tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post4790278644771323201..comments2023-06-02T05:56:55.748-05:00Comments on Love Each Stone: The City Church, a guest post by Paul GrabillDavid Rogershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comBlogger76125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-25487347950743282622012-08-13T17:18:01.616-05:002012-08-13T17:18:01.616-05:00Paul Grabill, His Life and Legacy
http://youtu.be...Paul Grabill, His Life and Legacy<br /><br />http://youtu.be/KFozsAgcv9ADavid Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-22931416626291224722012-08-13T17:09:19.956-05:002012-08-13T17:09:19.956-05:00A tribute to our departed friend Paul Grabill
htt...A tribute to our departed friend Paul Grabill<br /><br />http://youtu.be/6_xFv8r_C7YDavid Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-62343444246492261592007-04-08T15:59:00.000-05:002007-04-08T15:59:00.000-05:00Steve,Yeah, I guess the discussions do tend to get...Steve,<BR/><BR/>Yeah, I guess the discussions do tend to get a bit "in-house" here at times. By all means, feel free to "pipe up" whenever you want to, though. Other perspectives enrich us all.David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-18465446550967456322007-04-08T11:25:00.000-05:002007-04-08T11:25:00.000-05:00Not being a Baptist, I didn't feel very qualified ...Not being a Baptist, I didn't feel very qualified to comment on much in this discussion (since so much of it sounds like an inhouse Baptist discussion to me), but I had to pipe up and applaud this:<BR/><BR/><EM>Let's do our best to work on the part we do understand, and trust God to continue to guide us in the part we don't yet understand.</EM><BR/><BR/>So true. So true! Thank you, David, for this reminder.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-88207211315629252952007-04-08T09:37:00.000-05:002007-04-08T09:37:00.000-05:00R.L,Great observations!I think the unity Jesus pra...R.L,<BR/><BR/>Great observations!<BR/><BR/>I think the unity Jesus prayed for has not yet reached its culmination. Yes, I agree that none of Jesus' prayers go unanswered. But, just as in the case of our prayers, sometimes God answers them in His timing. He also taught us to pray that God's will may be done on Earth, just as it already is in Heaven. And I think that carries with it the implicit understanding that we are to be His instruments and co-laborers in seeing His will done on Earth. <BR/><BR/>What exactly will this unity look like? For now, "we see through a glass dimly." But, there is a whole lot revealed to us that is quite clear, and does not stack up with what we see on a day-to-day practical manner in the meantime here on Earth. Let's do our best to work on the part we do understand, and trust God to continue to guide us in the part we don't yet understand.David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-45991212056316109442007-04-07T19:51:00.000-05:002007-04-07T19:51:00.000-05:00Thanks for the reply, David. I don't have a major ...Thanks for the reply, David. I don't have a major disagreement with anything in your reply, if I understand you correctly. For the most part I'm just thinking out loud -- the original post having for some reason brought with force to my mind that a prayer of Jesus to His Father must certainly be answered, and that perhaps sometimes we operate as if it is not. And therefore perhaps we don't even know what the answer looks like. So I guess one thing I am wondering is just what does/will this prayed for unity look like?<BR/><BR/>Here are a few things that I get from the prayer regarding oneness or unity. 1) Jesus is not praying for the world, so therefore both the unbeliever and "Christian" in name only is excluded. 2) Jesus is praying for His own, and therefore all who are His called & own are included. 3) Jesus' prayer includes His children living at that time and those yet to come. So this unity must have a spiritual element that has nothing to do with visible unity (seeing some of these aren't even alive at the same time). 4) There must be some kind of visible or tangible element to this prayed-for unity, because in some way by it the world knows Jesus is the sent one of God. <BR/><BR/>So we have a prayer that excludes all unbelievers, includes all believers, brings about a unity of believers even across time that is a tangible testimony to the world of Jesus the Christ. That I see. I suppose what I don't see is just what kind of unity fills all that bill.<BR/><BR/>Thanks.R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-91657734727632538672007-04-07T05:41:00.000-05:002007-04-07T05:41:00.000-05:00R.L.,I'm not sure if Paul will check back this far...R.L.,<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure if Paul will check back this far and see your comment. In the meantime, I will give a shot at answering your question from my perspective...