Debunking Islam in 14 verses

The God of the Bible reveals himself in many ways and one of them is anger.  Us humans are made in his image and can display a range of emotions and if you are like me, in the space of a few seconds!  God is always self controlled in this respect but it is clear love, hate*, anger, mercy, grace etc are well within the persona of the Lord.  It is this point in which the Quran shoots itself in the foot and reveals it is a document written by Men.

Muslims say that the Quran is an unchanged document and is the Holy Word of Allah in Arabic.  You have to wear gloves touching any Quran written in Arabic and perform washing also.  The Islamic view of the writings is sacred, holy and the very words of God.   However in the first 14 verses the Quran runs into severe difficulty.  For those who have not explored the Quran allow me to underline its errors.

The first seven verses of the Quran basically tell us in no uncertain terms that Allah is completely, totally and entirely Merciful.  The text goes to extraordinary lengths to let us know this before we have any account of anything else.  "Allah is Merciful."  That's chapter 1 essentially.  When we get to 2:7 we find an extraordinary display of ...er... no mercy.  Speaking of unbelievers:

2:7  Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.

Wait.  I thought Allah was completely, entirely and totally Merciful? Yet here we see from the holy, sacred, can't-touch-this Quran a severe lack of the aforementioned Mercy.  Having asked Muslim clerics how to deal with this verse they all say 'Allah knows best.' In other words they can't answer this initial contradiction. It appears that if you choose not to believe, Allah makes it harder for you to believe.  Allah makes it impossible to perceive himself and therefore the person ends up in hell.   

The God of the Bible is opposite to this.  He has given himself for the Salvation of the world.  God wants all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:4). There is a point where God does give people what they want and sends delusions and restricts the ability to perceive Salvation.  This is usually tied in with a rejection of Messiah, once having known who he is.  Also we find from Romans that believers can get to a place where the Lord can do nothing more and allows them to hit rock bottom.  Israel is an example of this at the present time but will come to the Lord in the Day Of Jacobs trouble in the Tribulation. So the God of the Bible can do Sura 2:7 but the point is that he doesn't declare himself to be totally, entirely and completely Merciful!  There is a point where God will unleash righteous anger on people who reject Messiah!  

It's the overstating of Allah's Mercy in 'Holy Scripture' that ties Muslims up and reveals the Quran as nonsensical.   The Bible does have translation errors but in its original languages is the Word of God.  A bible is 'words on paper' but point to the Holy and Glorious Risen Son of God who doesn't require gloves to touch him, he invites us to hold his hand through our lives after he washes us clean!  Now that is Mercy.   


Gary Ward

* Jesus hates the deeds of the Nicolatians Rev Ch 2 and 3

'Do this in remembrance of me' #4 : Objections

The idea that Jesus passed on a way to do church at the Last Supper, and there have never been any other instructions is controversial.  It claims that for 1800 years the gathering of believers has departed from 'This do..." at the Last Supper and the practices of the Apostles.  Let's look at some objections to this observation:

1. They met in the Temple.  The Bible clearly states that in Acts 2:46
They did meet in the Temple and in other places.  They continued to do this but it was not ekklesia.  It was for evangelising, preaching the gospel to the unsaved and the like.  If the temple was the place where Jesus was leading Paul and the other Apostles we would see in his Epistles:  "To Nympha who meets in a home... stop meeting in homes... you are supposed to meet in the Temple."  Instead we get encouragement from Paul to do what they passed on for them to do and greetings to loads of people meeting in homes.

2. 'Paradosis' just means character, behaviour and conduct was passed on.
It is true to say that Paul and the other Apostles intention was to demonstrate a Godly life and Paul said 'imitate me.'  The paradosis was also the passing on of what the Lord passed on to Paul as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 11:23 about breaking bread and drinking wine in remembrance. So for a start it's not just about Paul.  What has happened with verse 23 is the context has been ignored.  The bread and wine appear as part of a meal that the Corinthians were able to gorge themselves at and get drunk!  To lift verse 23 out from the context leads to thinking we ought to just bread bits of bread up and sip wine.

3. "Jesus has always led his church. Today's church is Jesus' will." 
This line of thinking leads to a conundrum.  Firstly we must say that if Jesus has led his church entirely in his will then Roman Catholicism and its atrocities was Jesus will!  THEN we have to say Jesus is somewhat schizophrenic and led the Reformers to break from Rome!  Then we have to look at over 38,000 denominations on planet earth and say He's leading everyone into disunity!  What is true to say is that where unscriptural practices have taken place there has always been a remnant aiming to live by the Scripture. They mostly suffered persecution under the hands of Roman Catholics and Protestants respectively.

4.  There's no set format, 'church' is whenever believers meet together.
The reason people think each and every gathering is 'church' is because the word comes from 'ekklesia.'  This greek word means 'assembly of people.'  In Paul's day however, 'ekklesia' described a gathering of matters of state.  Be that as it may, even if you define 'breaking bread' as a sip and a morsel of bread or the full agape meal as I am suggesting,  both are occasions where we are 'remembering Jesus.'  We know this because in any event Jesus said, 'Do this in remembrance of me.'  So if a bunch of believers gather to watch a soccer match, go to a Rolling Stones concert or go on holiday together, are they meeting to remember Jesus?  Have they brought bread and wine or an agape feast?    The idea that Paul was thinking ekklesia is anytime people meet together is simply bad use of Scripture.  


5.  The 'small group, food based no-leaders' model is unworkable.
Firstly who said theres no leaders?  Of course there are leaders, they just don't exist in the same structure as we expect.  Also, they shunned the idea that a leader is over people.  Jesus told the Sons of Thunder in Mark 10 that the gentile way was 'not so among you.'  From a perspective of hiring large halls, setting up an aesthetically pleasing event, getting some great sound-bytes and mixing them with Scripture etc etc, the proposal I am making looks and sounds weak.  But dear Brother and Sister, that is exactly what the Lord wants to evidence his work through us on earth. To pass on a model for believers gathering that reflects upon the gifts talents and abilities of man is counter-kingdom.  Some time ago the Son of God hung naked and bleeding, nailed to a tree.  That looked pretty unworkable didn't it!  Yet our Salvation lies in this weak, pathetic and shameful sight.

6.  We have a thousand people in our Church.  Are we 'wrong?'
I don't think we can allocate 'right' or 'wrong' to believers meeting together.  If someone is born into a particular church practice and there's no-one to correct them, it would be difficult to assign 'right' or 'wrong.' That said, the responsibility of all Christians is to have ears to hear what the Spirit is saying to the Churches. Those who lead others in the Church will have to stand before Jesus and give account for what they did.  I wonder if church practice will be a part of this enquiry?  If I was a leader in the church that is not found in Scripture I would go to Revelation chapters 2 and 3 where Jesus addresses 7 churches about what they did. Some think these have parallel with the Church through the ages.  Jesus has big green ticks and red crosses for most churches so maybe we are being foretold that the leaders of churches will give account?

7.  The best Christian leaders in the world don't do church like you suggest.
But Paul, in the Scripture that God allows to be His Word did.  If that does not impact you over making leaders of today heroes, you have bigger problems than 'how to do church.'

8.  Small groups, as you suggest, are vulnerable to false teaching and unaccountable
Quite the opposite!  A group that does not regard the words of any Man to be infallible will all be searching out the Scriptures.  They will come and balance everyone in the room and if someone says something not quite right the group will bring balance.  It is when a group assume a handful of individuals have 'The Word of God' in a weekly preachment... that is dangerous!  They give themselves to the 'Man of God' and he could be saying anything!  With these things in view, all believers must be on alert at all times as everyone is vulnerable to false teaching in these last days.

