A Glorious Church?

[votivesoul]

Ephesians 5:22-33 (ESV),

22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.[a] 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

a. Ephesians 5:27 Or holy and blameless

The marriage metaphor of Christ and His Church is profound, and of a deeper quality and essence than we normally care to contemplate. We who are married, either male or female, get some hands-on experience with the concept, and hopefully, we find through the help of the Holy Spirit a way to live out in our marriages the commandments within the Holy Scriptures that speak to us regarding what it means to be married, and how to allow the truth of God's Word to resonate, even resound, in our covenant promises to the spouse of our choosing.

But that's not what I want to focus on; I only open with it, because it's the only way to impart an understanding of Christ's marriage to His Church. So, if you are married, there is something here I think you will understand. If you are not married, you might think to look to your parents, or grandparents, or of someone else quite close to you, who is married, and whose marriage offers you a shining example of what true Christian nuptials ought to be.

That being said, let me move on to the point:

Marriage is work. It is sacrifice. It is challenge. It is hard. But it's also wonderful, beautiful, life affirming, full of grace and power. Marriage is many things. Add children to the marriage and all of these things, and things not even yet mentioned, become multiplied almost beyond expression.

But when two saints covenant themselves to each other and to the Lord Jesus of Nazareth, promising to stick it out, no matter what, to work through every problem, to suffer together through every hardship, to make it past every pain, and remain faithful the whole time, for every up, and for every down, the truth is, there are going to be times of clashing, times of anger, and hurt. Times of frustration. The honeymoon wears off!

But do you quit? Do you say, "Ah, not worth it anymore. See ya!" (I know some who post here are divorced, and I don't write any of this to shame them, or put them down for the dissolution of their marriage, I promise. I am just speaking to the principle of how things ought to be, not how they sometimes turn out).

The correct response is, "No, we don't quit. We don't give up on each other. We stick it out, even if we can't see eye to eye, even if we struggle to feel any sense of affection or yearning. In patience, we possess our souls, and we wait on the Lord to renew us like eagles, and we come back together, stronger, and more in love than before" -- if we follow the process of the Lord in reconciliation.

Reconciliation! What an awesome word. We never reconcile with anyone, unless somewhere, someone agrees to compromise, or at least, set aside their own views and biases, their own instinctives and convictions, just for a moment, to listen and try to understand the why and the what of what's really going on with our wife, or our husband, as the case may be. If we want to come back together and find the oneness promised to us, to have true marital unity, we have to do it, or we'll never reconcile.

Again, this isn't about marriage. This is a great mystery concerning Christ and His Church.

Paul writes that Christ gave Himself for the Church, and in so doing, He then fully expects to return for a Bride that is glorious, something worthy of Him, in His glory. A Church that doesn't even have the faintest sign of stain or blemish, or even of wrinkle. I can only imagine this is the vision and desire of every saint: to be united with the Anointed One, knowing in us He sees the glory He expects. He examines and sees individually and corporately that we have purged ourselves of every spot or blemish, or anything that might even resemble such a thing. Indeed, He sees His own holiness reflected back at Him.

The question is: How? How does the Church go about making sure it is without blemish, without stain, blameless and holy? I know there are a lot of opinions out there, and frankly, I'm not overly interested in gathering opinions on the matter, though I do welcome them, in a general way.

My question, rather, is more pointed than a simple "how?'. What I want to know is, in light of the recent posts about doctrine, about standards, all the back and forth that constantly rages, not just here, but everywhere, how can anyone dare hope to point out a spot or blemish on the church, or say, "I see a wrinkle here. We'd best get the iron out and go to work" when it's clear that people don't want anyone doing that, not even for a moment. They don't want anyone pointing at their flaws, their lack of chapter and verse, their misunderstanding or misappropriation of a passage, and etc.

On either side! Appealing to the status quo of current churchianity cannot be a path to the glory Christ expects to see in us, right? Remaining mum and not saying anything can't be the right and proper way to fix any glaring or not so glaring problem, can it, if we want to be that holy and blameless bride? Should we not welcome any and all scrutiny and see if what we are dead set on defending really isn't something that is going to propel the Body into that particular glory the Son of God wants us to have?

Do we just throw our hands up and walk away and divorce the brethren of the Messiah and give up, that is, QUIT on each other? Husbands and wives aren't supposed to do that, are they? And that's the mystery. The Body is, collectively, in all parts of the world, that special treasure called the Bride of the Lamb, and since we are all, collectively in one place, we have to find it within ourselves to get in one accord, too. We are that wife, if you will, and Jesus is that husband, we with Him, but also with each other, we have to reconcile and make this marriage work.

