20 Comments

1. 

   4-4-2011

   Arthur Sido says:

   What about “paleo-blog”?
2. 

   4-4-2011

   Bobby says:

   First it would take a fresh revelation of the unsearchable riches that are ours in Christ followed by more of us stirring one another up. Come to think of it, in many ways these are one and the same. That’s probably why Paul began all of his letters by telling the Church who we are in Christ followed by exhortations to live out those truths.
3. 

   4-4-2011

   Randi says:

   a complete transformation
4. 

   4-4-2011

   Tim says:

   Since:
   1. It’s very clear having the revelation in front of them in plain English is not enough
   2. Pointing this out to them only brings bogus rationalizations and proof texts

   I think only a complete breakdown of the American economy so we can no longer afford hired help and maintain or build the crowd oriented gathering sites, will do the job.

   This does not mean we give up speaking the truth in love. It just means we are aware of the severity of the trap Satan has set for God’s people. They like being in the trap. They even call it “dedicated to God” or corban.
5. 

   4-4-2011

   Aussiejohn says:

   Alan,

   Of one thing I’m certain: Without the livening power of the Holy Spirit, nothing we say,write or do, will change anything.

   It is only then that the Lord Jesus Christ will be recognized, as the Head and Senior Pastor!
6. 

   4-4-2011

   Alan Knox says:

   I appreciate all the comments, and I agree with you. But, I’m also thinking about my brothers and sisters who do believe that the “clergy” are responsible for ministry while the “laity” are ministered to. How do we help these brothers and sisters understand that they are also called by God to be ministers (servants) and move toward living in this manner?

   -Alan
7. 

   4-4-2011

   Bobby says:

   we could start by being ministers and inviting them to join us or look for their own ways of serving
8. 

   4-4-2011

   Alan Knox says:

   Bobby,

   I think example is key. As we serve others, we not only serve them but we show other believers what it truly means to be a “minister.”

   -Alan
9. 

   4-5-2011

   Henry Neufeld says:

   Alan – Example is always the key. If we do not live what we teach/preach, we should not expect others to pay much attention.

   But as Aussie John already pointed out, all of our best strategies will be failures without the transforming power of the Holy Spirit.
10. 

    4-5-2011

    Alan Knox says:

    Henry,

    I agree both about the importance of example and the work of the Holy Spirit!

    -Alan
11. 

    4-6-2011

    Art Mealer says:

    I think we need to consider BOTH the new wine (the saints, including “leaders”) and the new wineskin (the organization, what is a local church, how/who is a member, how is it lead, by whom), or we will “burst” whatever else we try.
12. 

    4-6-2011

    Alan Knox says:

    Art,

    Exactly. It’s all connected, and, hopefully, connected back to Jesus.

    -Alan
13. 

    9-29-2011

    Marc Shepherd says:

    I believe it will first take ministers and church leaders to admit and understand two things:

    1. The true definition of “lay” ministry Is more than bringing people to church
    2. The need to have “laity” be involved in ministry.

    Once that is realized, church leaders will have to understand and come to grips with the three functions they have been assigned to by the Holy Spirit:

    1. Assist in the development of members discipleship by teaching the lessons and commands of Jesus Christ
    2. Help members understand their spiritual gifts and then mature those gifts.
    3. Provide and look for ways members can utilize their spiritual gifts inside and outside the church building walls.

    My .02 cents.

    Regards
14. 

    9-30-2011

    Joey Basta says:

    Hey Brother Alan …. can you write a post on your thoughts about this scripture – 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 (NLT)

    12 It isn’t my responsibility to judge outsiders, but it certainly is your responsibility to judge those inside the church who are sinning.

    13 God will judge those on the outside; but as the Scriptures say, “You must remove the evil person from among you.

    I believe many Christians hide behind “don’t judge me .. the Bibles says don’t judge” so they can continue to do what they want. I don’t see much rebuke or correction in today’s American churches. Why is this scripture in the Bible? How come NO one I speak to about this agrees with what it says?

    What are your thought about this scripture and judging (keeping accountable)each other?
15. 

    9-30-2011

    Hutch says:

    Alan-

    What amazes me when you get down to looking at the terms clergy and laity, they in no way have anything to do with separate categories of people within the church. The English word “clergy” is related to the Greek word “cleros”. It means “a lot or inheritance”. Nowhere in the New Testament is any form of “cleros” used to designate a separate class of “ordained” leaders. Instead, it refers to the “inheritance” (Greek: clerou) laid up for all the saints (Col. 1:12; Acts 26:18). The saints as a collective whole are conceived of in the New Testament as God’s “inheritance”. All believers are God’s “cleros/clergy” – God’s Inheritance.

    This English word is related to the Greek word “laos”, which means “people”. The Greek word “laikos”, which means “laity”, is not found in the New Testament. All in the body of Christ, are the “people” (“laos”) of God. “People of God” is a title of honor bestowed upon all who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Pet. 2:9-10). All believers are God’s “laos/laity”- The People of God.

    Some say that it was not until the third century that “clergy” was employed to designate a limited number of persons who functioned in the Christian assemblies. But I would say that this type of division started much earlier and that wherever you see the clergy/laity distinction/heresy in practice you are seeing the deeds of the modern day Nicolaitans in action as they set themselves up as lords over God’s laity/people. All believers are full time ordained ministers=servants and full time ordained missionaries.

    Our Master makes clear who our teacher and leader is: Matthew 23:8-11 But you are not to be called rabbi (teacher), for you have one Teacher and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone (in the church) on earth father, for you have one Father, Who is in heaven. And you must not be called masters (leaders), for you have one Master (Leader), the Christ. He who is greatest among you shall be your servant.