9. The early Christians met in homes because of persecution. It was for a specific time.
This is just historically untrue.  Persecution was sporadic and believers still met in homes.  This is another one-line dismissal of the command to meet around the Lords Supper as a full meal in a family home.

10.  So now, after 1800 years you and a few others have 'found the answer?'
Groups that practiced meeting in homes around the Lords Supper as a full meal with open and equal sharing have always existed.  They just haven't been the mainstream brand of Christianity.   So now, let's say 'Hillsong' et al is the main brand for evangelicals.  Many are meeting in the Scriptural way but marketing, visibility and categorisation are of no interest to these groups.

Conclusion
I've selected 10 of the most popular things levelled at me about this claim.  I hope you can further explore with me the possibility that church was modelled by the Apostles in the first century and we need to get back to that model.  If this resonates with you and want to know more do contact me at gary.ward.c1@gmail.com

Gary Ward

'Do this in remembrance of me' #3: Lost in Transmission?

In this particular writing series 'Do this in remembrance of me,' I have covered two issues.  The first one was underlining that the first churches were small gatherings around a meal.  They were in homes and each person was able to share on equal footing.  The second was about how Jesus instructed the Apostles to 'do this...' at the Last Supper.  What's missing in this exploration is evidence for the Apostles, having taken Jesus' words to 'do this...' on board, and then passing this practice on to other believers.

Jesus Passed on the pattern from the Last Supper as Paul tells us:

 1 Corinthians 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. (underlining and italics mine)

Also see 1 Cor 11:23 Paul 'delivers' ... the same derivative term.  Here Paul tells us what he is referring to... The Last Supper!

'Paradosis'

Paul had followed Christ's command in the subject matter (The Lord's full meal practice) and now the Corinthians were to follow Paul.  Follow what?  This is specifically the word translated as 'ordinances.'  The Greek word here is 'paradosis' and it means 'passed on or transmitted precept / pattern / tradition.'  For clarity over this you don't need a greek expert... just download esword and use the feature that allows Greek words to be translated from Strongs Concordance. So we are clear:

G3862

παράδοσις

paradosis

par-ad'-os-is

From G3860; transmission, that is, (concretely) a precept; specifically the Jewish traditionary law: - ordinance, tradition.

Traditions and precepts are things we do

So Paul 'paradosis-ed' ... transmitted or passed on something... he had received from the Lord.  I have no doubt that Paul passed on moral and ethical example and lived as a role model for the Christ life.  However the 'following Paul' (as he follows Christ) here is to do with the subject matter as traditions /precepts are things we do, not things we are.  This refers to the passing on of the specific way to meet as ekklesia.  Jesus passed it on to the Apostles and they passed it on to everyone else.  

Other instructions about 'paradosis'

Paul said certain things about the passing on of a way to meet as believers remembering Christ (church).  

2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

'Traditions' is 'Paradosis.'  The text here says 'Therefore.'  It would be good to note the things said in all of chapter 2 as it is clearly stated by Paul that keeping to the practices for believers will help when the Antichrist comes and powerful delusions / signs will be outworked to deceive believers.

2 Thessalonians 3:6   Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

Again, a strong command from Paul to not be associated with those who 'walk disorderly' over the paradosis! Again check the greek with esword as this rendering is exactly what the King James says it is!  So if you are aware of the way to meet, yet choose to not meet that way... not a good idea according to Paul.

Conclusion

Do a thorough study on 'paradosis,' as with all my writing don't just take it from me.  We can see that an actual way to gather and meet was passed on and the key word to look for is 'paradosis' and its derivatives. When we see verses like this one:

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

It appears that Luke records believers carried on doing what the Apostles did.  'Breaking of Bread is a Jewish idiom for eating together.  Read the rest and see what happens.  

Gary Ward

'Do this in remembrance of me' #2 < What He said.

The Last Supper was Jesus and the disciples eating the last Passover meal ever intended to be eaten.  We know this because the one who began the Passover just prior to the escape from Egypt (Exo 12) was the one to end it at the Last Supper (The Gospels).   Passover was the start of Israel's New Year and reminded God's chosen people that when the Angel of Death passed over the homes of those who had the lambs blood on the lintels were spared Judgement.  As a result of God's Judgement the Hebrew nation were allowed to leave Egypt.  This spoke of the coming Messiah who would secure Salvation.

When the real Lamb of God came there was no need to remember the escape from Egypt any more.  It spoke of the Salvation that Messiah would bring and at the Last Supper Jesus the Messiah stopped the Passover feast, leaving the fourth cup.  Taking the third of the four cups he used it to symbolize his shed blood and took the unleavened bread as his broken body.   In taking these symbols it was never to be detached from the meal they took part in.

When we just eat bread and sip wine
Churches worldwide remember Jesus with a small piece of bread and a sip of wine.  To detach these from a full meal is like a man who goes to a garage with his car.  The Mechanic tells the man that the spark plugs are what will make his car work.  Does the man go away thinking that you only need spark plugs to run an engine?  Of course not... the Mechanic was only referring to them as pertinent to a discussion to get the car going, not that them alone are needed to run his car.  In the same way, if we detach the bread and wine from the meal, "because Jesus said do this in remembrance of me," we neglect the entire context of them being there as part of the meal in the first place.

Jesus told believers how to do 'church'
"This do in remembrance of me" applied to the entire context of the occasion.  So when Jesus said this he was commanding his Apostles to have a meal when they meet together.  He wasn't referring to the Passover because that ended when Jesus becomes the actual Sacrificial Lamb on the cross. The small group in a family home eating a meal that had a loaf and wine as composite parts was the idea.

Paul told believers how to do 'church'
As I have explained previously, this is exactly what the Apostles went on and did.  Paul was not present at this occasion but he does inform us in 1 Corinthians  11:23 that he received this instruction from the Lord. Paul quotes what Jesus said to 'do this in remembrance of me.' This occasion had people eating too much food and getting drunk.  This was a feast, not a small sip and tiny morsel.

"It's about the heart"
When people are born into a way to meet together it is generally difficult to introduce new ideas.  Many who see the above scriptural instruction to meet around a meal say their own practice of a small sip and morsel of bread suffices because 'it is all about the heart.'  This is a true statement and if your heart cannot change to line up with what Jesus Christ, the Risen Ascended King of the Universe commands you to do then it would be wise to assess your own heart.  After all John 10:27 tells us that Jesus sheep hear his voice (through the word of God) and I know them and they follow me.  We must be willing to recalibrate our practices in order to follow the Lord.  But why is it so important to actually have a meal?  What's so erroneous about taking communion with emblems instead of a full meal?

Family time!
Firstly we must be obedient to the Lord's instructions even if they seem to make no sense or we are in another form of practice.  The full meal idea was pure genius because it makes families do what families do... eat a meal together!  We are Brothers and Sisters under the Father and when we gather to remember the saving work as family it diminishes the intimacy and purposes if we don't gather around food.  Why would we want to have sips of wine and corners of bread when we can have deep intimate fellowship with people we will spend eternity with?  The Lord needs this scenario to do his work.  Simple as.

Gary Ward

'Do this in remembrance of me' #1: A Preposterous Claim

This writing begins a multi-part series exploring a preposterous claim.  The claim will probably be so ridiculous, even offensive to your ears that you will stop reading.  However I will provide Scriptural basis for the idea that the pattern for believers meeting together was given in the New Testament as THE way to meet for all believers for all times.  Over 15 years of being led to sow seeds for a return to first century pattern of meeting together, I've never had anyone provide a more convincing story of 'church' than those observing these things with me.