As for me, there is no placating or backing down in the sense of just letting something go for the sake of someone else, when that something is a blemish on the church. IT NEEDS TO GO, or Ephesians 5:25-27 is never going to happen.

So, the question I am posing here, at the end, is, what kind of church do you want to be? Glorious? Without blemish? Without wrinkle, or any related thing? Or do you just want to hold tight and hope it'll be all right?

For me, I say, challenge me. Inspect, push, prod, test, examine, and stand up to me and see what I'm made of. Question everything. Demand evidence. Be even more noble than the Bereans. Show me all of my faults, my blemishes, my spots, and wrinkles, and help me be/become holy and blameless, just as glorious as the Savior wants me to be, as part of that glorious church.

But then, here's the catch: allow me to do the same with you. Because if you want to be just as glorious as I want to be, we need each other to make it happen. So tell me:

"How are we going to make this work?"

[Amanah]

I have a question for you Votive, if you don't agree with Church leadership, do you confront them, rebel against them, or agree to disagree and then move on?

[Michael The Disciple]

Amen Brother, All ministry is for the purpose of presenting every man perfect in Christ. Col. 1:28

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Amanah

I have a question for you Votive, if you don't agree with Church leadership, do you confront them, rebel against them, or agree to disagree and then move on?

The last congregation I was a part of, had what I believed were several particular issues stemming from leadership that needed to be addressed. I myself was in leadership at the time. I was an elder and overseer, prophet and teacher and evangelist. I wore many hats, not always at once, however.

When these particular issues manifested, I became frustrated and uncertain as to how to deal with them. I prayed and asked the Lord for guidance, and His response to me was: pray for him (that is, the pastor).

So I did, regularly, for a year. Nothing seemed to be changing. In fact, things began to get worse. The same sense of frustration and uncertainty came about, and again I sought the Lord, and He said to me: Give him the kind of grace you want me to give to you, when you are in the wrong, or make a mistake.

That sustained me for another year. So, I kept quiet, and uttered not a word to anyone but Jesus and my wife.

Into the third year of these issues, with even more coming about, the same frustrations and uncertainty also present, I still held my tongue and privately interceded and waited on the Lord.

There is a very long, long story at this point, but suffice it to say, I reached out to the pastor and asked for a sit down. I also asked for the assistant pastor to be there, for a witness. I started to address one of the issues I believed needed to be dealt with and we had a nice long conversation. It was very fruitful and encouraging. We didn't get to any of the other issues on my mind, but that was okay.

At this meeting, I asked permission if I could meet with the entire leadership team, and make a presentation to them of what I saw in the Holy Scriptures regarding Church leadership and operation. It was granted, and we had the meeting. It was cordial, but sometimes tense, and there was a lot of back and forth dialogue, but over all, not a bad meeting at all, I would say.

But by the end of it, it was fully realized it was time for me and my family to depart. We all agreed, the Holy Spirit bore witness, the pastor was in full support and things were in motion to make that happen. There was, by the time the meeting ended, no hard feelings, no lingering grudges, nothing like that at all. It was actually one of the most blessed meetings and times of fellowship I've ever had, once the Lord made plain to us all that we'd be leaving.

Then the other shoe dropped, and I was ex-communicated, blacklisted, stoned to death and had the entire church turned against me like I was some evil false brother. This is also a very long story.

So, we left. I didn't fight, didn't rail, didn't give back what I was getting. We just left and soon after, found another assembly of which we are currently members.

Eventually I reached out to the pastor of our former congregation and wanted to make sure that there were no walls between us, that we weren't in a state of un-reconciliation or unforgiveness about what occurred, etc. He assured me there was not. I assured him of the same. I asked him some questions in an email, to confirm with him that there really wasn't any root of bitterness between us, questions about rumors and other things I was told he had said about me (I was out of the will of God, I was backslidden, I needed to repent, I was going to end up demonized, and etc.).

He refused to address any of those things, not even to dismiss them as if to say, "No, Aaron. I never said those things". He said it was a waste of his time.

So I said "Okay. I just wanted to give you an opportunity to put the matter to rest, since rumor and gossip is so insidious and hurtful".

Haven't talked to him since. And there's a lot more I could write at this point, but, it superfluous.

But I would like to take the time to more specifically address something in your question. You asked me that if I didn't agree with church leadership about something, would I rebel? I know that wasn't the fullness of your question, but it's the part I want to address here at the end of this post.