<BR/><BR/>Down through history, I think it is hard to argue that there have not been periods when the unity of the Body of Christ have been more evident than others. Has the Father been answering Jesus' prayer all along? Yes, but, to me, that doesn't mean that He is not still in the process of bringing that unity to perfection.<BR/><BR/>There is, of course, a sense in which all of us as brothers and sisters in Christ are already in perfect unity in the spiritual, and I would say, theoretical, realm. However, in the day-to-day practical incarnation of this unity, we are many times far from what I think that Jesus had in mind when He made this prayer.<BR/><BR/>Also, I don't think the fact that God Himself is in the business of answering Jesus' prayer relieves us as Jesus' disciples from taking to heart His injunction to us, by way of Paul in Eph. 4.3, to "make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace."David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-55329914090571436902007-04-06T18:25:00.000-05:002007-04-06T18:25:00.000-05:00A question for David or Paul.I got in on this late...A question for David or Paul.<BR/><BR/>I got in on this late, so haven't read all 77 of the responses. If this is addressed in them, I apologize.<BR/><BR/>In speaking of the Lord's prayer, Paul writes, "It seems transparently clear to me that John 17:23 speaks (1) of visible unity, i.e., '...that the world may know... and (2) clearly expresses the heartfelt prayer and desire of the one we call Lord. I don't see any way that we can call Jesus "Lord" and ignore what is in his only extended canonical prayer...If this is not a priority for us, how can we call ourselves followers of Christ, let alone Biblical Christians?"<BR/><BR/>I agree that unity should be a priority for us. I further acknowledge that Paul's exhortation in Corinthians binds us to avoid divisions among us. But would you address the implications of John 17 being a prayer of Jesus TO God the Father? IOW, God is the prayer-answerer and not we ourselves. Is God not answering this prayer? Or is He possibly and we refuse to or don't see it? Or something else?<BR/><BR/>Thanks.R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-63123762472146364082007-03-15T06:05:00.000-05:002007-03-15T06:05:00.000-05:00Some great discussion here between Steve, Kevin & ...Some great discussion here between Steve, Kevin & Paul! From what I am understanding (and as Paul alludes to on his "99 %" comment to Kevin), none of us appear to be that far apart on this. <BR/><BR/>I also think Steve's point about different contexts leading to different approaches is valid. I was privileged to work in an area, in Extremadura, where the demarcation between evangelicals and non-evangelicals was pretty clear. I can imagine it gets a whole lot more complicated in a scenario like that described by Steve. <BR/><BR/>I still don't think, however, that the biblical and Christ-honoring approach, in such a situation, is to throw up our hands and throw in the towel regarding "visible unity." But I am definitely not saying either that we should compromise with blatant heresy. <BR/><BR/>I think perhaps the bottom-line issue here is the attitude of our heart. Are we honestly "making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit" with other truly born-again believers in our midst? Or do we relate to others who are not in "our group" in a way similar to that in which we relate to non-believers?David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-18281154519013329202007-03-14T22:21:00.000-05:002007-03-14T22:21:00.000-05:00well thanks Kev the Rev,As a matter fo fact we jus...well thanks Kev the Rev,<BR/>As a matter fo fact we just picked up a lovely young couple married about a month came over from Ontario. If you guys make them that good over there they are welcome here any day.<BR/>they are just coming out of a fairly strict Dutch reformed background..<BR/>So you are in the land of revival there? I have read Lutzer's book, and am aware of some of the good things happening. For what God can do in Canada, then He can do anywhere in the world....<BR/>Thanks for putting me on your prayer list, I'll reciprocate Kev.<BR/>SteveGroseys messageshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09256060632754175527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-51507424233264360162007-03-14T21:11:00.000-05:002007-03-14T21:11:00.000-05:00Paul,Blessings on you. I have enjoyed our discuss...Paul,<BR/><BR/>Blessings on you. I have enjoyed our discussion.<BR/><BR/>Steve,<BR/><BR/>It is great to meet a brother serving Down Under -- and me in the Great White North! You have just gone on my prayer list. Is there any way I can be of assistance or encouragement to you in your ministry in Newcastle?Kevin Peacockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06146727066996916570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-29828557040386135832007-03-14T18:42:00.000-05:002007-03-14T18:42:00.000-05:00Kevin, again, thank you so much.I had to laugh as ...Kevin, again, thank you so much.