The Pattern
To get started Ill outline the 'wineskin' that the Lord intended all believers to follow through all times.  I will demonstrate that the first century believers met in homes, in smaller groups around the Lords Supper.  This was not a piece of bread and wine, it was a full meal with a loaf and wine as constituent parts.  The believers would exercise gifts but not as ranked leadership with official offices.  I will give Scriptural basis for all these things including the fact the Paul defined this an 'ekklesia,' the term used for gathering together to break bread.

A Distinct Gathering
The word 'ekklesia' is not a special 'church' term.  The word comes from an 'assembly of people who are gathered to discuss matters of state.'  Paul used this word because the gathering around a meal was just that! The state was the Kingdom of God.  So believers met to do other things like pray or have specific teaching sessions but this was distinct by its purpose.   The idea that 'ekklesia' is any instance when the believers gather for any reason is simply error when we see Paul using this term to define gathered believers 'break bread'.

The data around the first believers meeting this way is well known.  Theologians and scholars are well written on this simple way to meet.  For those needing a few pointers here are some Scriptures that demonstrate this is how they met.

Met in homes:
1 Cor 16:19
Rom 16:3-5
Phil 1:1-2
Col 4:15

There's much more evidence for this but without one single scripture describing THIS meeting taking place in the synagogues or a specially prepared communal hall, we can be sure the New Testament is clear about the place ekklesia met.  Acts 2:46 indicates they met in the Temple but with this isolated 'met' reference it could have been a rallying point for the Apostles or a place where they started with prayers.  It certainly doesn't appear in the rest of Paul's Epistles as normative practice for believers meeting together.

Around a Meal:
In 1 Cor 11 Paul is correcting some error in believers gorging themselves on the food and getting drunk! Seamlessly Paul goes on to instruct the Corinthians about this gathering called 'ekklesia.' There was enough food to overeat and wine to get drunk!  This was a full meal.   Also not Paul urging the Corinthians to 'keep the feast,' as we can see, a food fiesta with lots of wine!  Note in Acts 2:42-47 is a Jewish idiom for a full meal.  Note Paul in Acts 20 dialogues with those present and then they have a meal together.  This was ekklesia and the text points out Paul had the floor because he was leaving.

That Jesus instructed the Apostles to eat a meal at the Last Supper I will leave for later.

Open and equal sharing
1 Corinthians 14:26
Colossians 3:16
Hebrews 10:25

These scriptures show believers mutually encouraging. building up each other on level footing.

Conclusion
So the New Testament shows clearly that the ekkelsia was a distinct gathering around a meal in homes with open and equal sharing.  The well known scholars agree this was how the church met together.  One question that needs to be answered is why we don't have this clearly instructed from the Lord?
The answer is ... we do!  The second installment of this exploration will show Jesus telling us how to meet when we gather in remembrance of him.

Gary Ward

"When The Son of Man Shall Come...."

Jesus' first coming is the event that defines humanity.  Those who do not recognize Messiah still date their cheque books 2014 as the dating system records thereabouts the coming of Messiah.  The Lord came in flesh, born in a humble feeding trough, no place to lay his head as an adult.  Everything about Messiah from his first coming invites us to come and offload to this humble servant of humanity.  The last 2000 years has been opportunity for all Mankind to kneel and be conquered by Yeshua Hameshiac... the Jewish Messiah.

While stood in the hills of the Promised Land, Jesus spoke of his second coming.  Let us make no mistake about the nature of this event.  I am a Pre-Trib rapture kind of guy with sympathies for Mid-Trib rapture. So, in any event, the believers will be with the Lord when he comes back to take his Throne in Jerusalem.  Jesus said of this event:

Matt 25:31

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

When is this?
He goes on to describe the Judgement of those who come from the Tribulation.  This is not the Great White Throne where the dead are judged... that is at the end of the Millennial Reign.  This Judgement is survivors from the three and a half year Tribulation period which is half the Seven year period after the Rapture.  The Christians who are saved in the Tribulation are identified by how they dealt with Jews during this time.  The sheep look after the Jews, having understood what this time actually is. The unbelievers are the goats and are killed to be risen at the Great White Throne. The Millennial reign begins with Satan bound in the Abyss and believers going on to populate the Earth. 

Glory
his return will be when Jesus comes in his Glory.  He will not be coming on this occasion as a bearded Rabbi in first century garb.  This time, having showed his Power in the Tribulation, he will come with no doubt as to who this is:  The Almighty God.  He says he will sit on the Throne of his Glory.  When we think of 'Glory' we think mostly of 'shining.'  I have absolutely no doubt that Jesus at his return will be glowing with heavenly light, shining brighter than the most resplendent star.  Trying to describe 'Glory' is obviously impossible and I dare say it will be when it is witnessed.  Suffice to say that Jesus will be who he always was... God, and everyone on earth at that point will see this.  This is a terrifying prospect for the enemies of God but utter Joy for those who are faithful.  

He comes with who?
Jesus mentions the Holy Angels but where are the Believers from the rapture.  Wherever you place the rapture we have to come back with him on this occasion.  The reason on this occasion Jesus doesn't mention the believers returning with their new Bodies is because he was speaking to Jews.  The Jews still had to kill Messiah and then turn to him after the resurrection.   If Jesus mentions who is with him they would assume this meant them.  However all of Matthew 25 is a severe warning to Israel that they must accept Messiah and turn to him for forgiveness.  Jesus is silent about who is with him other than Angels.  Rest assured that the Lord returns with his Bride to have the wedding feast of the Lamb.  

Many Christians have placed the Millennial reign in the 'myth' or 'bad theology' category.  Jesus was clear about the millennial reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years.  We are given roles where we reign with Christ and this role will be proportionate to your  faithfulness.  With the focus on productivity in discipleship let's be aware that simply doing what he says is all he requires.  

Gary Ward

God and the Silent Treatment

Thinking about Elijah and taking on board that it's within our experience to hit low points, I remembered there are instructions on how to deal with the lows.  We do need to make a distinction between seasonal lows, the depression caused by illness and the circumstantial lows that come through responding to an event or trigger.  I'm not sure depression as an illness has easy fixes, but lows based on circumstance can be helped. 

In Psalm 77 the writer was in exile.  Crying out to God was leading nowhere and this was right for a time as God allowed the captive nation to realise their need for their LORD.  The text of Psalm 77 starts with some very strong language.  Even though there was a heart wrenched cry for help, the writer says they were not comforted.  As a young Christian I heard so many sermons saying that Jesus would be at the end of every prayer.  This was not the experience in Psalm 77.  The writer thinks of God and groaned, he was too troubled to speak.  Kept awake, he looks for answers, things that may quench his thirst after God.

Then the Psalmist does what we all tend to do when it is a dry time.  He thought back to what worked for him before the exile.  He was a song writer and this is where he flourished, serving God. It appears that this only prompted a series of strange questions that reflect the faithlessness we display in low times:

⁷ “Will the Lord reject forever?                                 (the Lord is all accepting!)
   Will he never show his favor again?                       (the Lord shows favour)
⁸ Has his unfailing love vanished forever?            (how can an unfailing love vanish?)
   Has his promise failed for all time?                       (how can God's promise fail?)
⁹ Has God forgotten to be merciful?                        (he IS merciful, he can't forget!)
   Has he in anger withheld his compassion?”            (God is compassionate!)


This was a cul de sac.  Like us at times we reach dead ends because we focus on things that we have been good at, sentimental times in the past, maybe a formula we thought made 'it' happen or a bunch of people with whom we once experienced something.  Although sometimes helpful, none of these can help us raise our faith levels and get us out of a low time. 


The psalmist remembers to consider the deeds of the Lord, when he did great works.  He dwells on the amazing miracles and begins praising God and recounting the great act of saving which was central to the Old Testament believers.  The passage through the Red Sea is remembered and all the amazing things that occurred in setting his people free from Egypt.  We are told here that we can stir ourselves up.  We can raise ourselves up from the lows.  


