Community Vs. Fellowship Or The Same?

[Jeffrey]

I think one of the big issues here is that, more and more, churches are trying to do things in a less traditional manner.

In what tradition are you are you talking about? In certain countries where Christianity is banned they have to meet in homes or in the woods away from the public eye.

 

 

Somehow, today, people have been taught that its just not enough, that somehow it needs to be more, more exciting, more entertaining, new and improved church! 

I would agree with you here

 

 

 But if its new for the sake of new, it may be on the wrong path.

 

 

But sometimes, new is better

[Ukulelemike]

In what tradition are you are you talking about? In certain countries where Christianity is banned they have to meet in homes or in the woods away from the public eye.

I mean, traditional in that a church, to be a church, is organized with a leader/pastor, and the purpose is to be taught the word of God, to be equipped to give the gospel, live a godly life refelcting the teachings of the word, and to be spiritually mature. This is what many today, particularly youth, but also older Christians, in order to seem 'relevant', are rejecting. 

 

 

I would agree with you here

 

 

 

 

But sometimes, new is better And sometimes, it isn't.  "Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." The Lord has supplied us with His word, with many examples of how He wants thing done, how He will be worshiped and obeyed. New is fine, so long as it remains within the boundaries of the old paths: doctrine, the word, the same Spirit, same baptism, same Lord, etc. We have some leniency, of course, but there are still boundaries, and many times, particulalry since the advent of New Evangelicalism, and now the emergent churches, many seek to shake off the bundaies the Bible has given. This type of "new is bad news.  This is why NAdab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, got into trouble: they sought to worship God in a new way, a way He didn't require; in fact, after the manner of the pagan Egyptians, and they were killed for it. I suspect there are many churches who have died and don't know it for their size and membership, because they sought to come near the Lord in an unsanctified manner.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

Every church should have several small group Bible studies taking place daily ---- EVERY family (small group) in the church, without exception, should be memorizing Scripture and studying the Bible together EVERY day!!

[mkrishna]

What's dangerous about "small groups"? When we gather for Bible study that's just a "small group" from our church doing so.

Small groups may be a good way to disciple others in the church and pray for one another. Also, Wednesday midweek service can be used to get into groups and pray for one another after a Bible study. What are some ways people on this board do to disciple others out of curiosity?

[Salyan]

I am part of the group, because I am a bit of a self-sustainment type, but I am not in favor of the 'community' thing. I have explained to them that what was occurring in Acts 2 was something new and unique, and that it was the Lord who sent them out and into the world to be witnesses. I am generally ignored.

 

Right, and when the early church failed to obey His command to 'go into all the world and spread the gospel', He sent persecution to send them out!  I found it interesting that in Acts we find mention of the church (singular) in Jerusalem. Then came the persecution - and by the time it settled down sometime after the conversion of Paul, we are told that the churches (plural) had rest.

[Ukulelemike]

Right, and when the early church failed to obey His command to 'go into all the world and spread the gospel', He sent persecution to send them out!  I found it interesting that in Acts we find mention of the church (singular) in Jerusalem. Then came the persecution - and by the time it settled down sometime after the conversion of Paul, we are told that the churches (plural) had rest.

Thank you.

[DaveW]

The problem with some small group meetings is that you can get someone leading a small group who has their own agenda and leads people astray.
And if you get several like that you end up with a fractured church.

I don't think there is a biblical warning against it per se but it is something to be aware of.
The pastor has to be extra diligent in observing and choosing the leaders of these groups.

I also know from some friends involved that these small groups can become a time of expressing personal opinions rather than bible truth.

So there are things to be aware of rather than bible commands regarding "small group meetings".

[candlelight]

You must be referring to women's Bible studies in the church.  My pastor and many other pastors, in my area, won't allow them in the church.  We do them outside of the church for the reasons you mentioned above, DaveW.

[Jeffrey]

The problem with some small group meetings is that you can get someone leading a small group who has their own agenda and leads people astray.
And if you get several like that you end up with a fractured church.

