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
No comments:
Post a Comment