For us, we can remember the Red Sea and those incredible miracles but we are in the New Covenant with an ever more amazing miracle.  Jesus saves us from the captivity of sin and death by his death at Calvary. He was raised from the dead and ascended to be at the right hand of the father in heaven.  There is a man ALIVE in heaven!


Because we are so attached to this world it is often difficult to be amazed by the finished work.    This is where it is useful to remember scripture.  One of my favourite verses based upon Jesus finished work is this:


^{Romans 8:37} No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. ³⁸ For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,^[d] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, ³⁹ neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Be encouraged.  

Gary Ward

How Roman Catholic are you?

One of the main areas the Lord has been showing me is how there needs to be another Reformation.  In the 16th Century there was a departure from the Roman Catholic Church across Europe.  The problem with this 'Reformation of Theology' was that it did not address the area of church practice- what people do when they meet together to break bread.

So the "Protestants' came away from Roman Catholic Theology but the associated practices remained.  I have summarized the practices of Roman Catholicism  as 'Special people doing special things in special places.'  It is my observation that the enemy gets hold of this threefold summary and diverts people from having a vibrant relationship with the Risen, Glorified Lord.  Anyone who leads must be about this:  facilitating others to connect with the Risen, Glorified Lord.

The Simple Church Pattern
I believe the church was given form by Jesus' words at the Last Supper.  The biggest indication that 'this do...' was a blueprint for believers meeting together is that the Apostles reproduced small groups in homes around a full meal.  The New Testament tells us believers prayed and did other things but when it came to 'This do in remembrance of me' it was always around a full meal that had bread and wine.  In correcting misuse of the Lords supper in Corinth we find enough food to gorge oneself and enough wine to get drunk! Paul goes on to write many things about meeting together including gifts, worship etc.  Many accept this as 'church' but miss the fact that it was around a meal, so clear from chapter 11.

We find from Paul that no-one was special above others.  We find the meeting was in an ordinary home and what they did was what any family would do.  This was a design on purpose because if Biblical history tells us anything about humanity, it confirms that when we are given a small amount of rule over another person it is cataclysmic to the ego.  King David went back and forth with his pride and on one occasion took off all his Kingly clothes and danced around in his pants!  This was because he wanted to demonstrate the Kingly garb is not helpful to his own sense of importance.  He doesn't need to be King to love God.

If I was the devil...
About 1998 I did a talk for a youth group called "If I was the devil..."  The idea was that I looked at young people's lives and construct a plan to get them off course in following Jesus.  In the same way, if I was the devil I would have made it that the simple, ordinary pattern for church would become the opposite.  It would then be easy to manipulate the hearts of believers who have bought into a church practice that leaves them wide open to ego, pride, false teaching.  If I was the devil:

• First I would create a hierarchy among the christian family. 
• Secondly I would make things they do rituals so they become a focus
• Thirdly I would  designate a place where 'God is.'

This began with the Early Church Fathers around 110AD.  In the fourth century those who followed Emperor Constantine made Christianity the state religion with ranked leadership, central meeting places specially prepared for ritualistic practices.  Professional speakers were enlisted and the simple ekklesia gathering was replaced by special people doing special things in special places.  

If I was a church leader

With the Roman Catholic Church still banging its drum very strongly, the average non RC Christian would feel good that they have 'departed' from that unbiblical practice.  However as I have demonstrated, many non RC church leaders still practice having special people.  They meet in buildings called 'God's house' and make ordinary events like baptism into rituals.  Obviously there are scales of this depending on the particular stream you belong to.  However, only by returning to the simple way Jesus instructed the Apostles to meet can we reduce the risk of people running away with their own pride and ego.  

How much do you party to special people doing special things in special places when the New Testament knows nothing of these things?  If you find yourself in something like this error then the answer is not to rush to the nearest house group!  The answer is to haul your heart before the Lord and ask him to make you someone who can cope with being an ordinary brother / sister in a simple home eating a meal in remembrance of Christ.

How Roman Catholic are you?

Gary Ward

 

The Painful Shock of Leaving a Church

Dear Brother / Sister,

In 1989 I became a Christian and got involved with youth ministry.  In 1994 I started public ministry in a church plant in a city.  In my eagerness to be about the things of the Lord I got very involved with the church and myself as a child of God was immersed in the church.  For years pulpit preachers told me to do this.  I can't remember exactly when it happened but at some point I began questioning the leadership and how the Bible was being compromised. The subtlety in it was not their outright disobedience but how my relationship with Jesus was being mixed with my relationship with church leaders.  They would expect things from me which I knew were not what the Lord would expect.  It was like my inner sense of leading from the Holy Spirit was flashing red lights at me yet I really wanted to be part of this ministry.  Confused and conflicted.

A time came when I reflected this to the leaders and without going into the mud storm that ensued, we left the church.  After this I entered a very difficult time working out what the Lord was doing in all of this.  The church did what humans do and assassinated my character, socially martyred me and instructed evangelistic ministries I was associated with to not have anything to do with me.  In that place of indescribable tribulation I wondered what was happening on a 'God-level.'  I had always felt that no matter what happened to me, I would be like Job "...and though he slay me... Ill trust in him."  I'm one curious individual who pushed on to see what this was about.

I want to explain what God has done to those who have experienced similar trauma and struggle to see what disproportionate pain this kind of thing causes.  I also know of those who abandoned the Lord because of this occurrence.  I hope this helps you to come back to him... It really is a good news story!

The tough bit

Whatever state you are in because of the church issues you need to face a difficult truth:  You bought into the church and it's comings and goings.  You and I were immersed in the church.  The fact that you probably did this with the simple desire to serve God and/or Humanity is complex.  It's like you did what you felt led to do yet it turned to incredible devastation:  "Thanks God!" The pain is unbearable at times.  Feeling that the whole church car-crash was somehow with God's approval can be a dark place.  I want to analyse why God allowed you and I to experience such devastation and trauma.  

Your Rescuer

In the middle of all the pain it's hard to discern what I'm about to explain but please try to get to grips with it. The pain you feel is not caused by your Lord.  It is caused by the proportion of yourself that sourced itself on 'church' rather than 'Christ.'  We were never supposed to be led by church programs or visions... we were supposed to be led by the Spirit.  You and I, with the best of intentions, dived into what we felt was a great idea (and probably was) and got our self entangled with it at a core level.  We felt we should give everything for the program... so we did!  The problem was and still is, we should only give everything to the Risen, Glorified Lord.  

Now here's the point:  The Lord sees all these things and he intervened to rescue us from a scenario where we have over invested at core level in something other than himself.  This was why you felt strangely compelled to leave the church or the project / mission you were passionate about.  He was/is rescuing you!

Why the Pain?

The Lord has to break you from something which has to impact on the way you have invested in the mission / project.  You get torn from things you have invested in and I can only describe that as tangible, measurable trauma.  It is devastating.  If at this point you say this is God causing the pain you would be wrong.  It was your wrong attachments that cause the pain.  Jesus is saving you from wrongly calibrating your core being towards something other than him.  Maybe it is hard to see but God has afforded you possibly the greatest honours anyone of his children can attain to:  to suffer for the Gospel.  Don't worry if you didn't discern this until now... perhaps now is the time to turn back to the Lord in full understanding and discern exactly what caused the pain in all this.   If this seems unlikely we must remember that God had to crush his Son and make him sin, thus becoming separated from him on the Cross.  God will allow hurt to save you.  It's the story of all the bible Characters... now guess what... you have a similar story!

What now?