<BR/><BR/>I had to laugh as I read what you wrote. No, I was not laughing at *you*, but I was laughing at *me*.<BR/><BR/>I found it quite enlightening that while it appears that we agree on so, so much and disagree on so, so little, I was focusing on everything you wrote so that I might respond to...<BR/><BR/>Well, I'll let you guess...<BR/>A. What I agreed with<BR/>B. What I disagreed with<BR/>C. Both of the above<BR/><BR/>Well, since I'm too busy for C., the answer is B.:)<BR/><BR/>Isn't that human nature (especially those of us that are high D's on the DISC Profile:))? We (in marriage, in church, in society) can agree on 99%, but will so often focus on the part we disagree. Sometimes those disagreements are substantial, but so often they are not.<BR/><BR/>I think the Lord would be pleased if I stop doing B for right now.:)<BR/><BR/>Blessings on thee and thine!Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10390212659528931522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-29316305033009739522007-03-14T18:15:00.000-05:002007-03-14T18:15:00.000-05:00Paul,Don't get me wrong! I'm actually with you on...Paul,<BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong! I'm actually with you on the "city church" concept. In fact, in a way that is what I am endeavoring to create in my ministry. My issue with you was by no means on the validity nor the biblical justification of the concept -- I believe that was what was indeed found in Ephesus, Jerusalem (especially after the purge), and in many or most of the NT contexts. I commend you for what you and your ministry are accomplishing in State College. It is undoubtedly a valid biblical model of a NT church.<BR/><BR/>My issue with you is -- Is that the only valid biblical model of a NT church? From my perspective, no it is not. In my endeavors to plant a house church network across my city I do not want to discount the validity of other "churches" and models in my locale. Many of them are traditional, and most are denominational.<BR/><BR/>I also took issue with you over the idea that the presence of denominations means that Christ's body is divided -- that the mere presence of denominational congregations is a threat to the unity that Christ has created and desires to be evident in that community. I am still unconvinced that this is the case.<BR/><BR/>Christ came to build His church (Matt 16:18). It was His intent to make of them "one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:16). This was His purpose before He even prayed John 17, and unity and love between the brethren is His repeated "commandment" that He gave His disciples (John 13:34-35; 15:12, et al.). Jesus' prayer in John 17:23 fits exactly in line with what He taught previously, taught afterwards, and was repeatedly taught by the other NT writers. <BR/><BR/>As for John 17:23, I have already referred to how God has already answered His prayer in tearing down barriers and creating "the Church" (Gal 3:28; Eph 2:14-15; 4:4-6; et al.).<BR/><BR/>As the Father and Son are unified in koinonia, so His people become "one" by participating in that koinonia by being united with the Son ("I in them"). Earlier Jesus described this as "abiding in Him" (John 15:1-15). As branches joined to the same vine, the branches are united with each other. One of the signs and expected responses of this unity is love. Jesus expected His disciples to "love one another, even as I have loved you" (John 13:34-35; 15:12, 17). This is the chief way we demonstrate our unity with Him and with each other. We are recipients of His love ("that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me"), and we should extend His love. His people are to be a display of God's redemptive work, that the world might see the power of Christ to redeem sinners into sons of God and make from them a community of love that this world desperately needs.<BR/><BR/>It is indeed a spiritual unity, not an organic one. Jesus did not pray that the disciples as different persons become one huge man, but instead with their individual characteristics that they be unified in a common faith and purpose (cf. Eph 2:15). This unity is displayed by our love for each other (John 13:35). This holy unity is based upon the truth of His word (17:17), not upon some nonbiblical idealism of unity at the expense of sound biblical doctrine. Rather than beginning with our differences, we begin with our common faith in Christ, our "one Lord," who is the source of our unity (Eph 4:1-6). With that we have an awful lot more in common with fellow evangelical Christians than we have differences.Kevin Peacockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06146727066996916570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-31624593252334473842007-03-14T18:12:00.000-05:002007-03-14T18:12:00.000-05:00That is so sad, Steve.Maybe they think "everything...That is so sad, Steve.