I don't think there is a biblical warning against it per se but it is something to be aware of.
The pastor has to be extra diligent in observing and choosing the leaders of these groups.

I also know from some friends involved that these small groups can become a time of expressing personal opinions rather than bible truth.

So there are things to be aware of rather than bible commands regarding "small group meetings".

 

Dave, We have elders at my church. We don't have a single pastor authority. We have 6 elders and 10(?) deacons, each of our small groups have at least an elder or deacon assigned to them and are led by them. So lessons are pretty well thought out. My group has an elder and a deacon. My wife kids me and says that they are there to keep an eye on me. 

 There are some members that belong to several groups, due to the fact that they all meet on different times and days.

[John81]

Our pastor and/or associate pastor has oversight over all the Bible studies, groups and such. They lead some of them themselves and they pre-approve those who lead the others.

[Bro K]

Dave, We have elders at my church. We don't have a single pastor authority. We have 6 elders and 10(?) deacons, each of our small groups have at least an elder or deacon assigned to them and are led by them. So lessons are pretty well thought out. My group has an elder and a deacon. My wife kids me and says that they are there to keep an eye on me. 

 There are some members that belong to several groups, due to the fact that they all meet on different times and days.

We don't have a single pastor authority: This sound as if its contrary to the teaching of I Tim 3:5.

Deacons:  I may be mistaken; but I believe the reason for the 'deacons' was to take care of the widows within the church. I find no where that they were given any authority over any part of the congregation. Deacon Boards ?????? :puzzled3: .

[Ukulelemike]

We don't have a single pastor authority: This sound as if its contrary to the teaching of I Tim 3:5.

Deacons:  I may be mistaken; but I believe the reason for the 'deacons' was to take care of the widows within the church. I find no where that they were given any authority over any part of the congregation. Deacon Boards ?????? :puzzled3: .

WHile I agree that the deacons today in many churches are given more authority than the Bible directs, and they were originally for the care of the widows, I think their overall duty was to see to not JUST the widows, but the day-to-day issues of the church, so the pastor/elder(s) could be free to see to prayer and study of the Bible. Today I could see those duties extend to hospital visits, door-to-door visitation, making bulletins, if they have such, and the  like; things that can just take up a pastor's time and could keep him from the deeper issues a pastor needs to be about for sermon preparation and the like.

 

BUt that's just how I see it. Now, not have an overall leader in the church I could see as a problem-multiple elders, fine-that's biblical, but there should be one overseer with the final word, below the Lord. But I'm not here to judge another's work in such ways: its between them and the Lord, and if it works for them, all the better for them. They'll answer for such decisions, not me.

[Jeffrey]

We don't have a single pastor authority: This sound as if its contrary to the teaching of I Tim 3:5.

Deacons:  I may be mistaken; but I believe the reason for the 'deacons' was to take care of the widows within the church. I find no where that they were given any authority over any part of the congregation. Deacon Boards ?????? :puzzled3: .

Deacons don't have the "authority". It is led by elders. I beleive that it is more inline with NT teaching

 1 Tim 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

Titus 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Acts 14:23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.

 

If you noticed, the word is used in a plural sense. I have learned that a single authority in a church can be a dangerous thing. A single pastor can have "yes"men as deacons that rubber stamp all of his wishes, or as in the cases I have see, that the pastor fires the deacon who questions his authority.

 

 1 Tim 3:5 is part of the whole chapter that is describing the qualifications of leaders. I don't think it is a verse of laying the foundation of a single pastor role.  

[Ukulelemike]

HOwever, this could easily be seen as just proper English, that there were elders, plural, because there were cities and churhces, plural.

 

But I don't disagree in principle with you-again, I agree the it is biblical to have multiple elders/pastors, but there is also nothing wrong with having one, or having one over all of them. As long as, as you say, all those others don't become 'yes-men' and just tow the line. We have seen in some churches where this occurs and the nasty results of it.

[Jeffrey]

Mike, I have visited and known members from certain churches where the pastor was single leader and ran smoothly. Unfortunately, I have seen a few, especially the one I was involved in that was alot of issues.