13 meanings of the word "church"

As I have said before, I have noted that I personally feel that the most important things I've written on this blog were what I wrote first, but what has been seen most is what I've posted lately.  Therefore, today, I repost something I originally posted a while ago.
Also, I would be willing to present this topic to your group in person in the southeast Virginia area (as a discussion, where persons can ask questions) or some other creative way if one is further.  I can be reached at 757-735-3639.
----------
      
     Almost everything that I have in this post is something I have included in a previous blog.  Nonetheless, I thought it good to put this information in the form of a speech.  Being in an organic church, speeches aren’t a whole lot of use, as people learn more from the more interactive approach of an open Bible study, but there are places for speeches, particularly as introductions to various concepts.  Therefore,

13 definitions of the word “church”:  as a speech.

            When I first wrote on this subject a couple of years ago as an entry on my blog, tevyebird.blogspot.com, it was entitled “8 definitions of the word “church”, but over time, I’ve found definition 9, then 10, 11, 12, and then 13.  If after hearing this, you notice another that I have missed, please, let me know.  It is very easy in the western form of Christian society for the impression to be made that the person speaking “knows everything,” even if such person overtly says that we are all together on this journey of growing in following Jesus, in part because the person speaking as recently studied through the subject to put together the speech, and, usually, the audience is unaware of what will be presented to them, and, even if they were aware, are not given an opportunity to interject additional information or ask questions or challenge statements made by the speaker, notably unlike how Jesus presented what He said to the world.  As you will see, though, what I am about to say, in a way, is saying something subversive to that cultural attitude.  I hope I do this in a manner that does honor to the Holy Spirit desiring to direct us to follow Jesus as He would wish.

            I should tell you a little about myself.  I grew up in the Midwest United States to parents who, if you asked, would have said that they were Christians, but never went to church except for social reasons—weddings, funerals, me being in the  Christmas play.  At about 8, they started dropping me off for Sunday School at a nearby church.  Between my freshman and sophomore years in high school, I came to faith in Jesus, as the Holy Spirit spoke into my spirit about the things I was seeing in the world.  After high school, I went to a state supported college, and was involved in an Inter-Varsity group, which subtly established in me a respect for what scripture said over and above what was the status quo attitude within whatever group of believers I was around.  I have, over the years, been involved, first, with churches in a Calvinistic denomination, later undenominational charismatic churches, and over the past few years, simple, organic churches.  I am sure what I am about to say reflects something out of all these parts of my walk in desiring to follow Jesus, but my desire is that what I say touches your spirit in bringing out some points of God’s Word that just may be underemphasized in our culture.  Some of what I will say might just be more obvious if we were in a culture that was more overtly oppressive to us believers, which, at least as I see it, is somewhat more the historical norm.

            As I said when I started, I have noticed 13 different definitions of the word “church” and its rough equivalent in the Koine Greek of the New Testament, ekklesia, with consideration for the cultures and languages it has passed through from then to now.  Of these 13, I would divide these definitions into two groups—1) definitions which are rightly definitions of the word that Jesus, when He said it to whomever He was speaking to, meant, and the apostles, as they wrote and spoke it to the early church, and 2) definitions that cultures, both within and outside the true church have, intentionally or not morphed, distorted, and changed the word to mean.  These are definitions that Jesus, the apostles Jesus sent out into the world, and the early church would not have recognized or had any thought of as being the meaning of that word.  Such definitions, read into scripture, distort the Word of God into something other than God’s Word without our realizing it.  Some of this has been done by well meaning brothers and sisters, but, that is no excuse for our living in that once the Spirit points it out to us.

            First, I will start with the second group, those definitions that, at least some, persons in our culture, both believers and non-, would recognize as a meaning of the word “church” that were not and could not be something Jesus and our early brothers and sisters in Him would have thought of as being what that word meant.  In all cases, these are definitions that did not begin to evolve into the word until early in the fourth century. These are changes whose beginnings are co-coordinated with politicians in the Roman Empire legalizing Christianity in the early 4^th Century, with an eye to controlling it, possibly unintentionally, and then again, possibly intentionally for their own purposes.

            The first definition is the Roman Catholic Church.  I’m not trying to say anything overtly anti-Catholic, or pick on this tradition.  Others have done those things, sometimes malevolently.  It is just that, in this culture, approximately one-quarter of the people were born to families that consider themselves Catholic, and within that background, with some, just the word “church”, usually capitalized when in print, implies everything connected to that organization and tradition, whether said in a positive, negative or neutral manner.

            To vary only slightly, the second meaning I will mention is “denomination” of which one might argue that the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, in eastern Europe and Middle East, and Thoma, in India, are the originals, somehow forming by the sixth centuries, with many others coming later.  In modern business terminology, denomination is to a local church of that denomination as a business franchisor is to a franchise, a concept that the early church couldn’t have dreamed of being a meaning of the word.

            The third meaning is a certain building, or certain type of building.  As the early church was considered in the Roman Empire to be an illegal organization, once the Empire decided that it wasn’t part of Judaism, they couldn’t have had buildings if they wished to, because, to be legal, a belief had to be ancient.  As much as we know how Jesus existed back to eternity past, the Roman government saw it as beginning with Jesus on earth, and they had their own paperwork about his death on the cross.  From what the books of the Bible that describe the New Covenant era, Acts through the early part of Revelation, we see one meeting at the side of a synagogue, and other meetings in homes.  With that part of the church today that lives in areas in which it is illegal, we know that they meet in homes, in the woods, or wherever.  Jesus taught the church to be people, his followers, who met together.

            The fourth modern meaning of church is a local organization, which in a denomination, as referred above, is the equivalent of a franchise, or if not connected to a denomination, looking otherwise similar.  Usually that includes an owned or rented building, a name, such as XYZ Church, its formation as a not-for-profit corporation, in many countries tax-favored status for giving to it, and oftentimes a payroll and corporate officers.  For the same reasons I said earlier, none of that were things the early church associated with the New Testament word ekklesia.  These were things associated with most other beliefs the Roman Empire was familiar with, and helped give those to the Christian faith upon their legalization of Christianity.