<BR/><BR/>Maybe they think "everything is a fundamental."<BR/><BR/>If you might allow me to be so bold and presumptious, I would like to suggest that anyone in a situation similar to yours can still start somewhere--if one can find even one other pastor to pray with in one's local community, then we are moving in the right direction. I think that pleases the Lord and I also believe there is spiritual power in biblically-based unity. <BR/><BR/>I think that's what many missionaries (who often feel so isolated and alone) have discovered, so why not apply that principle to post-Christian nations?Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10390212659528931522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-85495658777719394002007-03-14T17:56:00.000-05:002007-03-14T17:56:00.000-05:00Thanks Paul ,Hey I'm premill too , but I can't tel...Thanks Paul ,<BR/>Hey I'm premill too , but I can't tell my fellow evangelicals (who are all but 1 amill) or I might be put out of fellowship! Believe it or not, I am serious! :)<BR/>SteveGroseys messageshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09256060632754175527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-54962446783437947492007-03-14T17:49:00.000-05:002007-03-14T17:49:00.000-05:00Steve, thank you for sharing. It sounds like your...Steve, thank you for sharing. It sounds like your city has many challenges. I've always felt ours has as well (in a town of 40,000 we have everything under the sun because of the nature of an institution such as Penn State University), but your description makes me feel grateful that I am where I am.:) Then, again, I always have felt that if we are where we are called, it's the greatest place on earth.<BR/><BR/>My guess, Steve, is that we agree far more than we disagree. Your last sentence surely resonated. I would think working together with anyone with whom you have substantial (even second tier) agreement qualifies as visible (not organizational) unity.<BR/><BR/>I've also gotten the sense from you and Kevin that we may be trying to mandate something here or elsewhere (with words like "submission," "formal," or "mandate." The truth is that we are very loosely affiliated, and the "City Church" is more aspirational than tangible.<BR/><BR/>Let me also very strongly say that I think there are two unity models developing. One is 'interfaith,' is false and may become a tool of the Antichrist (I'm premillenial, but I'm not real hard and fast on the details). The other is true, Holy Spirit-guided unity.<BR/><BR/>One is counterfeit; one is real. I don't want the counterfeit to keep me from believing for the real anymore than counterfeit Christianity might cause me to lose my faith.<BR/><BR/>As the other Paul would say, "God forbid."Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10390212659528931522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-49072277313093890582007-03-14T16:39:00.000-05:002007-03-14T16:39:00.000-05:00Paul, it sounds wonderful to be in a place where ...Paul, it sounds wonderful to be in a place where you have so many clergy who are identifiably evangelical. Having said that, I must say that I agree strongly with Kevin's ecclesiology.<BR/><BR/>Please let me share how this ecclesiology works out in practise in a community where the minority is evangelical.<BR/><BR/>In my town (I am the central city baptist church in a town of 400,000, with a total of about 30 evangelical churches of any denomination, and around, 150 non evangelical denominations). The other clergy in the inner city have a joint unity project. There is one evangelical presbyterian church in the inner city. There are 9 pro homosexual churches (some with homosexual clergy). There are 4 extreme pentecostal churches all affirming new revelations and apostolic authority over our church.<BR/>It has been demanded that I allow access to my pulpit of homosexual clergy as proff of my agreement with John 17.<BR/>It has been demanded that I join their annual joint service where the Roman Catholic priest who was recently charged as a pedophile speaks.<BR/>The Buddhists and Spiritualist church are part of the visible unity of churches in my town.<BR/>The Buddhist priest is the son of one of my church members (as a result of an era when the Baptists accepted the visible unity approach!)<BR/>The majority non christian community (85%) regards Christianity as a joke, and rightly so.<BR/>I have done 300 celebrant (non denominational) funerals in the last two years where the families have said that.<BR/><BR/>I guess my own scenario makes sumbission to your city church model of visible unity worrisome and unhelpful to evangelicalism. <BR/><BR/>With those 7 churches in our city that do not submit to the authoritarian city church model imposed by the extreme charismatics and extreme liberal anglicans, and the liberal charismatic baptists we have fellowship.