There's a few things to deal with.  One is those brothers and sisters who failed to love you (and vice versa?).  You now have an opportunity to do what the Lord intended by allowing this to happen:  completely trust him.  From a human point of view the acts of church leaders in these situations is inexcusable.  However, that isn't your problem!  You have been set free from a system and structure that has proved that they are incapable of dealing with another believer in love.  Leave that with them.  They are still in that system and God has his purposes.  Take the higher road and start to see how the Lord has dealt with you as an individual and saved you from that sort of set up.   God allowed these believers to unleash blessed humanity on you to show you a truth about yourself:

You have become or are becoming a product of that church and capable of doing the same thing in similar circumstances.  If you don't believe me examine some of you inner (or not so inner?) reactions to those who hurt you.  Jesus wants to take you on a journey of healing and tenderising your heart not leave you in a hurricane of brewing malice.  It's a process that leads to seeing exactly what has occurred historically to make believers want to set up churches based upon no Scripture whatsoever.  I believe church leaders may be called to lead but the form which they have adopted in a product of history rather than a product of Scripture.

Can't settle in a church?

Many who experience this go through a cycle until it happens again.  People cannot take too much of this so they abandon their faith.  Others like myself was made able to discern how other churches we tried to become a part of were potentially going to do the same thing.  So what do we do for church?  The answer is 'do what the Bible says to do for church.'  The Apostolic church of the first century was numerically small, run by uneducated believers, based around food in someone's home.  By God's design, there is no opportunity to get immersed in missions and projects because this gathering focuses on connecting individuals with the Lord who then leads the individual in their particular walk.  It's not a project or mission that drives the person, it is the Lord.  If you feel you aren't in a great place to lead you've missed the point.  We are handing leadership over to the Lord to lead.  Even if it is your own family... open your bible and trust the Lord.

Jesus really likes us to get fully and entirely 'fill your boots' immersed in him.  In fact that's the whole idea! 

Where is there a church like this?  Find one or start one!  We can help with this. 

What it was all for

Although it's hard to take on board, the Lord set up your freedom from the church to have you find him as your source and point of anchoring.  It is also my belief that the point of it is to deliver you into a form of meeting that is faithful to the scriptures and less likely to have believers become sourced in a work rather than in Christ alone. If I can articulate what the Lord is saying to people all across the world, to those who have an ear to hear:

'Give me back my Church.'

Please share this with believers who are in pain. 

Gary Ward

? "God did this..."

So, many of the people who I used to hang out with in my youth are now involved in Christian ministries.  With a fair amount of frequency they report on their exploits.  Sometimes this involves meeting a person of influence such as an MP.  The reporting of this somehow authenticates the ministry and as a by-product shows the person in charge approved by God.  Now let's be clear...

A person who has repented before the cross having been implicated in the death of Messiah is born again.  The life lived in recalibration to the Holy Spirit's leadings and convictions means a person is approved by God.  This is a result of 'Sonship.'  One of the things I'm sure the Lord wants us all to do is walk in Sonship.  The book of Romans will underline this as will most Epistles.  What we see however is endless seeking to vindicate and authenticate our walk with God via works.  Your Sonship validates you, but walking in 'works' and not 'faith' will lead to a constant search for authentication and validation.  

Callings?

I've written before, to the annoyance of many, that some ministries we see today are not of God's sending. It's an opinion based upon the conviction that we are firstly called to be a disciple before we are sent and thus become an Apostle.  What people do is assume that a need recognised means we must meet it.  Social action is a good cause and we should be helping people... but let's not call it a 'ministry' from God.   "I feel sad for the people of Indonesia... so God is calling me to them."  Really?  I hope it is true, but it is not why those Biblical characters did what they did.  They were sent by God and therefore saw much more than endless prayer meetings and collections to make something happen. 

A part of this whole industry is the need to verify the Lord's presence in the project.  This is why we see people underlining for us who they have met and who is involved.    "You're so negative Gary, how do you know the Lord isn't doing this?"  I'm not saying the Lord isn't involved at some level, but I am saying it is not difficult to get influential people involved with a good-works project. 

I launched a product in the UK to do with Youth Work and Interactive tools.  In the first year I had an Award as a Social Entrepreneur and by year two I was sat in the Secretary of State office.  WOW! I hear you gasp (and change your profiling framework about me).  But don't!  It's not hard to get people whose job it is to network with do-good projects involved.  A sure sign that Christians over-rate MP's, celebrities and other famed people is when they think mentioning them gives credibility.  It also shows that your project is in need of marketing by human means instead of the Holy Spirit's wind blowing through it.  The latter means you are absolutely unstoppable and in no need of marketing.

Some reading this will deduce that I am unstable and can't see when God is helping and promoting me.  "Surely God got you in the offices of power?"  I don't think so.  Here's why.  For many years before this stately visit the Lord had been preparing our family for emigration to Australia.    This meeting took place a month before departure so nothing could have come of this meeting anyway.  For God to have been directly and purposefully wanting me to chat to these people was for no reason whatsoever.  It just happened.  Things happen.  It isn't always God.  Here's a test to see if it is God...

The book of Acts. 

That's what happens.  

Gary Ward

Mediatory Substitution: Stepping on the feet of Christ

Post Messiah, you would think that believers would be clear that Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  Where there would be a King on Earth or a Lord... his Throne supersedes them all.  This reaches its conclusion when Jesus returns and sits on the Throne in Jerusalem.  His title will be outworked for a Thousand years.  That being the case, I want to examine the practices of those who lead in our churches.  I can't know the heart of any man, but I can observe where a leader has taken a place over and above believers in hierarchical fashion.  Here are five warnings to be constantly aware of concerning the human propensity to be 'over' others.

1) Where does this idea start?
Isaiah 14 has an account of the way Lucifer wanted to be above the Most High God.  To explore the scripture fully would make this blog too long so I will just deal with themes.  If Satan has been cast out based upon the idea that he could raise his Throne over God's, It would follow that an element of the nature of our inherited sin is wanting to 'be over.'  I would submit that the greater percentage of the worlds problems have at their core this drive to have the highest placing among others.  We would be wise to be constantly asking if we like being over other people in rank.  

2) The King Thing
In Deuteronomy 17:14f  God tells his people that a time will come when they will want a King to rule them.  God sets the criteria for this King.  It is telling that in verse 20 God says that it is vital that the Kings heart is not lifted above his brethren.  When the people had settled in the Promised Land a request is made for a King to rule them as predicted.  In 1 Sam 8 we read the account of God warning the people what this would do to their sociopolitical and economic well-being.  God had, in no way suggested that the King idea was better that his own rule.  God had simply said they would want a King.  Placing a King over people creates a 'Mediatory Substitution' where a being is placed between Man and God.  Take note of 1 Sam 8:18 where we see the consequence of having a mediator in place. Worried much? Later God chooses David to be King as his heart was after God's own.  King David would typify a King that was to come.

3) One Mediator Between Man and God 1 Tim 2:5
In the fullness of time the Messiah is born and as we know became sin for all Mankind at Calvary.  Having completed this work and having risen and Ascended, Messiah took his seat at the right hand of God the Father.    This is God's chosen Mediator and there's only one of them.  Anything that tries to get between Man and God or Man and Jesus is, by definition a 'Mediatory Substitution.'  So if we imagine an organisation flow chart it has been made really simple for us.   God is at the top and all Mankind is under God.  Between them is the one mediator:  Jesus Christ.

4) Jesus Slammed those Practicing Hierarchy Matt 23:1-12
Sitting in Moses seat was occupying the position of Moses.  Moses was the leader of the nation and the leaders of the time imagined themselves as being in that place.  This presented a slight technicality because the people still had to follow Law under those leaders.  However they should not do as they do:  present themselves as if they are superior.  The text goes on to explain in clear terms that Jesus is the only figure worthy of taking on a hierarchical position, 'so don't go even giving titles to men,' is the inference.  