            The fifth meaning is one aspect I just mentioned, the special tax-favored corporation.  This came from the Roman Empire.  In the days of the early church, the Empire had already given special tax status to the temples of Roman paganism, and special tax favored status to the pagan priests.  When the Empire legalized the Christian faith, they gave that same favored status to the church.  As the church didn’t have buildings, they got them, and to the degree that they didn’t have occupational leaders like the other beliefs that Rome saw, they got them, originally in the form of persons to be in charge of the buildings.  History shows that, when the Roman Empire created those jobs, many orators conveniently “converted” to accept a regular speaking position that went with the church coming to look like other beliefs.

            The sixth meaning is unique to the U.S., in that church can refer to the persons who set policies for a church corporation, insofar as the IRS will take certain of the benefits away from urorganizations that make certain policies, such as overtly recommending political candidates publicly within official meetings or performing certain types of protest activity, particularly referring to the activities of Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, KS, the church that goes around protesting at funerals of deceased soldiers and homosexuals.  Since this is so current, it is obviously not a meaning of church like the early believers would recognize, or even believers today in many parts of the world.  One can recognize that, in everything I said above, there is not even a vague connection to any part of scripture.

            That covered, here are seven meanings of “church” that the early church would recognize.  I can make this statement because of the context in which they are referred to in scripture.  Number seven is all believers in history.  In the book of Hebrews, chapter 12 verses 1 and 2, the writer of this book wrote, “Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.”  While this passage does not use the word typically translated church in it, it describes all believers who have passed on before us as being a part of us, and relating to running the race of faith, a thing only us, the saved, do.

            Number eight is all believers in a city or area.  The first place we see this is in Romans chapter 1 verse 2, where Paul wrote, “To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints, grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”  Paul makes an equivalent greeting to the church in Corinth in 1 Corinthians 1 verse 2 and 2 Corinthians 1 verse 1, and other books directed towards all the believers in a city.  In Galatians 1 verse 1 through 3, Paul wrote “Paul an apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead), and all the brethren who are with me, to the churches in Galatia:  Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.”  In this case, Galatia is an area in what is now northern Turkey.  It is a point of note that Paul addressed his letters to all the believers, and not a specific leader, and that in his greeting to the church in Galatia, he specifically referred to himself as an apostle, and clarified that that came from God and not any man or group of men.  Corollary to that is that, if one is gifted to a ministry, you are gifted even if no man recognizes it, and you aren’t gifted even if some person or organization gives you a title referring to such a spiritual leadership gift.  Acts chapter 5 verse 12 is the one verse, mentioned earlier, in which we see the New Covenant church meeting at a religious building, Solomon’s Porch, an addendum to a synagogue, but the notable feature was miracles occurring in connection to the presence of the apostles, with a subsequent increase in believers and unbelievers respecting them, but not daring to join them, except upon belief.

           Definition number nine is, simply, a group of believers, as we see described in Acts chapter 2 verses 40 to 47, which says, “And with many other words he (Peter) exhorted them, saying, ‘Be saved from this perverse generation.’ Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.  Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.  Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.  So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people.  And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.”  This group of verses is one many traditional churches of our day are sometimes hesitant about quoting due to the statement in verse 45 about sharing all things in common.  You and I need to search the scriptures for oneself.   I see this as a quality mentioned just this once, but I see it as a quality that appears consistently in the true church when almost everyone is extremely poor and/or suffering from political or social oppression, which over history is far more common than what we who live in this culture can relate to.  For our culture, key words here are “received” and “believed.”  We live in a culture in which many so-called “Christian” organizations have administrators, professors, and so-called pastors who do not believe the historic faith Jesus delivered to the church.  By definition, an unbeliever is not part of any church. The church is believers as a group or groups.  We can respect an intellectually trained person’s human rights, intellect, abilities, and other positive human traits, but such a person is not, by scripture, part of the church, nor has received spiritual gifts for the benefit of the church.

            Number ten is a group of believers who comfort and edify, or build up, each other.  In 1 Thessalonians chapter 5 verses 9 through 11, Paul wrote, “For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who dies for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with Him.  Therefore, comfort one another and edify one another, just as you are doing.”  Now, I could have quoted just verse 11, but it’s important to read any scripture in its context.  The sentences just before it help with that, in that Paul makes reference to the previously mentioned definition of all believers in history.  In verse 11, Paul tells us of the church doing two things—comforting one another and edifying, which means building up, one another.  Both these things can only happen when believers are interacting with one another, and caring for one another. A prerequisite for this is at least knowing one another.  This is probably little mentioned in our culture due to almost all traditional churches being structured such that people don’t really know each other and rituals are set up such that it isn’t possible for all believers to build up one another.  Let me point out that that isn’t the fault of most of our church leaders.  They were taught how to do things by the previous generation, who were taught by the previous generation, and in some cases are directed to do things a certain way by the denomination/franchisor.  On the converse side, many small group Bible studies, and even some traditional churches’ home or cell groups more closely meet this definition of church than our society’s traditional churches.  I’m attempting not to say this in condemnation of any particular group, but if one has found that the Holy Spirit has seemed to do the greatest things with regard to you and others you know growing in faith in meetings and situations outside traditional services, I would encourage you to consider that this may be the Holy Spirit also attempting to say something to us about what church is.  This idea also negates the traditional structure of that one person oftentimes referred to as a pastor being the one through which most to virtually all of the “edifying” goes through, in a manner that makes most others contributing nearly impossible, and that person believing that he/she is responsible for doing, or at least coordinating, it all.

