Ian

My 'experience' of Christianity is not mediated through anything or anyone except Jesus Christ, although obviously we can all be ínfluenced by the teachings that we receive.  During the last 2 years, as I have been looking to Jesus as my saviour, my redeemer, my all, I feel myself growing in ways that I never knew about prior to coming to relationship with Him.  I  thank Him each day for loving me so much that He took such a 'luke-warm' person as I was, and showed me a better way. Yes, this may come over as 'all loopy pente bla bla' but I don't really care what others think of me, I only want to become more like Jesus and less like 'me' - and I will do WHATEVER it takes. This has nothing to do with the 'local church' I attend (because I honestly don't think it matters which denomination/local church) but is to do with actually making Jesus the Lord over my life.

Anyway, after thinking over things last night and researching a little, this is my understanding of 'the church' (for what it's worth)

The 'church' is not the building but describes the people - ALL who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.  The word 'ekklesia' is the Greek word for church which seems to mean 'an assembly'.  Jesus said 'I will build my church' in Matt 16 and He obviously loved it (us) so much that He gave His life for it. The church is the body of Christ and I wonder sometimes whether Jesus even 'sees' the many divisions and denominations or just looks and sees US as believers in all our diveristy? 

John 17:20-23 in the Message says "I'm praying not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me because of them and their witness about me. The goal is for all of them to become one heart and mind - just as you, Father, are in me and I in you, so they might be one heart and mind with us. Then the world might believe that you, in fact, sent me. The same glory you gave me, I gave them, So they'll be as unified and together as we are - I in them and you in me. Then they'll be mature in this oneness, And give the godless world evidence that you've sent me and loved them in the same way you've loved me".

This passage (and I've read through the many translations) seems (to me) to say that Christ wants the church to be united in one heart and one mind.  I guess this doesn't mean all denominations merging, but to have a unity and a common purpose - to reach those that don't know Him. If this is our aim, then maybe instead of squabbling about 'who is right' and 'the loopy pentes are wrong' etc maybe we should keep focussed on the goal of reaching the lost with the gospel message. And (dare I say it?) even embrace the fact that different denominations can reach people in different ways that enables them to come to know Christ - the goal should be to reach out (not just vertically but horizontally, as you say Ian).

I will be busy doing the 'homework' that you've kindly 'set' for me, but the above is how I (currently) see the church, its role and purpose. 
 
Urchin

Ian, 

I've now read every scripture on 'the church' and 'the believer' in the New Testament but am still 'chewing it over' before I write anything. 

I've also read Phillipians 2:12 in all of the translations and, rather than take that one verse out of context, have read and re-read the whole book of Phillipians which Paul wrote while imprisoned. I've found it very challenging to read and understand (simple soul that I am) 

When Paul refers to 'salvation' in this verse, I don't believe he is talking about the Phillipians' eternal salvation (as we cannot 'earn' our salvation) They were already believers and therefore already 'saved' and also he used the term 'my beloved' which was an expression he used for believers. I think 'salvation' here was more to do with deliverance from sufferings (from their opponents).

In 1:27-30 Paul calls them to be in unity in the faith because they were under attack for their faith as he also was. Unity comes through selflessness and humility among the believers with Jesus himself being the model of humility. He obeyed the Father and the Father exalted Him when He humbled himself.

It appears to me that Paul was speaking of ongoing obedience with humility, reverence and respect (fear and trembling). The Phillipians had always obeyed and Paul was calling them to obey yet again. If we love and honour God, then we should want to obey him. 

In the Message translation v12-13 Paul told the Phillipians to " keep on doing what you've done from the beginning. When I was living among you, you lived in responsive obedience. Now that I'm separated from you, keep it up. Be energetic in your life of salvation, reverent and sensitive before God".

Lots more studying to do!

Urch

Hello Ian,

I believe the quick answer is 'no'. I'm thinking of one aspect right now - discipline. We are called to be His disciples. I cannot be disciplined on my own. I love my own way far too much. I can rationalise till the cows come home any wayward thinking/behaviour. Anyone who has spent any time out of fellowship can tell you what a slippery slope it can be.