I respect you and am exhorted by the Lord through the Holy Spirit to entreat you like a mother, for you are an elect, elder lady of the Church. I don't desire to have any disagreements or arguments with you, in any way. But I think the use of the word or phrase "rebel against them" is misplaced, and has become, or rather, grown into something that people don't see. It has become a very divisive, caustic word, a word used for accusation, and not for edification. It condemns, not helps.

When I was in leadership at the former assembly, as I wrote above, I wore many hats. I was an appointed elder. I was a church-wide recognized minister of the church. An overseer. The seal of the Holy Spirit was upon me as a prophet and teacher and evangelist. It was recognized by the church. I never "rebelled" against anyone or anything, even when I disagreed. For the sake of unity.

And though I was all those things, I never held a title, never introduced myself with one, never needed one, never expected one, never wanted one. If anyone ever called me by one, I asked them to just call me "Aaron". Not a single person that I won to the Lord, or prayed through to the Holy Spirit or baptized, anyone that I ever personally shepherded or discipled, anyone who was ever assisting me in any ministry I ever oversaw, not once did I demand obedience. It was never an issue. It didn't matter to me what I was, what my place way, or how people saw or acknowledged me. I was then and am now, still the same unprofitable slave I have always been since the day the Lord saved me.

Never once did it ever occur to me to think that someone might be rebelling against me, no matter what the circumstances. It wasn't even on my radar. Why?

Because I never made it an issue. I didn't draw lines in the sand with people and dared them to cross them. I never challenged people's loyalty, never made threats, never chewed people out or made them feel like I was their authority, even if I was.

And because of these things, a funny thing happened: No one ever disobeyed me. I didn't get grief from anyone. No one got in my face, challenged my authority, huffed and puffed at me, or anything. Everyone with whom I had to deal with, work with, lead, shepherd, disciple, etc., they all welcomed and appreciated my service to them and the Kingdom.

So, what's my point?

How about we stop making this an issue? Stop making it be about some line in the sand we think we get to draw on people, so as to divide and injure, that the Head of the Church Himself has not drawn?

Jesus told the Apostles that if they wanted to be great, they needed to be least. If they wanted to be exalted, they needed to debase themselves. Though they might be elders, they needed to live out their lives as though they were the younger.

The current model of church leadership, generally speaking, does not model this. Instead, it's a constant assertion of authority, of power over, of mandates of submission and demands for obedience.

That's not what Jesus wanted, is it? IS IT? The man given the keys to the Kingdom wrote that we all must be in subjection to each other. Is that happening in the current model? How does some "God ordained authority over you" ever end up in subjection to the ones he is "over"? Does he get told what to do? Why not?

To be "one in the Spirit" as Paul wrote means to be of equal standing and worth in the Body. Every saint has a voice, a calling, a ministry, a priesthood, and place in the Body to fully grow into and become all that the Head of the Body desires of them.

Is that happening in the current model? A church is given the right to have every member prophesy one by one, so that the lost who are present can be convicted and recognize the power of God active in the assembly. Ever see that happen in the current model?

See what I'm getting at here? The current leadership model, by and large, does not allow for these expressions of the person of Christ in His own Body. Any why? Because someone is allegedly rebelling against their "God-ordained authority"?

No, because this supposed "God-ordained authority" is rebelling against the Word of God, even against the Word Himself.

And that's really my issue here, with the question as it was asked. If anyone wants to nail me to the tree for what I believe, here are my wrists and ankles. It's okay. Go for it. But just remember, the sword swings both ways. The accusation of rebellion must be freely made in both directions, if it's going to be tossed around at all.

So, let me ask a similar, related question, to anyone who would like to answer:

If "God-ordained authority" is in rebellion to the Word, both the Scriptures and the Man, should you just ignore it and let it go, staying where you are, no matter how much it bothers you, take you and your family elsewhere and hope things change, never knowing if they will, or do you get in that authority's way and speak up and try and help them repent of their rebellion, and get right with Christ Jesus, so THEY DON'T LOSE THEIR SOUL?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Amen Brother, All ministry is for the purpose of presenting every man perfect in Christ. Col. 1:28

All of us working together toward that perfection, in my estimation, requires that yes, we even nit-pick at times, and not just let things slide. And the only way that's going to work is through anointed persuasion by use of the Holy Scriptures.

Honest, humble people who love Jesus will obey immediately anything they see in the Word, no matter how small, and be glad they were shown.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

All of us working together toward that perfection, in my estimation, requires that yes, we even nit-pick at times, and not just let things slide. And the only way that's going to work is through anointed persuasion by use of the Holy Scriptures.

Honest, humble people who love Jesus will obey immediately anything they see in the Word, no matter how small, and be glad they were shown.