    Jesus in the revelation of CHrist given to John makes an observation of the Ephesian church, noting that they have “hated the deeds of the Nicolaitans.” Who were these Nicolaitans? We shall observe that they were in Pergamum also (2:15). Some have suggested that the Nicolaitans were somehow identified with one of the seven servers mentioned in Acts 6:5 – “Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch.” This is very doubtful, and has no evidence to substantiate such. The Nicolaitans can probably better be identified by the etymology of the name. Two Greek words are joined together: nike meaning “victory” (such is the basis of Nike brand shoes), and laos meaning “people” (from which we get the word “laity”). The Nicolaitans are those who “conquer the people.” This is indicative of religion. It is an organized attempt to manipulate and control the people, to make them into unthinking pawns and followers who will do whatever they are told to do by the religious leaders (especially to give up their money and time). Religion is afraid of Christians who live by the freedom of God’s grace, allowing the Spirit of Christ to direct their lives and manifest His character. You cannot control those kind of people. They believe that Jesus Christ is their Priest and their Lord, and they will not bow down to any other, or be controlled or conquered by any other.

    While the Ephesian church at the time of John’s reception of the revelation of Christ had resisted and hated the deeds of the Nicolaitans, Jesus charged the Pergamum church with this: “You also have some who in the same way hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans” (2:15). Again, the label “Nicolaitans” is etymologically derived from the Greek words nike, meaning “to conquer” or “to be victorious,” and laos, meaning “people.” Nicolaitan religion “conquers the people.” It is but another variation of Balaamite religion that also plagued the church in Pergamum, for the name Balaam is derived from two Hebrew words, bala, meaning “to devour” or “to consume,” and am, meaning “people.” So we see that Religion devours and consumes the people. It uses and abuses them. It “eats them alive,” swallowing up all that they have in order to appease its insatiable appetite for personal enrichment and institutional advancement. Religion does not seek the highest good of men, but it is men seeking their own personal benefit.

    So, I would say that the clergy/laity heresy is here to stay and Christians must always be on the lookout for those who would set themselves us as “lords over God’s people”. Interestingly even some who make it on the list of the hero’s within the various organic church denominations such as Nee and Lee have been notorious Nicolaitans who paid lip service to the priesthood of the believer but nevertheless set themselves up over large groups of people as “God’s specialized prophet and mouthpiece”.

    The Nicolaitan clergy/laity distinction/heresy is prevalent and very damaging to the church so learning the truth about and meaning of the words “clergy” and “laity” is very important. The root words from which we derive the English words “clergy” and “laity” are found in the New Testament, but the common usage of “clergy/laity” is far removed from the New Testament concepts.
16. 

    9-30-2011

    Marc Shepherd says:

    So true concernIng this warped concept of the laity and the ministers. Hence the problem we are all experiencing concerning the church. And then so many wonder why it has become a business: we have set it up that way for centuries.

    The church I attend continues with this concieted mindset. MInisters idea of ministry for the “laity” is parking lot duty. And they seriously wonder why people leave the church?
17. 

    9-30-2011

    Alan Knox says:

    I’m glad this post continues to stir up discussion. I do think this distinction is a major hindrance to the maturity of the church today.

    -Alan
18. 

    9-30-2011

    Randi says:

    Marc Shepherd said, “MInisters idea of ministry for the “laity” is parking lot duty.”

    That made me LOL… and then made me very sad… that is so true & sad… why don’t pastors/people see this? tradition blinds them? but maybe moreso they have scriptures taught to them that make it seem they should be giving 100% blind support to their pastor/their authority that God gave for them to be ‘under’.
19. 

    4-30-2012

    Orthodox Christian says:

    There are a number of things that come to mind. I will mention one:

    Are you aware that the NT Scriptures you hold in your hand were compiled into “The Bible” by priests and bishops centuries ago? Are you willing to accept this fact? So then what is the nature of the “clergy” juxtaposed with that of “laity?” The terminology is utterly Western, and you would be correct in reacting against Roman Catholic ecclesiology in light of the Early Church. But do you realize that the Early Church was liturgical, and that the priests and bishops were raised up from amongst the cleros?

    It has always been understood that all believers have a ministry in one way or another. However, if we are to “take the Scriptures seriously” and “demand a more radical reappraisal” of ecclesiology, I would recommend reappraising the reactionary conclusions drawn by Protestant reformers, who were utterly divorced from the Early Church from the beginning. The absence of “clergy” as such (that is, people set aside for teaching and ministering) as well as the absence of bishops, who through the laying on of hands, receive a blessing to lead going back to the 12 Apostles, would be utterly foreign to the 1st Century Church. Furthermore, the dynamic of a minister speaking to the congregation–whether this individual is considered “clergy” by their Protestant denomination or if they are simply one of many “lay” people selected to stand in front of the congregation and teach/preach–is similar to the ecclesiology of the Early Church in that you still have someone telling others how to interpret The Bible. Perhaps you’d be surprised if I told you that, yes we are supposed to be told how to interpret The Bible. The question is: Is it going to be a clergyman from “The Church” teaching the actual correct belief as it always has been believed, or is it going to be someone telling you their personal opinion after they sit down alone and attempt to discern what the Biblical writers meant by reading a translation of a translation of a translation, with the presupposition that The Bible is the only source of doctrine?

    I know I unloaded a lot, but my inquiry is sincere, and I look forward to your response.
20. 

    4-30-2012

    Alan Knox says:

    Orthodox Christian,

    It sounds like you are assuming that since I disagree with some of the beliefs, practices, or decisions of some early Christians, then I must necessarily disagree with all of the beliefs, practices, or decisions of those same people. That would be an invalid assumption. The same would be true for believers who considered themselves Reformers, and even brothers and sisters today.

    -Alan