<BR/> (Of the 7 churches: 1 independant evangelical Anglican, 1 reformed Baptist and 3 Union Baptist and 1 Dutch Reformed, and 2 Presbyterian churches)we have great fellowship and intercommunion where we meet ocassionally, preach for each other, we encourage each other's evangelistic enterprises and respect each other's distinctives.<BR/>Submission to the city church model imposed by the extremes for us would mean loss of our evangelical identity (top teir issues).<BR/>While for you Paul there may be some possibility of fellowship in a city church model (given the preponderance of evangelical churches in your community), for us the "city church model imposed by non evangelicals has the unstated purpose of the deliberate annihilation of our evangelical position. From the position of the liberal/charismatic majority we are viewed as fundementalists and separatists becasue we do not acknowledge homosexual clergy as christians nor as valid ministers.<BR/><BR/>Of course, the point of the comment is to say that in times of revival evangelical cooperation is easier than in times of apostacy.<BR/>One size doesn't fit all.<BR/><BR/>May I give an example of the insanity that prevails in this city. The pastor of the local Calvary Chapel went through the large public hospital trying to do healings bed by bed without respect for denominational affiliations of the patients or their personal wishes for him to leave them alone. When stopped by hospital staff he claimed to be me (I was an officially recognised hospital chaplain, but why anyone would claim to be me, I have no idea). The hospital told me they are pursuing legal charges against the pastor, and I have lost my access to that hospital (They were not convinced that I didn't know anything about it, even though at the time I was an inpatient in the hospital, "after all", the hospital admin reasoned, "all the churches join together in the city church in Newcastle and know and respect each other's ministries"). I pursued the id fraud with their aussie denominational leadership (with whom there was agreement) and the pastor himself. The pastor himself refused all contact with me. Woops, now I am excluded from the city church, even though his own denomination carpetted him for the abuse!<BR/><BR/>OK, so from your part Paul, I would understand that you would say, well obviously the only real church in our city is the evangelical churches that are not associated to the "City church" and that is the true city church... Well I would think within the strange aberrations in our city there may actually be a number of evangelical christians worshipping and fellowshipping in non evangelical churches (I wrote the bible studies for 600 catholics in 23 Bible study groups some years ago in a small town, which became the foundation for the Bible studies in the Antiochean movement among charismatic catholic young people.<BR/>WOW folks I guess that must be a stunning revelation!)<BR/><BR/>I am asserting that a better model for intercommunion and fellowship between evangelical churches is one where we do not demand visible unity but in respecting the autonomy of the local evangelical congregations we find things we can do better together than apart.<BR/><BR/><BR/>SteveGroseys messageshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09256060632754175527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-70514597346475522352007-03-14T14:53:00.000-05:002007-03-14T14:53:00.000-05:00Kevin,Thank you so much for your comprehensive and...Kevin,<BR/><BR/>Thank you so much for your comprehensive and articulate response.<BR/><BR/>1. Is it your best guess that the Church of Ephesus (either in the time under Timothy's leadership--remember there were multiple elders in the city [1 Tim 3:1f; 5:17f]--or by the time of the Book of Revelation 2:1-7) had only a single congregation/house church?<BR/>2. Why, almost always, does the word "churches" in all letters in the NT (either epistles or in Revelation) only refer to a region, such as Asia, Galatia, or Macedonia. Are we not to get the idea that the NT writers thought of each city having one church?<BR/>3. Because of my congregationalist commitments, I'm more than willing to agree with you on each house church/congregation being self-governing, etc., but I still have to ask myself if Paul thought each Ephesian house church was such, or were they expected to follow Timothy's leadership (weak as it was)?<BR/>4. Would you be willing to venture a position on what I describes us doing in State College? Does that sound like something you think pleases the Lord or have we been deceived in some way? Do you think we are doing anything right, or does it send chills down your spine?