            The eleventh definition of church comes from a teaching of Jesus to the disciples in Matthew chapter 18 verse 20.  As we know, the culture Jesus was walking in was far different than our own.  Why didn’t people think it strange that this group of twelve men followed Jesus around?  Because that was how a rabbi taught his group of students, and for that manner, how the Greek teachers taught their students.  The modern university concept began evolving around 1200 A.D.  Being taught in that manner, no one was going around attempting to check Jesus’ transcripts as to whether he was accredited by the rabbis in Jerusalem somewhere to do this; they saw Him walking around like a rabbi who was teaching a group of students.   Further, they were in a culture where the rabbis debated whether women counted as humans.  As such, they had made a rule, which cannot be found in the Old Testament, that to begin a synagogue, it took a minimum of ten men.  Now, we know that Jesus certainly indicated that women were equal to men before God, as indicated in John chapter 4, the story of the woman at the well, and Luke 10, the story which contains Mary sitting and listening to Jesus teach, which is something the rabbis of the day would not have allowed.  In this passage, it appears that Jesus was teaching the disciples without others around them at the time.  In Matthew 18 verses 19 and 20, Jesus says, “Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.  For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”  We have heard it taught that this is telling us about the importance of believers agreeing in prayer.  Might I suggest that Jesus is also defining as few as two believers making up a church.  How do I get this?  Well, what is Jesus going to be doing in the midst of them?  He knew that the Holy Spirit was going to be sent to earth to indwell believers.  Paul tells us in Colossians 1 verse 18, “And He (Jesus) is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.”  Nowhere in scripture does it tell us that any human, even if we label him or her by a name like pastor or priest, is the head of the body. The word "priest" in a variety of religions around the world, ancient and modern, means a person who is an intercessor between God and man, but Revelation chapter 1 verse 6 tells us that all believers are kings and priests.  Pastor, as a title of a church leader, did not develop until after the Reformation, as it was obvious to the leaders of the Reformation that the title priest was theologically inappropriate to the Christian belief.  Jesus is and wishes to direct the church.  My understanding is that western traditional church leaders will maintain that they must do the leading, and that Jesus leads in some spiritual manner, but that implies that the Spirit doesn’t actually, in an everyday manner, direct us, and He does to the degree that we allow Him to. Now, I understand that in western culture, some brothers and sisters in Jesus who I know love Jesus and His church may subliminally or overtly feel threatened with regard to their paycheck by this.  Let me just say that this isn’t nearly as upsetting in the areas where there is official or societal opposition to believers in Jesus.  We will get to paychecks a little later.

            Definition number twelve is merely “group.”  In Acts chapter 19, we have the story of the idol makers’ guild in Ephesus organizing a protest against Paul’s presence in the city.  In that city, the religion was the temple of Diana (or Artemis).  This was a fertility cult.  It was a worship of sexuality, and that included cult prostitution.  It was a key part of that city’s religion, which had turned into a major moneymaker for the city.   In most cultures of the day, except Judaism and the small groups of believers in Jesus, sexual abstinence outside of marriage was unheard of, at least for men.  In Roman culture, married relatively late in life, and previously had a variety of sexual experiences (hetero- and homosexual).  In Jewish and almost all the other cultures, sexuality in women was controlled by their being married off between 12 and 16 years of age, just as a girl was beginning to have sexual feelings.  In Ephesus, an exception was made, in that women were expected, at least once, to be the object of a sexual sacrifice in the temple.  As Ephesus was a portage place, as it had been determined over time that ships sailing in that area were safer portaging at Ephasus, having the ship rolled over about a hundred yards of land, and put into the other side, as opposed to sailing through a narrow rocky channel, of which there was about a 10% chance of sinking the ship.  Sailors, never throughout history known to be a moral lot, were willing to contribute significant portions of their salary to the temple for the opportunity to “sacrifice.”  Ephesus, as a city, made big money from the portaging ships and via their temple, getting the sailors’ money, to the degree that, by 50 or 51 A. D., when the incident described in Acts 19 happened, the temple of Diana had 22 branch temples scattered around the Mediterranean region, making money for some people in Ephasus.   

The idol makers sold idols.  Because it isn’t easy to find in books, a question might be asked, “Were the idol makers making idols which we might consider pornographic?”  The answer is that, as of this time, archeologists have not found any idols made that can be definitively connected to these idol makers, so the official answer is, we don’t know.  We can say from what we know about similar groups in other parts of the world and persons of all cultures who have given themselves to immersing themselves into this type of life, probably.  Anyway, Paul was leading persons to faith in Jesus, and those persons turning from the cult of Diana was cutting into the idol makers’ profits.  They could claim that, in their protest, they were defending their city’s civic and cultural pride and the economic status of the city.  It is reasonable to say that they were looking out for their own pockets.  Either way, they organized a protest.  The Roman Empire didn’t much care what cities and areas outside Rome did, so long as they received their taxes and that there were no protests or rioting.  Organizing a protest threatened the city officials’ jobs, which explains the city officials’ actions in the chapter, which seems to us in our culture to be strangely inconsistent.

            Now, in Acts 19, this mob or protest in most English Bibles is referred to as a “gathering” or “assembly” in verses 32, 39, and 41.  In the original Greek, the word Luke used was “ekklesia”; the same word in all other places is translated “church.”  What this tells us is that ekklesia had a secular meaning, that an ekklesia was impermanent, and that it was a vague term, as there is no reason to believe that the mob ever met before or after—like our word, “group”.  The extra meanings we have added over the centuries are exactly that, added, and not what the writers of scripture were communicating.

            To this effect, the theologian Jon Zens has made the observation that, if we were translating the word ekklesia into English for the first time right now, the most exact word would be the phrase, “town meeting” which I mention as definition thirteen.  In the early church’s local bodies of believers, believers all knew each other, didn’t meet in a religious building, had as their only ritual baptism, which was the initial public sign of being a believer.  They shared with each other as there was need, and shared a simple meal, from which centuries later the ritual of communion was made out of.  Spiritual leadership came out of believing, maturity, and gifting.  The power of communion is, and is today, as believers shared their lives with each other while sharing food.  As they had no buildings or payroll, any money was collected as needed to help the poor, both within and outside the church, and to send mature believers to go where people had not heard the message of Jesus.  Even then, as now, one main example was Paul, who had a skill which would support him in missionary work without financial help from other places.  Worship was not a ritual, but how one lived one’s life. 

            If I have said some things that you have not heard before, I encourage you to not only check out scripture, but also what we know of the history of the day, which is significantly more than some would have us believe.  Also, I believe that it is a sign of the end of the age that we average everyday believers without portfolio have available the resources, which includes the Bible, but for this purpose, is also various historical documents, both by believers and unbelievers, to confirm what Jesus taught the disciples, who taught the early church, in both literary context of the Bible and the cultural context indicated by historical documents of the time, and how they practically lived out the direction of Jesus, through his apostles and other believers in the first few generations.

            As I said in the beginning, I have come to believe that we learn better from discussion than lecture, so are there any questions?     

------   

            All quotations of scripture are from NKJV.

            Much of this can be found in George Barna and Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Present Testimony Ministries/Tyndale/Barna Books.

            The reference on “town meeting” came from John Zens,  The Pastor Has No Clothes, Lincoln, NE: Ekklessia Press.

            The information about the idol makers of Ephesus comes from, www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=2268

www.formerthings.com/dianaephesians.htm

www.biblebb.com/files/mac/sg1928.htm

The thrid anniversary of tevyebird.blogspot.com

I just realized that, on the tenth of this month, this blog touched the third anniversary of its beginning. I guess that it is time to retell the story of why I started this blog.