A small issue in light of this weighty topic, but thought I started here, because this has been my experience.

I'm beginning to find my place in a church where I matter, where I can worship my God ALONGSIDE fellow believers. I can now not imagine this type of worship as a 'loner'.

Chips

1. The priesthood of all believers.
2. The universal human need for leadership. 
3. The servant nature of leadership

Leadership will only be effective and safe if a balance is kept of these three perspectives, so we will examine them in some detail.

1.  The Priesthood of all Believers
Every person is responsible to give account to God for his or her own life. There is no sense in
 which a king, minister, governor, leader, boss, leader, captain, or pastor has any titled premium on God's presence or favour. God communicates through His Holy Spirit to every person who personally desires a relationship with Him and is willing to approach Him through faith in the atoning work of Christ. 
Biblical Christian leadership, then, is not a matter of a leader standing between God and another person as 'God's representative' (that is, a 'priest'). Nor is leadership a matter of the leader’s unlimited authority over another person's life such that questioning the authority of a leader's opinions about a matter is automatically equated to disobedience to God.                              In the light of this concept, then, leaders need to see themselves in the role of exercising real authority, but their authority is limited to specific areas and times in the lives of people who are, ultimately, accountable only to God. For example, the boss in a business has real authority over the worker inasmuch as he is dealing with a matter of employment, but outside of that, the boss has no authority. 

Church leaders have a special God-given responsibility to 'watch over the souls' of people who commit themselves to pastoral care. The role of this kind of leadership is identified in Scripture as that of the 'undershepherd'; that is, church leaders serve those they lead entirely on behalf of the Chief Shepherd, Jesus. The image of the shepherd is one of a servant who leads sheep to places of sustenance and safety and protects them from outside harm and from foolishness within. Similarly, church leaders exercise authority only to help people to better understand God and to walk in obedience to Him. People may choose, (but cannot be forced to) submit to the care of church leaders and obey them appropriately as a part of their submission to the care and authority of God. 
Human imperfection has led to many abuses of church authority, so we are wise to be careful to see that a church leader’s exercise of authority is always open to scrutiny and accountability in the light of God’s word. 
The concept of the ‘priesthood of all believers’ also has implications for the method of operation of leadership. Leaders can see the people they lead as a means to make the leaders’ vision, mission, or ministry more successful - and people become ‘pawns’ in the leader’s great game of life. Alternatively, leaders can see the people they lead as God's servants, gifted potential ministers of God’s kingdom into the society around them. The latter kind of leader will want to see the people they lead become more successful in their walk with and service of God. Such leaders will look to nurture people's gifts, encourage them to find God's peculiar call on their lives, and seek to release them to minister where God calls them.
2.  The universal need for leadership
A thoughtful perusal of the Bible leaves one in no doubt that God identifies we humans (somewhat unflatteringly!) as 'sheep' in need of shepherding. This is obviously true in a broader social context than our spiritual need of the Great Shepherd or of church discipleship. In all spheres of life (political, economic, scientific, educational, cultural etc), creative and productive development invariably follows the vision and action of gifted leaders. Conversely, communities without visionary and strong leadership suffer disillusionment, dissipation, lack of progress, and, eventually, social disintegration.
It seems that God’s plan for the peaceful, free, and prosperous operation of human community has properly constituted human leadership as one of its key elements. 
3.  The servant nature of leadership
In his training of His leaders-to-be, Jesus distinguished between 'gentilic' (self-seeking) leadership  and leadership that is based on the principles of humility and service (e.g., Matthew 20:24–28). The essential difference between these two kinds of leadership is the attitude of the leaders to themselves and the people they lead.
Jesus indicates that only the servant kind of leadership will be of use in the building of His eternal kingdom, so there is an obvious application of His teaching to Church leaders, Christian parents, and other Christian leaders. 
Distinguishing between the attitudes of 'gentilic' and servant leadership, however, is just as relevant to leadership in any sphere of society, whether the leaders and those being led are Christian or not. A biblical Christian perspective of leadership will make any leader, Christian or otherwise, more capable of leading in a way that is appropriate for the development of a free, peaceful and productive community. 
The biblical Christian perspective of leadership is characterized by an attitude of service. Leaders see themselves as the servants of those that they lead. In contrast to self-seeking leaders, who may seek to further their own reputation, profit, egos, or programs by using those they lead as 'consumer items', servant leaders put self-interest aside to look to the needs of the people they lead and to enhance the mission of the organization that they serve. The mission-mindedness and passion of servant leaders is tempered by their refusal to abuse people in reaching their productivity goals. Servant leaders will inspire and empower people to find their place and function within an organization rather than bully or manipulate them. When correction needs to be brought by a servant leader, it will be done with the best interests of both the one being corrected and the mission of the organization concerned.
Whether in the Church, business, politics, or volunteer organizations, the biblical Christian 'formula' for leadership will be effective in producing orderly, peaceful, productive, and pleasant community. This is illustrated by the fact that much contemporary leadership theory, although it is not all ostensibly Christian, advocates the application of some of these principles to modern business and organizational culture. 