5) The Nicolatian heresy
Jesus hates the deeds of the Nicolatians.  This was the practice of creating a ranked leadership structure as a platform to oppress people.  In Mark 10 Jesus speaks about the Disciples desire to be the greatest in the Kingdom.  He says those in Christ are to not do as the Gentiles do... exercise 'lordship.'  This text appears in Revelation 2-3 where the Lord is speaking to churches about their status with him as Head of the church. That Jesus hates the deeds of the Nicolatians should have us tremble at the thought that we may have become over people as leaders.  "But we don't oppress people!" The very fact that a percentage of Lordship is taken from Jesus and exercised by mere men is oppression in itself.

 If I stop the means of freedom for another I don't need whips or chains to keep a Man captive.

Above I have given examples:

• From Before Creation
• In the Old Testament
• From the Person / Position of Christ
• Jesus' comments to leaders of his day
• The Ascended, Glorified Christ's hatred for Nicolatian rank

Mediatory Substitution is the act of practicing rank / hierarchy in the leadership of God's people. We are given a mediator but for many this is a green light to step into a rank over people.  Their may be scenario's where leaders are made to be above people by the people.   In this case the leaders should examine themselves to eradicate the suggestion that they are over people.   Here is where we hit some significant problems.  The general church practice of gathering in halls with the Pastor preaching a sermon while the people listen attentively is enforcing rank and Man's authority by the way church is practiced.   

A Question... 

Tomorrow I will unpack just how the form of believers gathering together speaks into how people perceive Jesus, leadership and the role of believers in serving the Lord.   But for now a question:  Have you too readily accepted position, profile, status among your brothers and sisters?  Maybe you are called to lead but have you pretended your being over people is a burden?  Can we be honest and say there's something fulfilling to our core about having some kind of superiority over others?  

It's a starting point for the Reformation of church practice.

Gary Ward

Rome: An Internal legacy

Yesterday I posted about scratching the surface of our walks to expose what is actually happening.  below is a comment of the legacy of being born into this time has on our default practices and auto-positioning on issues such as leadership:

I want to further expand my thinking on my claim that we are presently affected by ‘Rome’ in our modern lifestyles.  It explores our defaults, the starting mindsets and auto-defining of central spiritual issues.   Surprisingly for some this will not just be a Roman Catholic bashing session...this will implicate the Protestant church and those who meet together with the traits of ‘Rome.’  In the first few centuries of the church a great change took place.  This was at the time of Constantine the Roman Emperor.  He claimed to be a Christian and whether he was or not is the wrong question to ask.  Given his circumstance I’m not sure which way I would have taken the Church. Just a quick recap on what happened:

As the Emperor he was the head of a very successful Empire.  It had conquered most of the known world.  It was able to do this by becoming experts at conquest.  War grabbed the states it entered and then the Iron fist of Roman rule maintained it.  Three main elements made this possible

1.  Invasion of other countries
2. Strong, ranked leadership
3.  Men sold out to the cause

Constantine had the correct assumption that God wanted Christianity to be widespread. So using the model of the Roman Empire the church became modeled upon it.  Did Constantine make the church become something that it was not?  Not entirely.  Since the early second century the Early Church Fathers had begun departing from the Apostles teachings and practices.  They messed with Leadership, content and practice.  For those who feel this was a Spirit led thing please allow for this conundrum:

The New Testament shows us Jesus instructing us what we must do when we meet together at the Last Supper event.  Church according to Jesus:  Believers, a meal, Christ.  That’s it!   The Apostles also championed this practice for church in people’s homes.  So we have the Apostles and Jesus himself ratifying this way to meet.  After the Apostles the Early church Fathers begin changing the way church met.  If this was the Lord leading his church into changing to suit the culture, times or other external factors we run into some serious problems.  Firstly we are forced to say Jesus led the believers into Roman Catholic practices and beliefs.  An offshoot from this is that Jesus led believers to not do what the Bible says.  Secondly we have to say that Jesus has continued to lead the church and the Protestant Reformation is going against Jesus’ leading.  Thirdly, if the church was supposed to adapt its practices according to its culture, politic, times etc, why do most churches still practice as the Early Church Fathers designed it?   Surely Jesus would have further developed ‘church’ as the times, cultures and political landscape changed?

It all gets too complicated and silly for words when we try to say Jesus has had sole leadership of the church.  The answer is that Jesus instructed us to meet together as a family of believers around a meal that has a loaf and wine /juice with open and equal sharing.  The Apostles followed the Lord and the first century Church is recorded to be just that.   When people meet together in a community building with one or a group of prominent leaders around a spoken ‘state of affairs’ we truly have ‘Rome.’   The vision statement of most churches will gravitate around:

1. Strong evangelism program
2.  A leadership structure to make sure (1) is happening
3. A rallying round the cause on a weekly basis

So is the message to share Christ wrong?  Is it wrong to have gifted people leading the gathering?  Is it wrong to keep people centered on what this is all about?  The motivation in this is right but what is the overall drive of it all is wrong.   In other words, we know what the Bible says we need to be about but ‘Rome’ in us assumes the lead in things that we were only ever invited to take part in.

The way we meet together in a community building with our leaders running things facilitates our own forward momentum, innovation, genius and ingenuity.  Many churches are run on these attributes identified in a leaders’ or teams vision statement.   Basically it’s ‘here’s how we are going to do it.’  People rally around this if they resonate with it personally.  I want to suggest that this was never intended to be how the Gospel was to be handled.  All that is ‘church’ was supposed to be led by the risen Christ as head  and leader of the Church.  Of course Jesus does delegate leadership but it is never to lead that which the Lord himself leads.  True Christian leadership is delegated to those who can walk in that which is already purposed by Christ.  To be in a place where you can truly allow Jesus rule and reign is rare and demands a return to the simplicity of first century Church.

We cannot hand all things over to Jesus’ Headship while doing things that facilitate our own lead.  The Lord has to break Rome within us.  Rome is bent on conquest, equates position in the structure with value and spends itself on ‘the cause’ instead of sacrificing itself for the body.   This has been called ‘the Lord’s will’ and to perpetuate it we need a structure and system.  This is the core reason why your church meets contrary to Jesus instruction (command?) and the Apostolic practice in the New Testament.   This ecclesia was for all people of all times because it gives less opportunity for us to take the initiative for leading the Church.  When a group of people are committed to giving Jesus his church back the New testament way to meet facilitates the demise of ‘self.’ 

When a believer comes to a small gathering ‘Rome’ will invalidate the group.  The reason is because Rome equates numbers with success.  “Your conquest isn't too hot is it?” Says Rome.   The lack of prominent leadership will also be targeted by Rome within us.  “There’s no leadership! This is just disorganized!” Sneers Rome.  

“Where’s the Preaching?”  Is also a problem for ‘Rome.’  As a group develops a separate Teaching time would occur outside of the ecclesia gathering.  This goes against all Rome’s convictions:  “You mean to say everyone contributes? Even the untrained?” Especially the untrained!  There is nothing in the small first century style church that attracts those playing with Rome.  There’s no opportunity to show off their gifts talents and ability.  There’s no vying for position.  There’s no spiritual one-upmanship.  Gone is the attention seeker and those so holy we dare not look at them.  When we aim to truly come under Christ alone, have Rome and other infections smashed out of us, we default to all we have ever been:

Contrite sinners saved by Grace, stepping aside to allow Jesus to be Lord in faith and obedience to his Word.  Humbly we aim to walk in that which has already been granted for us.  Having identified how hopelessly lost in Self we can be, we dare not venture unless we discern the Lord is leading us.  Maybe we will be sent one day to do great works?  That aspiration is well and truly at the Lord’s initiative and not a ‘given’ because we see the need. 