A long time ago, I remember not when, a person sent me a comment through some other source, as I as of yet haven't gotten the “comments” function of this site to work (according to the functions screen on my end, it is supposed to be operable), saying that I had a lot of time on my hands. That person was absolutely correct. In the time immediately previous to opening this blog, I had a job which was mainly sitting at a desk of a high-rise condo, and pressing a button to allow residents in when they came to the door. To a large extent, I was sitting at the desk doing nothing. A couple of years previous to that, I was running a small business which developed such that 90+% of my business was on Saturdays and Sundays, making getting to the church I was going to difficult. I knew that there was nothing special about Sunday as a day of worship, so I looked on the internet for a church that met sometime other than on the weekend. I couldn't find anything I was comfortable with.

A couple of weeks later, my Sunday business started late enough that I was able to get to the beginning of the early morning service at my church. That day, Larry Kreider was to speak, so out in the lobby, there was a selection of his books for sale. One of them was his book “Starting a House Church” (or something like that—I can't seem to find it on my bookshelf at the moment). I didn't find it particularly useful, except that, in the bibliography, it directed me to other works. That shows something of my personality, as so many persons in Jesus' people read only simple books, and definately don't read footnotes and bibliographies. That eventually directed me to the works of Frank Viola and Wolfgang Simson, and to a website that, in turn, directed me to the website of the housechurches in my metro area. From that, I called up and talked to a person who was connected to one of the housechurches, called and invited myself to another one that met at a time I was generally free, and started reading the works of the authors writing on this subject.

Over time, my business failed, and I started the sit at a desk and press a button job. I started picturing in my mind that the ideas in George Barna & Frank Viola's Pagan Christianity and Wolfgang Simson's Houses That Change the World might break down into a group of 2 minute segments that would be appropriate for radio, and wrote a number of scripts for the two minute programs. Later, I added a few more from Steve Lyzenga's doctoral thesis that can be read online, http://house2harvest.org/docs/Simple_Churches_Releasing_Resources_S_Lyzenga.pdf. Thanks to the wonders of the recording program Audacity, I recorded these. Eventually, I temporarily had enough extra money to actually get about six episodes broadcast on a local station. I started the blog to post the texts of those scripts, which goes back to December 2010 and January 2011.

Over the past year, I haven't felt well, specifically with regard to being able to think properly. Also, since last March, many days, I've been putting in some time working on a project fixing up my son's house. About two weeks ago, I got to the end of that part of the project that I could do by myself. Yesterday, fumbling around writing yesterday's post, the old computer I was working on somehow flashed off the screen I was typing on, and over to the page on Blogger which shows how many page views my posts have received, and I saw that there has been a significant increase in views on those posts of the last 15 months or so. As I believe that what I wrote the first two months are the most significant things I've written, I'm going to make a point of reprising some of those entries.

Just, as a matter of intrest, yes, that is my real phone number in them. No, to my total surprise, that hasn't been a problem.

Book Review: Jesus: A Theography by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola

Book Review--Jesus: A Theography, by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola (Thomas Nelson, 2012)

For anyone unfamiliar, Leonard Sweet is a theology professor, best known for his two books which I understand to be an intellectual framework behind the megachurch flavor of Christian groups, Aquachurch and Soul Tsunami (I say that I believe in that, personally, not ever gotten around to reading Soul Tsunami). Frank Viola has written a group of books that could be described as an intellectual framework behind the housechurch flavor of Christian groups. When it comes to organizational structure, this appears to be going in opposite directions, but, over time, Sweet and Viola met, and wound up collaborating on Jesus Manifesto in 2010, with this being their second collaboration. The word "Theography" is a combination of "theos" the word that meant "God" in the Greek that the New Testament was written in, and "biography", emphasizing the idea of the attempt being to write a biography of Jesus from the perspective of Jesus as God come to earth, who has a history both before and after his days as a person on earth.

Now, I have to state that, over time, I have heard many Christian leaders say and do things that only seem correct when viewed from our cultural context, but do not fit the original cultural context of the writings of the Bible and actions of God's people of those days. Therefore, I have a fondness for all teaching that puts the original context in proper perspective. To that degree, possibly my favorite learning tool is the two volume, IVP Bible Background Commentary. I am willing to say that I would put this book next in line in speaking to this part of Christian knowledge.

The two books are extremely different, though. Bible Background Commentary is written like a dictionary, with the comments connected to specific Bible verses in order of book, chapter, and verse, with each comment disconnected from the previous and next comments. Jesus: A Theography covers specifically those facts having to do with Jesus, from before creation to the Final Judgement, understood in the widest form possible, and written in literary, as opposed to reference, form. Further, as with George Barna & Viola's Pagan Christianity, this is written in a language that an average adult can understand, but with copious footnotes, as would be done for a theological or other book written to the highest level of intellectuals. Unlike Pagan Christianity, which was written as a criticism of all kinds of status quo structures in the modern believing/evangelical Christian church and defense of very different ways of doing things in the early church as being what was taught by the apostles and in the Bible, which demanded copious footnotes of all kinds of historical and theological sources, most footnotes in Jesus: A Theography are just scripture references done in the style of an intellectual work, as opposed to being inserted in the text as is the case with most popular Christian books.

Therefore, this book, in literary form, connects a large amount of related statements, analogies, prophecies and literary illusions that appear in various parts of the Bible which look forward to Jesus from the Old (referred to in the book as First) Testament, or look back from the New (or Second) Testament's Acts to Revelation to the Gospels and previous. The basis for this is the standard Christian concept that Jesus, as God, was before creation and continues through eternity future in community with the Father and Spirit. Therefore, nothing He did on earth was an accident, but was connected to His communication to man in times past and future.

As such, to the unbelieving person who is not open to the leading of the Holy Spirit, the whole book probably would come across as the construction of an elaborate house of cards. To the believer, this will be extremely helpful in realizing how such a wide variety of situations throughout the Bible are interconnected together to communicate His truth to us. Further, it is done in a readable style for those who are more attuned to read things written like a story. Particularly, as various flavors of the church have come to realize over the past century that leadership is a function of gifting, not academic accreditation, this type of writing is highly useful to leaders who have not had the opportunity or received the direction to have buried themselves into just studying theology for a period of time.