What a great topic and indeed worthy of in-depth research and/or study. The home work set by Ian has been invaluable, provoking and, to a certain extent, unsettling.

There are many questions circulating in my mind, some I have already came up with an answer but need confirmation, others require a guiding hand.

To begin with, the first NT reference to Church is found in Matthew 16:18, “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it”. Is the Church infallible? Surely Jesus’ statement, “the gates of Hades will not overcome it” points to this conclusion...infallibility of the Church. Will He not (as His bride) “maker her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless”? Ephesians 52:6-27

This thought stems from Ian’s post, “Thought six: the entire witness of Scripture is one of submission to authority. First to God through Christ; second to those in positions of authority (whether secular or religious); third each to one and another in Christ. A Christian simply does not have the luxury of choosing not to be in submission to hierarchy, as according to Paul, such remains part of the Created Order. Furthermore, the Christian Church has always been a "work-in-progress". There are no perfect churches, if there were, then three-quarters of Paul's letters wouldn't have had to be written! Acknowledging this, endure we must with what we have.”

I certainly have no desire to submit to an RF ‘pastor’ or ‘house leader’ unless I know that such congregation falls under the definition of a Church...one holy catholic apostolic. (Mark of the true church)

As you can imagine, just the ‘mark of the church’ leaves me to ponder the inevitable, “do all roads lead to Rome”. I am rather cautious in my path as I can envisage a direction to Rome growing stronger should infallibility reign supreme! (Not to mention the Apostolicity of the Church consisting in its identity with the body which Christ established on the foundation of the Apostles, and which He commissioned to carry out His work...no other body save this is the Church of Christ! Again to Matthew 16:18)

Bless you all

Akriboo

Yes, long-time, no-hear but covertly active in reading, researching and pondering. I just can’t thank you enough for your knowledge, wisdom and assistance since leaving Revival.  You are valued dearly in my heart!

“'One' implies a Church united (by the Spirit) under Christ.

Does not the implication rather rests in that the Church is One because its members;

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1.       <!--[endif]-->Are all united under one government

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2.       <!--[endif]-->All profess the same faith

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3.       <!--[endif]-->All join in a common worship?

After all, Christ Himself declared that the unity of his followers should bear witness to Him. The unity and brotherhood promised by Christ are to be the visible manifestation on earth of the Devine union (John 17:21). Paul reaffirms this in that he sees in the visible unity of the body of Christ an external sign of the oneness of the Spirit who dwells within it. There is, he says, “one body and one Spirit” (Ephesians 4:4)

I just wonder if the Church was divided into two or more mutually exclusive bodies, how she could witness to that oneness of Spirit in unity. As in a living organism the union of members in one body is the sign of the one animating principle within...so it is with the Church, so I speculate. Is it no so that should we as members of the Church being united by the profession of the same faith, speak of external profession as well as internal acceptance?

Despite what one wants to believe or say (“Protestant arm of the Western Church identifies with the 'marks' too”), can there be a unity of Spirit compatible with differences of Creed?

Bless you

Akriboo