According to God's Word, how does a biblical congregation function? What does a biblical congregation look like? I have previously used Scripture to reveal and explain this, but now I shall use the "experts" and "scholars" to prove it, to demonstrate that it is not my own personal interpretation. This is what God's Word teaches, and anyone who professes to be spiritual will recognize the truth therein. Those who reject this truth are stubborn and rebellious, desiring to hold to the traditions of men rather than to the Word of God, because the truth is not in them!
The New Testament Congregation met in the homes of those in the Congregation:
"The earliest Christians had no special buildings, but met in private houses, as mentioned in several places in the New Testament." Dr. Colin J. Hemer, A Lion Handbook: The History of Christianity, p.58.
New Testament Congregations were completely open, spontaneous, and participatory; with no one leading from the front:
"Worship in the house-church had been of an intimate kind in which all present had taken an active part... [this] changed from being 'a corporate action of the whole church' into 'a service said by the clergy to which the laity listened.'" Dr. Henry R. Sefton, A Lion Handbook: The History of Christianity, p.151.
"In the earliest days... their worship was spontaneous. This seems to have been regarded as the ideal, for when Paul describes how a church meeting should proceed he depicts a Spirit-led participation by many, if not all... There was the fact that anyone had the freedom to participate in such worship. In the ideal situation, when everyone was inspired by the Holy Spirit, this was the perfect expression of Christian freedom." Dr. John Drane, Introducing the New Testament, p.402.
"The very essence of church organization and Christian life and worship... was simplicity... Their worship was free and spontaneous under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and had not yet become inflexible through the use of manuals of devotion." A. M. Renwick, The Story of the Church, pp.22-23.
When New Testament Congregations met, they partook of the Lord's Supper as a full meal:
"In the early day the Lord's Supper took place in the course of a communal meal. All brought what food they could and it was shared together." Donald Guthrie, The Lion Handbook of the Bible, p.594.
"Jesus instituted this common meal at Passover time, at the last supper shared with His disciples before His death... the Lord's Supper looks back to the death of Jesus, and it looks forward to the time when He will come back again. Throughout the New Testament period the Lord's Supper was an actual meal shared in the homes of Christians. It was only much later that the Lord's Supper was moved to a special building and Christian prayers and praises that had developed from the synagogue services and other sources were added to create a grand ceremony." Dr. John Drane, The New Lion Encyclopaedia, p.173.
""[1 Corinthians 11]... reveals that at Corinth the Holy Communion was not simply a token meal as with us, but an actual meal. Moreover it seems clear that it was a meal to which each of the participants brought food." Canon Leon Morris, Commentary on 1 Corinthians for the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, p.158.
"[The Lord's Supper]... was observed by His disciples, at first as part of a communal meal, Sunday by Sunday." I. Howard Marshall, Christian Beliefs, p.80.
Each New Testament Congregation practiced non-hierarchical, plural male leadership that had arisen from among the people in the Congregation. These men were known as watchmen (overseers) and elders. This was a function, not a title or office. Decision making was on the basis of the consensus of everyone in the Congregation:
"It was Paul's practice to appoint several elders (the same thing as bishops) to take charge of each church." Donald Guthrie, The Lion Handbook of the Bible, p.620.
"The churches were living organisms rather than organizations... When decisions were made, they were made by the whole company of believers, not simply the officials." Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology, p.741.
"When we come to consider the permanent officers of the Church we find that in the days of the Apostles elders and deacons were appointed and their duties defined. The office of elder is variously described in the New Testament as bishop, pastor, teacher, preacher, minister and steward. The various terms mentioned referred to the same officer, but each presented a different aspect of their work. Thus 'pastor' indicated their duty to 'shepherd the flock' of Christ. Bishop, a word used to translate the Greek 'episkopos,' indicated that was 'overseers' they had to 'feed the Church of God' (Acts 20). That the 'presbuteros' and 'episkopos' (elder and bishop) were the same is shown by many facts... Furthermore, the qualifications for bishop and elder were the same. Scarcely any scholar today would dispute the words of the late Dr. J. B. Lightfoot, Bishop of Durham, and an undoubted authority: 'It is a fact now generally recognized by theologians of all shades of opinion, that in the language of the New Testament the same Officer in the Church is called indifferently bishop, and elder or presbyter.'"" A. M. Renwick, The Story of the Church, pp.20-21.
"Instead of the community of the Spirit that it had originally been, the Church came to be seen as a vast organization. Instead of relying on the Spirit's direct guidance it was controlled by an hierarchy of ordained men, following strict rules and regulations which covered every conceivable aspect of belief and behaviour and when the Spirit featured in this scheme it was taken for granted that what the leaders decided was what the Spirit was saying. By the middle of the 2nd Century the change was complete. At the beginning the only qualification for membership of the Church had been a life changed by the Holy Spirit. Indeed, at the start there had been no concept of church 'membership' at all... But by the end of the 1st Century things were rather different. Now the key to membership of the Church was not found in inspiration by the Spirit, but in acceptance of ecclesiastical dogma and discipline. And to make sure that all new members had a good grasp of what that meant, baptism itself was no longer the spontaneous expression of faith in Jesus as it had originally been. Now it was the culmination of a more or less extended period of formal instruction and teaching about the Christian faith. And in all this we can see how the life of the Spirit was gradually squeezed out of the Body of Christ, to be replaced as the church's driving force by the more predictable if less exciting movement of organized ecclesiastical machinery." Dr. John Drane, Introducing the New Testament, p.397.