<BR/>5. You are right. Right now in State College our unity is just what I think most of us would agree upon--brothers and congregations loving, praying, worshiping together. We do have one small joint checking account (but no 501c3 status), and that's about it. We don't even have a web site. Might it someday become a loose semi-organized unity, such as the SBC or other congregationalist organization--I don't know. We're in no hurry to do that, for sure.<BR/>6. If Jesus had never prayed John 17, you think the Church would be more fractured than it is now? Do you think the Holy Spirit would have been disempowered? Do you see my argument of John 17 as canon, and not just as another of Jesus' kazillion prayers?<BR/>7. Sure, Kevin, I'd love to hear your take on John 17:23. I'm tired of hearing mine.:)Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10390212659528931522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-70207725246511805542007-03-14T14:07:00.000-05:002007-03-14T14:07:00.000-05:00Paul,No, I don't believe you are reading me correc...Paul,<BR/><BR/>No, I don't believe you are reading me correctly.<BR/><BR/>1. I do not believe you think there should only be one "congregation" in a city. Even though you might call a congregation a "house church," we seem to differ in our ecclesiology. I am willing to acknowledge that "congregation/house church" as "the body of Christ" (your reference to "house church" opens up this possibility; cf. Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:19; Col 4:15). A local congregation is not merely a part of "the church of God" (Acts 20:28), it is the church of God in its local expression. It is the church that Christ has built in that location. Each congregation, no matter how large or small (or in whatever form) represents His congregation, the church. Each church is a whole church, because Christ is embodied in it. But as individual churches are joined to Christ they are also joined to each other (Eph 4:4). Thus, the one church of God expresses itself locally in each fellowship of believers.<BR/><BR/>The NT pattern is that each congregation is under the lordship of Christ (even a house church). Each church is a gathered group of God's people with Christ as their head. Each congregation is led and empowered by His Spirit in its God-ordained task. Thus each local "church" (in whatever form) looks only to Christ for its authority to preach, teach, evangelize, and conduct its business. Each church was indwelt by God's Spirit (Eph 2:22), was responsible to choose its leadership (cf. Acts 6:1-6), to conduct the specific ministry God had assigned for them (Acts 11:27-29), and to fulfill its missions task (Acts 13:1-3). Each local body also had the responsibility to care for its own members in ministry (Gal 6:1-5, 10), discipleship (Col 1:24-29; 1 Thes 5:12-15), and church discipline (Matt 18:15-17; 1 Cor 5:4-5; 2 Cor 2:4-11). No other church or ecclesiastical body had authority (except for the unique authority of Christ's apostles) over this God-called, Christ-led, and Spirit-empowered local body of believers. Therefore, I believe that the scripture teaches that each "body" is autonomous, or more specifically, directly answerable only to the lordship of Christ.<BR/><BR/>At the same time, even though local churches in the NT were not bound together by a formal religious structure or authority imposed upon them, the early Christian churches had a profound sense of unity with one another. Their "fellowship" created a spiritual indebtedness to one another (e.g. Rom 15:23-29), like brothers and sisters in the same family. Paul said, "There is one body and one Spirit – just as you were called to one hope when you were called – one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all" (Eph 4:4-6). NT churches associated and cooperated with one another for the purposes of benevolence, fellowship, brotherhood, and for common missions causes (Acts 11:22-26; Rom 16:3-5; 2 Cor 9:1-2), but never for the purpose of exercising authority over one another. This is why I struggle with the idea that "visible unity" of Christ's body is identified only with some sort of ecclesiastical structure of various congregations in a locale. <BR/><BR/>You stated, "It seems to me that 'visible unity' doesn't necessarily mean organizational unity." I agree. You seem to equate denominations with "organizational unity," but is not what you propose with your "city church" model an "organizational unity"? If there is no "structure" or "organization" of the various congregations in your town, then what is the difference between that and autonomous "churches" that choose to love, respect, and cooperate with each other wherever they can to build God's kingdom?<BR/><BR/>2. If you will re-read my post, I am not saying that John 17:23 will only be realized in heaven. In fact, I demonstrated many ways in my context in which Christ's unity has clearly transcended denominational lines. I find that to be "visible unity" -- comparable to the examples that you have given in your context.