Amen

[Amanah]

Aaron,

I don't know what to say. You are saying that the current church model in general is in rebellion to the word of God. The current model may not be perfected, but I don't see it as in rebellion. I see people getting the HG and lives being changed.

I think the home church movement such as you, Bro Benincasa, and Bro Esaias present it seems to be more in line with the Book of Acts, I concede this.

But, I also think that there is danger in being out there on your own without a council of Elders or God ordained leadership. Not everyone is able to leave and start a fellowship.

Also, there are some issues that are worth contending for, and some that are trivial and would not be worth causing division over.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Aaron,

I don't know what to say. You are saying that the current church model in general is in rebellion to the word of God. The current model may not be perfected, but I don't see it as in rebellion. I see people getting the HG and lives being changed.

I think the home church movement such as you, Bro Benincasa, and Bro Esaias present it seems to be more in line with the Book of Acts, I concede this.

But, I also think that there is danger in being out there on your own without a council of Elders or God ordained leadership. Not everyone is able to leave and start a fellowship.

Also, there are some issues that are worth contending for, and some that are trivial and would not be worth causing division over.

Hi, Sis. It's okay if you're not sure what to say. I'm just glad you are responding and engaging the issue. Clearly you care enough to get involved, and that means a lot to me.

As far as "The current model may not be perfected, but I don't see it as in rebellion. I see people getting the HG and lives being changed."

I have been a part of a lot of people receiving the Holy Spirit. Many times, despite all the nonsense and shenanigans going on around or behind the scenes. I think we have to be very careful on where we place the credit. I don't mean the praise of God who deserves the glory. I mean suggesting that an imperfect, but not rebellious leadership model still allows for people to receive the Holy Spirit and have their lives changed, so it must be okay with God.

I'm not saying that that's what you are saying exactly, but it seems close. So I simply urge caution. It is the Father's good pleasure to give people His Kingdom. He doesn't desire that any should perish. He wants everyone to come to the knowledge of the truth. People receiving the Holy Spirit and having their lives changed by God may be due to nothing more than God sovereignly shedding abroad His Spirit out of love and grace and a commitment to the promises of His Word.

In fact, I might argue that's the only reason. And when people's lives are changed, and they become more like Christ and less like the world, and God's Word is perfected in them, and they become harmless and blameless, true Sons of God, again, that might be despite some things, even within leadership or it's model of operation, and not on account of leadership and it's model of operation.

Do I think the generally accepted visible model of church structure, organization, leadership, and polity is not measuring up to the standard set before us in the Holy Scripture? 100% YES.

Of course there are reasons for that, and why I think so, and how I came to that view, that maybe are beyond the scope of this thread, or even a message board/forum. It's a really long conversation!

Suffice it to say, Rome's shadow still looms large, larger than we realize or want to admit, and it's very, VERY hard to see that unless you've stepped clear of it and can see it for what it is. Personally, I will engage anyone who wants to hear what I have to say, and it's on me to correctly articulate and make known the truth as I see it, with as much evidence as I can give, to show this wasn't done in a corner, so to speak.

But for others who don't care to engage, or who maybe don't know how I see things, who are operating within the current leadership model, I do not see myself as some Moses "Let my people go!" figure that has to rescue the church. I've said it here before, but I am stalwart when it comes to my "no strings attached Christianity" view of things. I believe everyone must be fully persuaded, each in their own minds, because it is to their Master Jesus that they rise or fall, and I never expect or desire than anyone simply embrace my view of things for the embracing. Each must personally come to it on their own.

So, instead, I see myself simply as a book, or a website. You can pick me up, or open your browser, read and/or take a look, put me down, close your browser, and do what you like with what you've read and seen.

Count the cost! In any way in which a person desires to draw closer to the Lord and become more like Him, I warn you, you are going to experience the fellowship of His sufferings, and that's going to include being misunderstood, falsely labeled, caricatured, harried and persecuted, and worst of all, betrayed by friends with a kiss, as it were. And all of this is going to come from, not the "Romans" of the world, but from your people, just as it came from His people. It's not going to be the magistrates and publicans who give you a hard time, it's going to be the religious leaders of your world, just as it was for Him.

I know that's rather cynical. But it's true. It really is. You can't become like Jesus unless these fiery trials that He Himself faced, come your way, too. And not everyone is ready for it, and they shouldn't be playing with fire when they aren't properly prepared and trained.

As far as being "out there" without a council of elders or leadership, generally speaking, what you say is true. But there are some exceptions in the Holy Scriptures, that makes it hard to fully concede the point.

