saints He has put around us.  Again, amen!

9 hours ago, Sower said:

 

Yes I made the claim based upon the fourteen years here so often defending the "traditional" church from  church bashers running down how ALL the churches do not meet their standards naming their many reasons. Research my post history and you can read it. That is why I ask for a poll.  (I do not know how) I guess I am just a bit sensitive hearing why people here have to use that excuse to not assemble together. You have been here a long time and I'm sure you have heard it.

And I usually always preface this with that I am aware that there are the sick and the infirm, and many without transportation etc etc. I get it.

No church is perfect. But God's body will prevail with all the warts and wrinkles.
Though I have heard some here, but not  much about the benefit of belonging to an assembly of believers (church) and everybodies 'good' experiences on the plus side. Edification. So why belittle churches, and point out the sins of others. Aren't we supposed to be edifying one another, to say nothing of Christ's body of believers?
                The glass is also half full........

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.
 

 

I so appreciate the genuine fellowship on here!  While I've been blessed to have been able to enjoy gatherings that are highly participative these past couple decades, I hope it is clear that I also don't want to be in the "church bashing" camp.  The bottom-line is the One Grain died so that the many grains would be in the loaf. The Christian life is the body life.  Period.

So while the system of things may look messed up in the ekklesia, the Lord loves it and sees the finished work - a glorious church without spot or wrinkle or any such thing! 

[Anne2]

17 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

Of course there is some kind of authority in the body God designed. But He didn't set up the kind of overt hierarchy present in most of the church now, but rathe something more organic.

The kind of overt authority? What does that mean. I am attempting to  have some clarity. I don't think the hierarch structure itself is that much of a difference, as long as hearts are right. I also do not think  these....

1. a small thing that those ancient bodies were there from the very early origins.

2. a light thing to show such dismissive disrespect in judgement of those which were of old.

3. a small thing to misrepresent any of them (or anyone else) in judgement.

It is IMO, not beneficial or helpful to anyone in the body.

So, in that vein, I desired where you were that much different. As obviously authority has been a part of the Church from the Apostles on.

You don't want to discuss that aspect of it, then don't.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Anne2

[Alive]

3 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

So while the system of things may look messed up in the ekklesia, the Lord loves it and sees the finished work - a glorious church without spot or wrinkle or any such thing! 

Amen!

[Vine Abider]

38 minutes ago, Anne2 said:

The kind of overt authority? What does that mean. I am attempting to  have some clarity. I don't think the hierarch structure itself is that much of a difference, as long as hearts are right. I also do not think  these....

1. a small thing that those ancient bodies were there from the very early origins.

2. a light thing to show such dismissive disrespect in judgement of those which were of old.

3. a small thing to misrepresent any of them (or anyone else) in judgement.

It is IMO, not beneficial or helpful to anyone in the body.

So, in that vein, I desired where you were that much different. As obviously authority has been a part of the Church from the Apostles on.

You don't want to discuss that aspect of it, then don't.

Sorry, I couldn't completely tell what you were getting at or asking from your post.  Are you saying you think it disrespectful to look at the system of authority in the early church, and that the history of what occurred then is being misrepresented?

[Anne2]

27 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

Sorry, I couldn't completely tell what you were getting at or asking from your post.  Are you saying you think it disrespectful to look at the system of authority in the early church, and that the history of what occurred then is being misrepresented?

I am saying I cannot tell, what difference is being made between the 4th century and what you are talking about.

I am also saying that the system itself is not the problem. It is men's hearts. No system is going to cure a bad heart.

I am also saying, I do not think it is helpful whatso ever to mischaracterize What occurred, nor how they operate.

Let me give you an example for that. I think it helpful for you to understand what I am saying.

The Eucharistic assembly. What happens there is no different than what happens when someone prophesies in your Church. Or when Someone gives a word of knowledge, an interpretation, a tongue. One spirit is functioning in the body through men. None of your prophets, nor you yourself would claim  they were speaking their own mind and will, but exercising their gift of the spirit, through the spirit, by the spirit. The same which functions in all the gifted in the body.

Yet, the Eucharistic assemblies of old, believe the very same thing concerning the eucharist. Yet, often reformers speak of them as they don't believe it is Christ's priesthood, functioning through them. So, doctrinal disagreement is one thing, but to actually mischaracterize this is all together another thing. The gift of the priesthood, operates no differently in their eyes. 

The Roman Church split with the rest of the Church over leadership issues. The rest of the Churches which existed at that time, did not think or do as Rome did. But you speak as though they were all the same in that.

These kinds of things are not helpful IMO.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Anne2

[Anne2]

37 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

Sorry, I couldn't completely tell what you were getting at or asking from your post.  Are you saying you think it disrespectful to look at the system of authority in the early church, and that the history of what occurred then is being misrepresented?

Bottom line as I understand it and have read from their materials. Now I am gonna put this is my own words as we both share the same issue foundationally. We westerners do not understand the ancient Eastern Church. I do not say this to offend you, but to be as open as I know how. We (you and myself) do not understand because we ourselves are affected by our Roman roots. Have you ever heard the phrase "shaking off Catholicism"? I have and I have used it to describe my own spiritual journey. It is the remnant of Papal (Roman) Catholicism we yet keep that is the cause of this.

Martin Luther greatly respected the Eastern Fathers, and dialogued with one prominent Bishop. Martin wanted his support and unity against Rome. Finally this bishop cut off communication. Martin and the reformers had already been affected by the same self rule thy got from Romanism, to where this Bishop, seen reformers as the egg Rome had laid. Those are my own words and way of explaining this. IMO, history shows this has some merit. The reformers could not agree among themselves, denominationalism began, and it has grown to ridiculousness since. Every head being their own little Popes.