<BR/><BR/>In a very real way God has already answered Jesus' prayer for unity of His disciples (John 17:20-24). He has already made the church one in Christ. We are "one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:16). In Christ the deepest divisions that scar humanity have been abolished, no longer Jews nor Gentiles, slaves nor free, male and female, "for all are one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28). He created a fellowship that is a new phenomenon in this world, spanning cultures and languages, traditions and social mores, politics and ethnicity. Indeed, He "broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity . . . so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace" (Eph 2:14-15). He has already accomplished this, thus Christ's prayer has already been answered.<BR/><BR/>Now, do we display what He has already accomplished? In many ways we do not, even as the early church struggled with this. They struggled with ethnic issues, culture, personalities, and particulars of theological interpretation. In the same way that not every Christian lives out their new nature that they have in Christ (Eph 4:17), not every church displays the unity that Christ has already created, within its local body or among other local bodies (whether or not we would like to acknowledge that we are indeed unified with them). My reference to heaven was to demonstrate that in heaven unity among God's people will finally be displayed in its purest form. Until then, we strive toward that end.<BR/><BR/>I will post this now, and Paul, if you are still interested, I will be glad to do an exegesis of John 17:23.Kevin Peacockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06146727066996916570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-2331814085051993732007-03-14T09:55:00.000-05:002007-03-14T09:55:00.000-05:00Clarification: Under #5 above, when I said "no on...Clarification: Under #5 above, when I said "no one," I was speaking of those who disagree and have taken the time to respond/dialogue (which I greatly appreciate). Obviously, with those, like David, who agree there is no need to preach to the choir.<BR/><BR/>As I do every Sunday, my prayer is that my lack of clarity doesn't impede the message.:) Anyone identify with that?:)Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10390212659528931522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-51678821508656222007-03-14T08:03:00.000-05:002007-03-14T08:03:00.000-05:00Strider,Once again, great words! Thanks for your c...Strider,<BR/><BR/>Once again, great words! Thanks for your contribution on this subject. I believe the Lord has given you a lot of wisdom.David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-9110486284216069192007-03-14T07:33:00.000-05:002007-03-14T07:33:00.000-05:00Grosey said:>>Well it seems to me that "visible un...Grosey said:<BR/><BR/>>>Well it seems to me that "visible unity" is dependeant on uniformity in doctrine and uniformity in practise.<BR/>I think it is arrogant to impose uniformity and conformity upon others.<<<BR/><BR/>Grosey, sorry for the late response. Yesterday was a travel day for me to a conference I'm attending.<BR/><BR/>1. It seems to me that 'visible unity' doesn't necessarily mean organizational unity. I think it may be helpful for us to think outside the box and not immediately think of what we have known--denominationalism.<BR/>2. One expression of 'visible unity' that we took in our community was to have a joint Sunday morning worship service in the mid-90s with about 12 various evangelical congregations represented. Was that unbiblical? Based on what you know from the Word, would you guess that the Lord was pleased or displeased with us? (BTW, it was the Baptist pastor that spoke:)--he also was the Sunday morning preacher at the dedication of our new worship facility--was the Lord pleased or displeased with that?)<BR/>3. If that weak form of 'visible unity' is too much, then shouldn't we get rid of stronger forms of visible unity, such as all Baptist conventions?<BR/>4. Why would visible unity necessitate uniformity? Why can't local unity has as much freedom and soul liberty as Baptist conventions have? Isn't that what Wade Burleson and others are contending for?<BR/>5. Why is no one actually trying to exegete John 17:23 with me? It seems to me that we are talking around it rather than trying to understand what Jesus actually was saying (using classical evangelical hermeneutical principles). Do we really care what He said or meant? Can you forgive me for taking a "The Bible says it, I believe it" approach?<BR/><BR/>I'll stop here for now. Please understand the root of my passion--to please the Lord.