Okay Deacon and Usher brought up some good points that I would have never consolidated like he did in the previous post. But I want to tell you what I see.
1. A man gets a theological education and starts a church. He is the leader all who come must submit to his vision he is the originator, the conductor and the fianlizer of all ideas.
2. A man has a problem he gets people on his side, he leaves and splits the current fellowship up. People go with him not realziing that they too will have some problems and we get the perpetual splitting church syndrome.
3. A man is gifted in teaching but can’t wait to the current pulpiter dies or decides to share the spotlight. He receives the blessing from the church, goes, the current church may even provide him with some people and some resources and the people go with him. There is a guy there also who feels the same way he does. Sooner or later he sill do the same thing (hopefully he isn’t called a pirate).
4. A guy and his wife gets some mystic vision that they should be pastoring. They call themselves co-pastors (this alone should make you laugh). They talk in biblically clothed jargon with a cherry on top in the form of some type of super-spiritual hogwash. They get enough followers they become a church they buy some arena and go on to be multi-millionaires with their own Christian Cereal and action figures.
Here is how I saw it.
1. A man or woman would go and preach the gospel. Many people would respond to their message and the preacher/evangelist/apostle/normal guy some with little to know formal education some being heavily educated would encourage them to meet together.
2. They would meet together loving one another and serving one another, with no leaders.
3. The gifted and mature men would raise to leadership and would be officially recognized by an Apostle or an apostolic assistant (small apostle maybe?) sometimes months or years later.
4. They would function as a church having served one another from the beginning, loving one another, caring for one another, so the leaders would not Lord it over and command someone to “submit”. They would so well know, respect, and willing submit to their leaders because they “know” them. They would have not been appointed by a search team, a deacon board, or have earned it by some theological training or have some ecclesiastical authority appoint someone over them.
5. As they grow they split off naturally in order to meet the needs of one another and not lose the intimacy they have been sharing with one another for years. Thus they are still one church in a city with many places to gather and a plurality of leaders “eager” to serve and coming into their position understanding that this position of service could cost them their lives under anti-christian tyranny.
See the difference? Does it make a difference?
P.s thanks for the picture brother Dave!