Eternal Purpose

Today's Simple Church Minute broadcast was on the subject of God's Eternal Purpose.  In reviewing the recording, I see that at the end, I said that is was posted on September 11, 2011.  I actually posted it on September 18, 2011, so it is better that I have reposted it today.

   

 

          I have been attempting to include quotations from a variety of persons writing on simple/organic/house church, and this rewrite turns out to allow me to add quotations from two prolific writers on this subject, Milt Rodriguez and Frank Viola.  In spite of most of these blogs being heavily built on the research from George Barna and Frank Viola’s book, Pagan Christianity, I had not put an actual quotation in any of the commentaries, heretofore.

2012—eternal purpose

            My name is Tom; this is Simple Church Minute.  Milt Rodriguez, in his blog entry for July 6, 2011, told an extremely short story, of which I quote:

            A friend recently told me that the eternal purpose of God was so vast that it was difficult to grasp and even more difficult to explain.  I told him that I agreed.  He also said that it’s very difficult to put into one sentence.  I also agreed with that, however, after thinking about this later, I decided to take on the challenge.  So here is my contribution of consolidating the eternal purpose into one sentence:

            “God’s eternal purpose is that the fullness of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, would be displayed and expressed visibly through a vessel that would be a Family/House for the Father, a Bride/Body for the Son, and a Temple for the Holy Spirit.”

 

            What in the world does that mean?  Most believers have never heard anyone overtly speak on this subject—God’s eternal purpose.  Implicitly, most of us who have been part of evangelical or fundamentalist or Bible-believing (choose you favorite phrase) church understand that the thing to do that is most emphasized is wishing other persons to come to faith in Jesus, that is, evangelism.  If I point it out, it is obvious, that in that part of time previous to Genesis 3, the story of the fall, there was no place for evangelism in the whole universe.  At the other end, beginning at Revelation 21, the final judgment, there will once again be a time where there will be no place for evangelism.

            Now, just for a moment, glance at what things would look like from a liberal progressive church position.  There, doing good is the emphasis.  Once again, before Genesis 3, there is no place for that, as sin had not entered the human race, and some period of time before that, the fall of Lucifer that is told us in Ezekiel 28.  On the other end, after the judgment in Revelation 21, there once again will be no room for doing good, because sin will have been banished.  Therefore, neither of those things can possibly God’s eternal purpose.

            Let me go over those items in the Rodriguez quote.  God wants the fullness of Jesus displayed.  That was the plan before the creation of the universe. How do we know this?  Numbers 23:19 says, “God is not a man that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind.”  If we follow Jesus, then we have to take God’s word that what he has told us in the Bible was what he meant to tell us.  He tells us that he wants a family.  The chosen people of the Old Covenant, were a physical, and imperfect, type of a New Covenant chosen people that are a new creation by faith, a people that deep in our hearts want to be his chosen people.  We also are God’s house.  John, in Revelation 21 verse 3 tells us, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them.”  On this idea, Frank Viola, in his book, “From Eternity to Here”, wrote,

            “John’s climatic vision in Revelation 21 and 22 gives us an intriguing window into the ultimacy of God’s house.  Therein we discover that the house is a city.  As we read further, we discover that the city is also a bride, and that the bride is also a dwelling place, and that the dwelling place is also a wife, and that the wife is also a temple, and that the temple is also a garden.  All are graphic, mind-grabbing images of the same reality.  All speak of God’s ultimate purpose.”*

            God’s ultimate purpose is that temple of the Holy Spirit from 1 Corinthians 6 verse 19, that bride of Christ from John 3 verse 29, the body of Christ from 1 Corinthians 12 verse 27, that family of God from Galatians 6 verse 10, that house of God from Hebrews 3 verse 6.  That all is us, the saved, the believers in Jesus, who wish to desire to do His will in everything.  Good works are good, communicating the message of Jesus’ love for us is good, it is part of how we desire to honor God, but there is a time coming that those things will be irrelevant, and God’s plan in some way accounts for a time that we only can understand at this point in time quite dimly, and trying to hold onto any chaff that the wind and fire of the Holy Spirit is blowing and burning away is counterproductive.

            I can be reached by email at simplechurchminute@yahoo.com or at 757-735-3639.. What I just said went fast; to read what I just said, I have it posted on my blog, tevyebird.blogspot.com, with additional information, posted to September 11, 2011.  To find out more about simple church on a national and international scale, visit www.simplechurch.com and, for this area, at www.hrscn.org.  

            Milt Rodriguez quote from his blog, miltrodriguez.wordpress.com, from 7/6/2011.  Frank Viola quote from his book, From Eternity to Here (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2009) p. 213-214.  This book is an excellent, thorough examination of this subject.  Frank has additional resources at his website www.ptmin.org, and his blog is www.frankviola.org.

On the words "postmodern" and "existential"

One of the RSS feeds I get is the House 2 Harvest Network, which emphasizes completing the work of the Great Commission through the establishment of simple, organic churches.  Over the past couple of weeks, I have been receiving the blog entries of one a certain blogger who will go nameless here.  While it is clear that this person is traditionally trained in church leadership, and now is part of, and probably one of the leaders of, a house church in northern Virginia, and what he writes does not seem to have any connection to world missions, which is supposed to be the theme of that online group, I do not see that as much of a problem, either.  We have all said or written things that are not quite on topic.

            There is one thing I find disagreement with.  From his writing, it appears that he has been in contact with Frank Viola and some other known writers on the topic of simple, organic church with regard to their functioning as church planters, and is somehow unhappy with them.  To this regard, in every blog I have received over this period of time, without regard to what subject Jim begins to write on, somewhere in the article will be a veiled or not-so-veiled criticism of Viola.  Two specific criticisms of Viola have been applying the words “postmodern” and existential” to describing either him and/or his work, and, to me, it became less and less clear what he was attempting to communicate. 

            Personally, I do not know Frank.  In writing this blog, and preparing for my radio program, I have had the opportunity to communicate with a number of persons around the country involved in simple, organic church.  One difference in communicating with Frank is that the response always comes from a person on his staff, whereas I at least feel that the other persons I have written to were the persons responding to whatever I wrote.  This, in and of itself, is not wrong, only different.  I might say that if I were to send a communication to almost any sizable traditional church pastor, the response would be from a staff person, also. 

            Anyway, this morning, I decided to do one thing I can do passably, and that is research existing ideas.  As you will see, this is not really heavy research, maybe junior high level or lower research.  What do the words in question, postmodern and existential, mean?