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10390212659528931522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-67144633350772310462007-03-14T07:00:00.000-05:002007-03-14T07:00:00.000-05:00Alan & Jonathan,No need to apologize for taking up...Alan & Jonathan,<BR/><BR/>No need to apologize for taking up space on my blog to discuss these issues. I think these are issues we need to discuss, and happy to provide a forum to do so.<BR/><BR/>Also, it "strokes my ego" a bit to see so many comments on my post (actually Paul's post). ;^)David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-89765624471480420552007-03-14T06:56:00.001-05:002007-03-14T06:56:00.001-05:00Steve,No one ever said practical unity was easy or...Steve,<BR/><BR/>No one ever said practical unity was easy or uncomplicated. I do wonder if perhaps we are dealing with different definitions and understandings of "visible unity." I have read a bit of the history of the Plymouth Brethren. From what I understand, the more closed group, aligning with Darby and others ended up splintering in a "thousand" different directions, while the more open group, identified more with George Muller, has been able to avoid a lot of this. At the same time, I see the Plymouth Brethren, at least in Spain, functioning more or less as one more denomination, which was definitely not their original vision.<BR/><BR/>I think some of these difficulties perhaps underlie what Paul said in Eph. 4 about "making every effort to preserve the unity of the Spirit." It is something that requires lots of effort and perserverance.<BR/><BR/>I do agree with you, however, that it would almost certainly be instructive for us, as Baptists today, to study the history of the Plymouth Brethren, as well as that of the Campbellites, and Watchman Nee/Witness Lee, and any others who had a vision for "visible unity" to learn what we can from their errors of the past.<BR/><BR/>I haven't had a chance to read Nathan's post yet, but I hope to get to it soon. He usually has some interesting things to say.David Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11701934251748260267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22575956.post-60387995746168745772007-03-14T02:05:00.000-05:002007-03-14T02:05:00.000-05:00Well, this is the longest comment string on a non-...Well, this is the longest comment string on a non-political issue I have seen. Congratulations David!<BR/>My two cents: <BR/>The issue of visible unity vs. spiritual unity is found in 1 Samuel. When Israel wanted a King they inadvertently rejected God as their King. We must not do that. To create a denomination- which is a human organization- and call it the Church is blasphemous IMO. We have organizations and we enjoy them but we are all members of one Body whose head is Christ. I don't agree with my brother who lives in Texas about anything but when we are together everyone can tell that we are brothers and that we love each other. This is because we have the same parents and nothing we 'decide' can change that. Christians need to treat each other the same regardless of the organizations- which are very helpful and good- they create. <BR/><BR/>As to the five fold ministry- I like the conclusions drawn by Jonathan and Alan. IMO- they are ministry gifts. The reason we have such an issue over determining whether they are offices or not is because we still think in worldly terms with worldly leadership structures. In God's Kingdom he who has a ministry given to him by God serves. This makes him a defacto leader whether he has a title or not. Here in Middle Earth I have encouraged house-church leaders not to take on the 'title' of pastor as that has too much baggage- it basically means dictator. Instead we have elders and of those elders there is always one who surfaces as the one who serves- is gifted- as pastor. I think the same is true of the other gifts here. I do not introduce myself as 'Apostle Strider.' But I am an apostle and if I do not recognize my gifting then I will not act on it and the body of Christ will be poorer. <BR/>Also, as far as gifts go it is worth mentioning that gifts of healing, and miracles and several others can be had by anyone from time to time- the gift is the Holy Spirit and He does the miraculous. Paul did not have one of these- he used several as the Holy Spirit chose. But the ministry gifts act differently. A person with the pastor gift remains pastoral regardless of his assigned job. A person who is a prophet always operates in a prophetic manner- even though no one even recognizes that he is doing so anymore. <BR/>So, in the original discussion of City Church it would help us to work together better and encourage each other better if we were able to recognize these types of people and use them. I would put it to you that we do many times as we see so-called para-church ministries started. What we are really seeing is a gifted person serving the greater body. We would be richer to recognize these people more often.Striderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07347436154893544535noreply@blogger.com