Just a few come to mind:

Joseph. 'Nuff said.

Elijah. Also 'nuff said.

Naaman the leper goes back to Syria and begs the prophet who healed him to pray and ask the LORD to forgive him when his master causes him to bow down in the house of his idol.

Paul in Arabia for three lonesome years

Ethiopian Eunuch

You could also point toward several of the assembly Paul and Barnabas established. After just a few days or weeks, Paul and Barnabas left their novice converts to their own devices. Then, they might revisit after a couple of months, eventually write them a letter, or send Timothy or Titus, for example, who would stay for awhile before also moving on.

Many of these assemblies were then therefore, thrown into the deep end of the pool, without constant, consistent, ever present eldership or leadership. Their leaders arose from within. I mean, where did the Bishops and Deacons in Philippi come from?

Now, it's true, many today cannot withstand being separated for any amount of time from the Body, for any reason. Some, even years into their walk, can barely make it through the week, hence the mid-week service is now a staple.

I think it's in Jeremiah, but there's a verse about if you can't run with the foot-men, how are you ever going to run with the horses. And horses learn to not only walk, but run within hours of being born. What if we had a model of convert development that could bring novices to a place of strength and faithfulness in a short time, so that if ever they were separated from the Body for any length of time, for any reason, good, bad, or indifferent, they would be able to hold it together, keep loving Jesus, and be found true by any and all who they come to meet later on down the road?

Can such a thing exist? It seemed to in Paul's day, so why not dig into the Word and find out exactly what he did and how he did it and give it a try?

As far as what to contend for and what to leave alone or consider trivial, that too, is a hard one. For me, it's all about timing. Meat in due season. If a discussion about a topic turns toward contention, I urge caution and slowness. You can't push people beyond where they are capable of going. And Jesus is the only One who knows where and when that time will come. Here at AFF, I think we're all pretty well seasoned vets of the Kingdom and can talk and contend without it causing a stumbling-block crisis for one another.

Nonetheless, let me pose a question:

Suppose you are praying, and the gentle breeze of the Holy Spirit stirs your soul, and the Loving Savior speaks to you in whatever way He speaks to you, and instructs you to make a change, even a tiny one, let's say. Ever happen to you? It has for me. Lots of times.

Do you obey that? Of course. Might it be seen as trivial? Yeah, you could make that argument. Should you then contend with the Lord to disunity with Him over it? No, just obey it, right?

Well, you are an individual expression of the larger entity known as the Body of Christ. And if the Lord Jesus is using someone to speak to instruct the Body to make a change, if it's a tiny one, let's say, what do we do then?

Obey Jesus, or put concern for the unity of the Body above the Head of the Body? Because anyone whose ever been put into a position to correct knows how well it can NOT go over with some. Well, didn't the Lord know that when He spoke? Is He not then putting members of His Body on trial to see what they're made of? Is He not perchance dealing with an unfruitful bow, and He's giving them a chance to get with it or get pruned?

See, we would think it's causing disunity and it's divisive. And maybe it is. But let's make sure of that first. I've seen the Lord prune churches before. I've also seen the Lord remove people from churches because of the soil of the church somehow became toxic and the only way He was going to save the branches who remained faithful was to remove them and plant them somewhere else. Other times, He seems to keep them right where they are and expects them to weather the storm He has whipped up for the faithless.

No easy answers. I know. But I will say one more thing about so-called trivial matters. Sometimes what is trivial to one is a major to another. Sometimes those trivial matters are merely a screen for much deeper issues that the person addressing them has, but doesn't realize subconsciously they are going after the trivial things which are merely tangentially related to the major issues lying underneath, because the issues lying underneath are very hurtful or hard to deal with.

A broken reed He will not break, right? What about us? Do we break broken reeds when we dismiss things we think are trivial and demand that whoever is bringing them up needs to stuff it and leave it alone, for the sake of unity?

In other cases, not paying enough attention to small things is what leads to eventual catastrophes down the road, and it's the prophetic work of God to have a saint say something about the small issue because the Lord is trying to prevent a major issue from developing.

So, definitely, caution is advised. Always.

Peace and God bless, Sister.

Aaron

[Amanah]

thank you Brother Aaron, very thought provoking.

One problem I can see with the hierarchical organizational model, is that you are constantly supporting a structure that is also a business, which results in the church leadership being kept in a family because the family owns the building. And if that family goes astray, you are out of luck and your investment is a loss.

[Esaias]

Brother Votive, this a good thread. Unfortunately, I have no answer except we all gotta do what God tells us to do. The church's destiny is in His hands, I just want to be part of it.