            According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-Modern, “post modern: Postmodernism is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the rejection of objective truth and global cultural narrative.” 

            According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism, “There is no consensus among scholars on the precise definition…”  With all due apologies to the anonymous writers of those definitions, the first defines postmodernism, and the second defines nothing.  Might I suggest, to use that first definition, postmodern is, therefore, a synonym to contemporary culture.

            As for the word “existential”, according to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism, “Existentialism is the philosophical and cultural movement which holds that the starting point of philosophical thinking must be the experiences of the individual.”  Now, this definition isn’t particularly good, in that, for the believer in Jesus, our experience of the Holy Spirit speaking into our spirit before repentance is certainly part of our life experiences, but the unbeliever cannot truly understand that, and, as such the person we might think of as being existential would not see things that way.

            Another definition I found is from www.thefreedictionary.com/existential, which defines as such:  1. Of, relating to, or dealing with existence. 2. Based on experience, empirical.  3. Of, or as conceived by existentialism or existentialists: An existential moment of choice.

            I went to post this as a comment on the last blog of his I received, but I couldn’t without a Wordpress password.   Just as a note, if you have trouble leaving a comment on my site, send me an email at simplechurchminute@yahoo.com. I’m just curious; I’ve been writing this for nearly two years and never received a comment.  For about the first four months, comments weren’t turned on (my error).

My response to Viola's challanging question

This evening, I was reading Frank Viola’s blog from three days ago, and he posed a question for persons who have a blog to answer.  Given that, I decided to take up the challenge of answering this question.

The following exercise is from the synchroblog at http://frankviola.org/2012/07/09/gospelforthemiddle

Fielding Melish and his wife Felicia have two children, ages 10 and 6. They live in a very remote part of Maine, USA. They are surrounded by extended family, none of whom are Christians. The nearest churches are one hour away, and by all evangelical standards, none of them are good. These churches are either highly legalistic, highly libertine, or just flat-out flaky.

One of Fielding’s cousins is a practicing Christian. They see each other once a year. Fielding’s cousin has shared Christ with Fielding many times over the years. Whenever they’ve talked about spiritual things, Fielding shows interest.

Felicia grew up in a Christian home. She’s received Christ, but she isn’t evangelistic and is overwhelmed with working long hours and raising two small children. She would love to find a church nearby for the spiritual support and instruction, but none exist.

Fielding has no college education. While he is capable of reading, he is not a reader. He doesn’t use the Web either. He’s a man who works with his hands, both for his career and for recreation. He’s an “outdoorsman.” He hunts, he builds, he does manual labor, etc. In his spare time, he helps his elderly parents with various building projects.

Fielding is not an atheist. Neither is he an agnostic. He believes in God. He believes Jesus is the Savior of the world who died for our sins and rose again from the dead. He hasn’t fully surrendered his life to Christ, but he is not sure what that looks like exactly. His children know a little about the Lord, mostly because of what their mother has taught them.

Recently Fielding asked this question:

When I’m with my cousin once a year, I want to learn more about God. But when I come back home, and I’m around everyone else, my mind is off of God, and I am back to working, raising my kids, and helping my parents. Someone needs to come up with a solution for people like me . . . people who are in the middle. (By “in the middle,” Fielding means someone who believes in Jesus, but who isn’t fully absorbed in the faith yet either. They simply don’t know enough nor do they have any spiritual support system around them.)

Relocating is not an option for Fielding and his wife. Even if they wanted to relocate, they don’t see a way they could do it financially.

Remember: Fielding and his wife don’t personally know any Christians. None of their extended family or coworkers are believers either. And the nearest churches (which are an hour away) aren’t recommended.

Question: If you were Fielding’s cousin, how would you instruct him and his wife the next time you saw them?

            First, I would make clear to Fielding that, as much as it doesn’t look like it in western society, a Christian church is a group of believers.  Jesus taught that, where two or three are gathered in His name, He is with them, and that Jesus is with them because He is Head of the Church.  He and his wife can be the beginning of a church, and that, in the books telling us of the New Covenant, church wasn’t a one day a week thing.

            I would encourage them to pray together, and study the Bible together.  I would volunteer to help Fielding by phone or email, as I am certain that neither Fielding nor his wife will feel comfortable with this at first.  Possibly, I would use the phrase “family Bible study”, even if it would be technically incorrect, if that would help them get this mutual encouragement going.   Many of the other details would be connected to their motivation and personal details I would know if this situation was real.

The purpose of this blog

            The original purpose of this blog is more than just rambling about what is on my mind, although I occasionally do that.  I became a believer in Jesus in the summer of 1968, the week after the Democratic Party’s convention in Chicago, and concurrent protest over the Vietnam War and rioting.  During the summer of 2008, I had a business that eventually turned into using every free moment of my time on Saturdays and Sundays, which didn’t work well with being involved with a fellowship of other believers.  I tried to find a church that met on weekdays, and in the course of doing so, ran into books such as Barna & Viola’s Pagan Christianity and Simson’s Houses That Change the World.  While that scholarship changed the way I approached following Jesus, I was aware that many of my fellow believers don’t read such serious readings, and that this flavor of what God is doing gets nearly zero attention in the Christian media (for obvious reasons—there’s minimal money and human power in it).  To that effect, over time, I wrote a group of two minute commentaries, with the audience in mind as youth oriented Christian radio.  At the time, I didn’t have the money to put them on a local station, and, as of now, still do not.  In December, 2010, I posted the transcripts of these on this site, appearing with the title Simple Church Minute, numbered 1 through 100.  During May through December 2011, I have posted five and one minute versions of the same subjects, which appear with numbers in the 1000’s for one minute versions, and 2000’s for five minute versions at the beginning of the titles. 

      I have posted footnotes from where this information comes from. The research is important so one can see that the idea behind these statements isn’t just to be different, or controversial.  It is to show that what Jesus taught the disciples, who as apostles taught the early church is different than what centuries of traditions have morphed the meanings of the words of the Bible.  Over the Middle Ages and later, our previous brothers and sisters may not have been able to know better, but today there is no excuse to misunderstand the scriptures, just because it threatens what some persons (sometimes not necessarily believers) feel comfortable with.
        Lastly, one reason I do not have as many five minute transcripts posted is that, over time, I have run across various writings of others who, from their journey with Jesus, have been able to write about certain issues far better than I could, so, if or when I ever get the commentaries on radio, I will read these writings (sometimes edited for time) in certain time spots, with their permission.  The following writings fit the context of the five minute series:

Author              blog (or writing)                    date                                title

George Barna    georgebarna.com                  5/8/2011    Measuring the fruit of wholeness

Felicity Dale     simplychurch.com                7/1/2011      The financial transition from…

Felicity Dale                                                   7/5/2011      Stories of financial transition…

Keith Giles       subversive1.blogspot.com     6/7/2011      Sympathy for the Pharisee?