"It is important to realize that the movement towards a more authoritarian church hierarchy originated in the fight against unacceptable beliefs. At a time when Gnostics were claiming a special authority because of their alleged endowment with the Spirit it was important for the mainstream church to have it's own clear source of power. It was of little practical use for the church's leaders to claim -- even if it may have been true -- that they, rather than their opponents, were truly inspired by the Spirit. They needed something more than that, and they found it in the apostles. In the earliest period, supreme authority had rested with them. So, they reasoned, anyone with recognized authority in the church must be succeeding to the position held by the apostles. They were the Apostle's successors, and could trace their office back in a clear line of descent from the very earliest times. They stood in an apostolic succession." Ibid, 403.
The dominating factor of the early Congregation was the guidance of the Holy Spirit, something vastly missing from today's denominations that have effectively strangled the Headship of Christ and rendered Him silent as the Congregation's Head.
Shepherds are sheep, too. Were any of the epistles written to Congregational leaders? No, they were not! They were written to a specific congregation (as in the letters to the Corinthians), or set of congregations (as in the letter to Galatia). Could you imagine how indignant church leaders today would get if someone like the apostles wrote a letter to the entire Congregation, rather than simply to its leaders, concerning their upcoming visit? If the Congregation was expected to submit to its elders, the way many church governments conduct themselves today, surely the place to mention it would have been in Ephesians 5-6 and Colossians 3-4 where Paul tells wives to submit to their husbands, children to submit to their parents, and slaves to submit to their masters; or in 1 Peter 2-3 where Peter tells believers to submit to government, and wives to submit to their husbands.
Elders are a subset of the Congregation as a whole. There was no clergy/laity split! Nor should there be! This is an unbiblical practice. The epistles went to great lengths to influence all believers, not just the leaders. The apostles also did not bark orders in their epistles. They treated all believers as equals and appealed to them as such. Do the various denominational congregations today behave this way? Not in the least! Their leaders lord it over the assembly and demand they do nothing without the authority or approval of the leaders. An elder's primary responsibility is to influence with the truth.
The only consideration given to elders in the epistles is Hebrews 13:7. But what does it say? "Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith." Many authoritarian church leaders run to Hebrews 13:17 and say, "See! You're to obey me/us!" Really? Are your skills as an elder that inept? The typical word for blind obedience is hupakouo. The word used here is peitho. It means "to persuade or convince." The typical word for submission is hupotasso. The word used here is hupeiko. It means "to yield or give way." So the passage is saying, "Be persuaded by your leaders and yield to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give account." It suggests that dialogue will take place; not a monologue. Teaching will be given and arguments will be made. Someone who is persuaded by something will act on it. It has nothing to do with authoritarian dictatorship or hierarchy!
God's flock must be open to persuasion by its shepherds, and shepherds must be committed to ongoing discussion and teaching. Congregations are made up of both mature and immature Christians; of those who walk in the Spirit and of those who do not; of those with the gift of discernment and those without it. After much persuasion and prayer, dissenters are called on to yield to the wisdom of the shepherds. This should only come about after dialogue, discussion, and reasoning. Elders must be committed to building Spirit-filled congregational consensus. The Congregation is not an authoritarian hierarchy. Eldership is not for men of ego who hunger after control over others. Jesus condemned this behaviour.
The Words of Jesus:
Jesus contrasted the authority of political leaders with congregational leaders: "The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called 'Benefactors.' But it is not this way with you, but the one who is the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like the servant." Luke 22:25-26
How much authority does the youngest person in a family have? How much authority does a servant have? In harmony with Jesus, Peter later instructed elders to "shepherd the flock...[not] as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock." If you want God's blessing on you as a congregational elder, then do what Jesus modeled and wield your authority with a servant's heart.Jesus condemned the use of titles and positions: "They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. But do not be called Rabbi [or Pastor, or Reverend]; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. But the greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted." Matthew 23:6-12
How arrogant is it to affix the term 'Reverend' to your name and demand that others call you by such? Reverence belongs to Almighty God alone! By giving titles to yourselves and to others, you elevate them above everyone else, making them greater than all. There is no humility in that.
People today spout on about the "separation of Church and State," but the Greek word ekklesia outside of the New Testament was originally a government word, which meant a political assembly that was regularly convened for the purpose of making decisions. It was for full citizens only! You can see two secular uses of the word in Acts 19:32, 39, 41. The New Testament use of the word has the same weight. It is a gathering, an assembly, a congregation of those called out from the world and to God. There is a decision-making mandate involved. It is for members only, for citizens of Heaven only!
In Matthew 16:13-20, Jesus promised to build his ekklesia on the rock of Peter's confession. The "keys" spoken of represent the ability to open and to close something; "kingdom" is a political term; and "binding" and "loosing" involve authority to make decisions. In Acts 1:15-26, the Jerusalem congregation as a whole was charged with finding a replacement for Judas. In Acts 6:1-6, the apostles looked to the congregation as a whole to pick men to administer the congregation's food program. In Acts 14:23, the apostles appointed elders with the consensus of the local congregation. In Acts, 15, the apostles not only included the local Jerusalem elders, but also the entire congregation! Decision making was never relegated to a select few officials over the rest of the Body! This has been the practice of modern denominations and their authoritarian dictators with egos to fill.