‘Rome’ would see this as a lazy, unmotivated, selfish and deceived group.   This is far from the truth.  Waiting for the Lord to move through you is exactly what the disciples did.   When the time came they were sent into all the world to make disciples.  Many see this as their own sending and this is one of the reasons people go into all the world and make more confusion as to why God is ‘absent’ from the mission.  Can we get to a place where we realize we are born infested with the ‘self-willed –works-agenda’ I am calling ‘Rome?’ Is it time to readdress our practices and put ourselves to the slaughter? 

Gary Ward

Is It Ok If I Follow Jesus?

Being categorized is one of my pet hates.  It's not because I see my self as above categories, after all I'm a 'Christian.'  That's a category.  However I really don't like what comes after being categorized... the assumptions about behavior, language and practices etc.  Categories can also speak back to the person and anticipate those trends, traits and habits of the category.  For example 'I'm a Christian so the category expects XYZ.'

The Ministry of Annoyance
Because of my writings and speaking I am categorized.  There are those who have socially martyred me because I don't flow with the XYZ of category.  Am I just a person who likes the controversial, revels in rebellion and enjoys alienating people?  The answer is no.  I don't enjoy having Bible College colleagues think I'm back-slidden, Youth Group contemporaries perform that deafening silence that is loud and clear. Nevertheless I am compelled to write and speak about Reformation in the church.  In order to do this the Lord has had me observe beyond categories.

When we find that someone practices a certain thing we place them in a category.  It's a labeling system we all do as we manage the information before us.  What I ask is 'what makes a person (me) do that in light of this?'  For example the Hebrew nation fell into unbelief and a generation fell in the desert.  What was the process of thinking, "Yahweh shows me seas parting, fiery tornadoes, water gushing from a rock, daily food provided for us from heaven... I think I'll follow an Egyptian god!"  It's too easy to just categorize that as sin.  It's right to do so but what are the actual components of our core self that can be so 'yes!' one minute then oh so 'nope!' the next?

Someone has to say it
I am not going to answer that question in this particular blog but this is the core motivation as to why I feel the Lord wants me to challenge the Church, Christians, Christianity and its component parts.  Someone has to say things that go beyond categories, bypassing the niceness that gets friends and supporters.  "But Gary,  'Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man' (Luke 2:52)  you need to be like Jesus" That text is speaking of when Jesus was growing up.  Everyone forgets that this went terribly wrong when Jesus went into the Synagogue 2 chapters later!  Jesus challenged those he was brought up with to the point that they wanted to kill him.      

Jesus also conducted an all out war with the Teachers of the Law (Tannaim).  Again, I will cover the detail of that later but it is entirely Jesus-like to be called to challenge the establishment.  That some people don't like it is not a cause for concern... it's supposed to be like that.   Just to give a flavor of how Jesus purposely annoyed the Teachers of the Law we can observe the healing of the man born Blind (John 9).  Firstly Jesus was healing on the Sabbath.  That was the first no-no.  Mishna still says making mud from spit to heal was particularly banned by the Tannaim. Jesus did this to absolutely infuriate those watching who had come from Jerusalem to observe Jesus.  To top it off Jesus tells the man to wash it off in the pool of Siloam.  At the time a festival was taking place where water from the pool was used in the Synagogue.  The water was muddied by this act thus making the ceremony problematic.

Now we can see Jesus stepping up to the plate and saying what needs to be said.  Some people are called to be like this today.   Is it ok if I follow Jesus?

Gary Ward

Who Will Build Whose Church #3

In this final installment on this title we need to examine how Apostles differ from other giftings.  In the last two under this title we established that unlike others who are following God's leading, true Apostles will not move until they are sent by Jesus (Eph 4:11).  The reason they will resist any other motivator is because of the preparation to be an Apostle, something I will expand upon in other writings.  The one who is sent by the Lord has become schooled in the Lord working through them.  This takes many years of preparation.

A true Apostle, when sent by the Lord is going to walk in a place where the Lord has gone before.  When the Apostle arrives where he has been sent the heavens are open, signs and wonders follow the preaching of the word.  They open the way for other giftings to further the work.  Our example is the Book of Acts.  We have the Acts recorded as a benchmark for what it is to be sent by Jesus.  Miracles and Salvation are the marks of an Apostolic work.  What has occurred in Jesus has sufficiently conquered the believer and knows the man is at a place where he will be able to have the Lord issue forth through his life.  There would be no glory sought by this man or some kind of ministry to draw attention to what he is doing.  Such was the clarity that it was Jesus who performed the signs and wonders in Acts, we hardly get reference to them when they go on to write the Epistles.

Most books believers write today draw attention to their own acts, what the Lord has done with them.  The Apostles would not have one single thought that this 'all by Grace' work was anything to do with them - such was their death to self.  

So who builds Whose Church?

Jesus said he would build his church (Matt 16:8).  He used the Apostles to do this but only because they were the vessels he could issue forth through.  The Lord was able to flow through those who had been conquered that their self will was sufficiently neutralised.  Jesus builds his Church using Apostles firstly because they follow the Lord into places he has been first.  That this didn't last long after their death is a matter of significant writings but for now let's examine what happens if believers just go and plant churches while not being Apostles.

It follows that the world needs Apostles to plant churches because they 'clear the air' for a supernatural work to be done.   If men and women attempt to plant churches without this preparation and sending it is simply a work of man.

 "But what's wrong with starting a Church, God blesses Churches."  Of course God blesses Churches because he loves people.  However Acts is our blueprint.  I have demonstrated:

• The Apostles (sent ones) began the church after Pentecost
• They had been sent by Jesus in what we call 'The Great Commission."
• Apostles have a long preparation time which the bible documents for the majority of sent ones
• Signs and wonders were the mark of the sending (Acts)

I am not suggesting churches that have not been started by Apostles or have not seen signs and wonders are false or somehow demerited.  All I can present is the Biblical data that underlines Apostolicity as vital to the explosive days of Acts.  I want to suggest that there are extremely few true Apostles who have endured the excavation of the heart to be truly sent by the Lord.  The church has taught for years that we should all rush out and 'do something' for God.  It is an unconquered life that attempts these things as well as poor teaching from church leaders.  

The Final Reckoning

Based on the reasoning observed in this three part writing I fear many believers have assumed upon the Lord and stepped out into works that are not Apostolic.  It appears we have lost the sense of our utter foolishness to think we have the tools to break open the heavenlies by 'planting a church.'  We all have to appear before the Lord and give account for what we have done.   

Forbid me Lord from anything that tells me I can step out in your name without you going first.  I want Jesus to issue forth through me into this world.  Death to my creativity, ingenuity, innovation and genius.  Come and ransack my self will Lord.  Death to self!  Death to self!

Gary Ward

Who Will Build Whose Church #2

In the first of these observations I separated Christians into two crowds.  Crowd A I labelled as those more likely to get on and meet needs with the assumption that God is involved by default.  Crowd B I labelled as those who do not move until the are specifically sent by the Lord.  Today I want to offer where I think the tension lies regarding the New Testament.

 How you see the 'Great Commission' (Matt 28:16-20) will guide how you perceive works.   The vast majority of Christians like the Bible translators feel this sending of the Disciples applies to everyone who becomes a Christian.  Seeing the words of Jesus to the disciples as a commission for everyone gives the green light for believers to go and embark upon a project and assume Jesus is in it. I'm not at all sure this is what is happening here.