Keith Giles                                                      6/21/2011    Now Open: The New Temple ...

Keith Giles                                                     5/28/2011    Pitfalls of Organic Church 3

Keith Giles                                                     5/30/2011    Pitfalls of Organic Church 5

Keith Giles                                                     6/22/2011   Confessions of a Selfish Mind

Keith Giles                                                     7/19/2011    We ARE the Church

Keith Giles                                                     7/21/2011     Salvation is a Process, Not a …

Keith Giles                                                     7/29/2011    When Should We Meet Toget...

Keith Giles                                                     8/2/2011      Our Idea vs. God’s Idea

Keith Giles                                                     8/29/2011   The Gospel: For Here or To Go

Milt Rodriguez miltrodriguez.wordpress.com 5/13/2011  River Crossers

Ross Rohde      thejesusvirus.org                    5/30/2011    I Don’t Want to Die

Ross Rohde                                                      6/30/2011   Don’t Forsake Fellowship

Jon Zens          searching together.org                               The New Testament is Plural, Not Si...        

                         Prelude to Jon’s book, The Pastor Has No Clothes
                         This writing also appears on frankviola.com, 1/22/11, as a guest writing

Also, about eight of the five minute talks are based on Steven S. Lyzenga’s dissertation, “Assessing the State of Simple Churches in the USA Regarding Releasing Resources Toward Finishing the Great Commission”.  Go to any of the five minute commentaries numbered in the 2150’s, and in the footnotes is a link to that work.

             Lastly, the list above might make you think that I may be overly enamored with Keith Giles’ work.  The reason for so many is that his writings happen to fit the five minute format I was working with, and his experience brings life to the subjects touched in those writings.

Tyranny of the Urgent

            I indicate on my blog list that one of those blogs I read is Beyond Evangelical by Frank Viola.  I would guess that many who stumble upon this blog read his, at least occasionally, as his is one of, if not the, foremost, on the subject matter I attempt to write on.  On his writing of April 24, titled 10 Ways You Can Waste Your Time as a Christian, two of the points he makes (numbers 3 and 4) can be summarized as “stay busy” and “neglect reading the Scriptures.”

            Upon reading this, it reminded me of a little booklet I first heard of when I was in college, printed by Inter-Varsity, titled “Tyranny of the Urgent.”  I didn’t check, before writing this, whether it is still in print, but if it isn’t, there is another writing to take its place.  Since the Industrial Revolution, western society has moved faster and faster.  I remember reading some futurist in about 1970 (although the term hadn’t been coined yet) predicting that the maximum work week would need to be cut to 30 hours, as computers would make work more efficient.  From this point, we can look back and see that, to the converse, technology has made things go faster and make our work have to go it a faster, and therefore, more stressful manner.  The tyranny of the urgent has only been cranked up over the last 40 years.

            As I have written earlier, I am disabled insofar as doing a normal 40 hour a week job.  Upon reading Viola’s writing, the Spirit convicted me of still being in the trap of feeling a need to stay busy constantly, to fight to prove that I am at least attempting to be economically useful, a task that I have struggled with my adult life.  As for reading Scripture, back in college, at the same time that I was introduced to the concept of Tyranny of the Urgent, for the purpose of being aware not to fall into the trap of the world’s constant pressure to do something, as opposed to following the Spirit’s guidance, which is sometimes “stop, and be aware, and worship and honor Jesus, the Savior and Guide to His people, I also became aware of the idea of the Daily Quiet Time.  As a matter of daily doing a DQT of at least 15 minutes, I will say I have failed more often than succeeded, if one considers it to be specifically reading a piece of the Word, creating questions about the passage, and answering them, preferably on paper.  Later in life, I grasped the idea that a DQT consists of a) reading a piece of Scripture, b)studying the piece of Scripture (which can include reading writings about it), c) prayer, and d) meditating on the Word.  As the years went by, meditating on the Word, in a sense, became easier as I had more experience in life, and situations that related to any part of the Word, and, somewhat unique to this culture, meditating on the Word can be done simultaneously with repetitive work and vehicle driving.  Still, it reminded me that I haven’t done as much reading Scripture that wasn’t connected with a subject that I was immediately concerned with, which over the past three years, has had much to do with the ideas connected with simple church.  The point, in my spirit, is to do so as to honor Jesus, as opposed to a legalism.

            One thing that I have noticed over the past couple of months among the blogs I read is dealing with subjects within following Jesus that do not have to do with getting back to the original meaning of church.  Felicity Dale has been writing about outreach.  I have become aware through that how few people I actually come in contact with during the week (as she writes from the same position of working mainly alone).  This blog helps me put the brakes on the little things in life that call, “Do me now” to stop and consider what the Holy Spirit is doing in and around me.

My view from here, and an odd story

            While I have attempted to blog at least once per week, and usually have done more, it has been two weeks since the last post.  The main reason for that is the illness that I have been struggling with for about the past six weeks.

            Over at frankviola.org, 2.29.12 was Shameless Promotion Day.  Why didn’t I mention this blog on it?  I had every intent to do so, and was thinking that I was looking at my email each day, but clearly did not notice that the 29^th was the day until about 10pm (EST) on the 1^st. About then, I realized to what degree that my mind was operating foggily.

            Those of us who read Frank’s blog know that he has been generous on giving advice to bloggers.  Of course, Frank has written many books and appears to do a significant amount of speaking.  His directions, I would imagine, would be near impossible to follow by a person doing an everyday, normal job (and a job in some type of field as being a professor, missionary, or other Christian service job doesn’t, in this instance, fit as being everyday).  As I am to a degree disabled, it is somewhat easier for me, but not all that much.  Feeling ill certainly lowers that ability.  Anyway, in his blog, frankviola.org , on February 26, 2012, he gave a piece of advice of not posting more than one post per day, as it makes finding it more difficult.  That was something I need to take to heart, as, when I started, I posted 100 2-minute radio scripts I had written over the previous two years, and posted them all within one month, with the idea of referring back to the date at the end of the program.  Also, when I posted them, I did not, at the end, leave footnotes as to where I got the information from.  Therefore, it is reasonable to post them again, where each can have a unique date affixed to the writing.