Rules around interpretation of Biblical text say that the plain meaning of the text is the very first consideration. With that in view what is reported in this text is Jesus sending his Disciples 'into all the world to go and make disciples' etc.  This applied to those stood in front of him when he said it.  So to assume this specific sending applies to everyone by default is not a correct rendering of the text.

From Disciples to Apostles

The name given to the Disciples after they were sent was 'apostalos.'  This means 'sent one.'  So the assumption that everyone who becomes a Christian is sent to the Great Commission means we are all Apostles. This contradicts Ephesians 4:11 where some are called to various Apostolic gifting.  Those who are called to be Apostles will undergo the process of being prepared to be sent but not necessarily the same destination.   So we are clear about this the Lord has had the journey of most sent Bible characters outlined for us.  It involves many years of preparation to become the vessel through which the Lord can work.  It is therefore impossible to become a Christian and suddenly be sent by Jesus... it just contradicts God's clear processes outlined in the Bible.

So because all are not Apostles having been sent, it follows that the Great Commission was showing that Jesus can and will send those called to Apostolic gifting.  It does not implicate every Christian to 'Go into all the world and make disciples.'

So how do we serve God?

It's much easier to do good works if we assume the Great Commission is our own sending.  However doing good works is much more simple than having to impose bible verses upon them.  To return to the original question we are asking, we can simply designate gifting to Crowd A and Crowd B:

• Crowd A, the get on and do it crowd are more like Deacons.  Gk. diakonos
• Crowd B, The wait on the Lord's specific sending are more like Apostles.  Gk. apostolos 

Most people who are Apostolic start in Crowd A but find they are called to Crowd B.  Crowd A still have to pray and find out what the Lord wants to do but do we really need a Bible verse to feed the poor, help the homeless, help widows and orphans?  Crowd B need to make sure they are actually on a program of preparation from the Lord.  Crowd B know with searing accuracy that the Lord has this kind of calling and it's evidence is as plain as the day.  Just be aware that there is a vast number who are neither Apostles or Deacons.  That means you simply live your life with a moment by moment sensitivity to the Lord's leading and walk in it.  No sweat!  

Whatever your desires and passions, make sure the Lord is the one generating it, not a vision statement, assumed bible verse or pressure to show how spiritual you are.

Gary Ward

Who Will Build Whose Church? #1

For many it isn't even important to ask the question:  "Who builds the church?"  They are already invested into what their local gathering is doing and that is a good thing.  However some feel that this question is a central point of tension that needs to be Biblically answered - Who builds the church?

Acts of whom?

To underline the core of this dilemma we can ask it this way:  The book of Acts, a book describing what the Apostles and others did after Pentecost.  It is the story of the early church but is it the Acts of the Apostles or the Acts of the Holy Spirit?  Or both?  Where does the initiative come from to initiate these acts? How does 'both' work?

The reason why this is extremely important is because our moment by moment walk with the Lord is affected by how we answer this question. We do things that affect lives and everybody endeavouring to serve the Lord wants them to have God-content.  Because we are capable of doing things off our own innovation, creativity and genius, we need to be aware of God's involvement.

An Unconscious Polemic

The majority of Christians just go ahead and do works that seem to be the right thing.  This would be the "Acts of the Apostles" crowd who lean towards God being more presently active in our each and every work.   The smaller crowd would be the other side, the "Acts of the Holy Spirit."  This is where it is not assumed that each and every work is the Lord's will and we have to wait for specific leadings and sendings.  

• Lets call those who assume God is 'in' everything, crowd 'A'
• Let's call those who feel they have to wait for specific leadings and sending, crowd 'B'

Crowd A get busy around needs they perceive as important.  Crowd B are sensitive to the fact that God goes before us so wait for him to lead so the work will be effective.  If Crowd B are right then Crowd A get and do works that are not led by God.  If Crowd A are right then B are not seeing needs and procrastinating waiting for a letter from Heaven to help people.   

Can you see the dilemma?  What is the answer to this conundrum? Tomorrow I'll provide my angle but please comment as to your understanding of Crowd A and Crowd B.

Gary Ward

Our Church Split

I'm keen to relay our experience of brothers and sisters choosing to leave us.   It's an area that many don't publicly comment on because anything that doesn't work out is deemed as failure.  Who wants to admit something has failed?  Er... we do actually! 

The reason people are so guarded or often deceptive about church splits is because they have invested their own identity in the forming and momentum of their gatherings.  We have purposely avoided the idea that any of us have purposed a gathering.  We have simply offered a space and a bunch of songs with simple chords.  We feel it is the Lord's will to have people meet together in a format that allows the Lord to have as exclusive lead as possible.  Within this my role is to lead in the sense of keeping the group within Biblical parameters and protecting what we feel the Lord has sent us to do.  Because we feel we have been led to champion the cause for first century ekklesia, small groups meeting around a meal with open and equal sharing, we are candidates for all sorts of responses.  The idea is over time the group appoints Elders.  This doesn't happen overnight. 

In Christ

It is my observation that those who can gain much following in these times are the ones who are about accommodating the 'whatever' of people's opinions and views.  Our position has been to usher people into not just Biblical practice but also pursue Biblical Doctrine.  To be perfectly clear, we are not about 'doctrinal snap!'  People come to us hopefully with the core Christian beliefs in place.  The non central themes like eschatology or some of the chestnuts of the faith that don't affect our daily walk are all for healthy discussion.  Sadly this is a departing point for many.  We have always set out our terms of fellowship on 'being in Christ together.'  All the rest of our position on XYZ is academic compared with the astonishing awe of being in Christ together.  Tragically this fundamental truth of why we should meet is lost in the rush to be right for being right's sake.

   

Not about self

We believe there are people who want to join us in the pursuit of authentic Biblical practice by readdressing the way the first century ekklesia met and how subsequent historical leaders departed from the Apostolic pattern set by Jesus at the Last Supper and practiced by the Apostles.  In our offer of a biblical model that endeavours to flee the historical church patterns and positions we have and will attract people from many backgrounds.  People are welcome to pursue the non-agenda approach, the unbranded and un heralded gathering.  That some will choose to not flow with this is inevitable well intentioned people will choose not to.  We have been called to an expression of ekklesia, a pursuit of a life in kind that offers little of self.  We offer no platforms, grandstands, eschatological catwalks or self-branding masquerading as spiritual gifts.  We do offer the pursuit of authenticity, a stand against all the powers of the air and an ongoing commitment to walk in obedience to the instructions of the Lord as revealed in the original rendering of the Scriptures. 

The comings and goings

So dear brothers and sisters left us.  The reasons had form.  The overarching principle however was that flawed humans didn't see past self to the glorious phenomena of 'in-Christness.'  This kind of thing is lamentable but is not failure.  For it to be failure to me means the growth of this church is my success.  

If this is the case, my pride needs to be torn limb from limb and nailed to a tree as I have stepped into a position of head of a church and claimed the work of the Lord's to be my own.  

That I should set myself up for attention, applause and adoration because of any Graces afforded me is to my utter shame.  Thus I don't see a church split as failure because none of what occurs here impacts on me personally.   I cannot succeed and I cannot fail.  I simply issue forth that which the Lord wills on earth.  How pure is this?  How Gary-less is this issuing forth?  Should the fruit of Jesus' issuing forth result in growth and Acts-like success?  This is my prayer but for now we are endeavouring for the authentic first century church and rendering ourselves on the daily death list for the Holy Spirit's work. 

The outcome of a small group approach can only do what Jesus' life on earth did... filter those who can bear such a message outworked on earth.  Rejection, rebellion, salvation, healing, murder, attack... the list continues.  What is never did was create a status quo, a plateau, a consensus.   Splits show there is at least an offense.  We feel it was caused by the gospel outworked.  

God has his purposes.  Note the full stop. 

Gary Ward