            As for getting them on radio, to my knowledge, I am further from that than I was back in December, 2010, because of what I know of myself.

            A funny thing happened to me about a week ago.  I have been attempting to contribute to the finances of my house by buying self storage units, and selling the contents.  For anyone who has never been involved in this, but has seen one or more of the reality programs based on this activity, it isn’t anything like the programs, but still, some odd things happen.  Part of the oddities come from all the extra bidders that have been produced by viewers of the programs.  Anyway, it was a Friday morning, and on that day, a certain chain had an auction planned at a location to the north of a military base, another, a couple of hours later, at their location to the opposite end of the base, and, a third at a location to the west of the base.  I went to the first one, and there was a tremendous amount of persons.  This may be good for the company, but not for me.  Also, I saw in the paper that there was one at the same time as the second auction on the opposite side of town, but they only had two units available.  I had been to that company before, and knew that it didn’t draw many bidders that last time, so I decided to go over there.  Noon came, and no other bidders showed up!  As the law in my state (according to the owners—I haven’t bothered to double check) was that they needed a minimum of three bidders, they went out into the lot and got a couple of service men who warehoused there to come in and sign in.  Since I was there to bid, and they weren’t planning on it, I got both units, in my opinion, quite reasonably.  Opposingly, one unit was of a major company which had gone out of business, and the contents was all their IT equipment, like 15 year old computer and server equipment.  I find that, as time goes on, I am selling more and more items which, if I had to describe what they do, I could not.  I guess that, so long as I can put a price on an item, and someone will pay it, on enough items, and income is greater than outgo, I’m ok in that regard.  It’s just an oddity of life.     

2001--tithe over time (revised)

            Today, this post is another revision of a previously posted commentary.  Once I actually attempt to record these, problems show up that are not so obvious in writing originally.  In this case, these were written for a five minute time frame, and the previous version, I could read in about three and one-half.  Further, this commentary has some of the same ideas as the commentary I posted two days ago.

            Also, I am concentrating on at the end of these writings giving more citations of where I got the information.  Hopefully, this will help someone.

2001—the tithe over time

            My name is Tom; this is Simple Church Minute.  Today, a little bit about how the idea of the tithe has morphed over time.  In the days of the Old Covenant with the physical chosen people, the Jews, there were three tithes.  The first was the temple tax, which was for maintenance of the temple in Jerusalem, the Levites and the priests.  Key verses which speak about this one are Leviticus 27 verses 30 through 33 and Numbers 18 verses 26 to 32.  The second tithe was to pay for the festivals commanded in Torah, the Law or Teaching of Moses.  Key verses for this are Numbers 18 verses 20 to 26, Deuteronomy 12 verses 1 to 19, and Deuteronomy 14 verses 22 to 26.  The third tithe was voluntary, and was a third of a tithe or a tithe every third year, and is based on Deuteronomy 14 verses 27 to 29 only.  That tithe was for helping the poor, of which it appears that the Levites were expected to be a part of.   At the times in which Israel was a nation, the budget for the country also came out of the tithes.  By the time Jesus came to earth, the Jewish people had greater hardship, as, in addition to these tithes, the Roman Empire had more layers of taxation upon conquered peoples.  Further, the rabbis had made a rule, not based on any scripture that Jewish people were not to give more than 40% of their increase.  This was because of the influence of Roman culture, in which certain wealthy persons were paying for large public works projects to gain favor with the people, so as to be able to gain public office with the Empire.  These public works projects could be likened to some of the earliest political advertising in history.  Although this might look good to us today, given how we are barraged with annoying and twisted political ads today, the rabbis saw it as a danger to the people. 

            When Jesus died on the cross, the early believers understood His death as the ultimate sacrifice which fulfilled the Old Covenant, including the laws about tithes.  This is confirmed in Acts 15 verses 23 to 29, where the apostles and elders write a letter to define to the early church what parts of the Law were to be carried over into the church. Verse 29 says, “that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”  The question they were writing to settle was about circumcision.  Tithing wasn’t even an issue.

            The church gave generously to help spread the message of Jesus, and to help others, both fellow believers and neighbors who were not.  The church did not have buildings.  Leadership was by God’s leadership gifts. 

            Saul’s parents or further ancestors were apparently sufficiently wealthy to purchase Roman citizenship.  When he became a Pharisee, it was a rule that Pharisees had to learn a trade, as in the past, Levites had a difficult time when large amounts of Israelites turned away from God and then stopped tithing.  When Saul had the miraculous experience that brought him from persecuting the church to speaking for faith in Jesus, became Paul, grew in faith, and started on missionary journeys, having the trade of making tents was handy for supporting himself far from his home church.  When Jesus said in Matthew 10 verse 10 that “a worker is worthy of his food,” that was not a license for a church to have a payroll, but that the believers had a responsibility to financially help those who were going to take the message of Jesus where it had not been heard, as those cultures might be so different that being able to make a living there with skills obtained in their home culture may be difficult to impossible.  Jesus commended the widow in Matthew 12 verses 41 to 44 who gave generously out of her poverty, as opposed to those who gave much more out of their abundance.

            The teaching of one 10% tithe came back into the church in the 8^th century, when the Catholic Church began acquiring land in northern Europe, where 10% of a year’s crop was the traditional land rent.  The local leaders, who at that time were trained in ritual, but not necessarily on understanding scripture, then got it confused with the Old Testament writings.  Whether that was an honest mistake or not is beyond our reach.  Possibly this did not disappear in the Reformation due to the church leaders not being prepared as Paul was to earn a secular living.  Today, in traditional churches, 85% of offerings go to building costs and payroll alone, and only two one-hundredths of 1% go to sending the message of Jesus where there is absolutely no Christian teaching going on. Interestingly, we are hearing a great move of people coming to faith in Jesus in the Marxist, Buddhist, and Islamic lands where the believers are underground like the believers we read about in the New Testament, but we, with all our money, buildings, marketing, and programs see minimal.

            I can be reached at simplechurchminute@yahoo.com or 757-xxx-xxxx.  If you wish to review what I just said, a transcript is posted at tevyebird.blogspot.com, dated September 27, 2011.  You can find out more about believers being the church without buildings and corporations in this area at www.hrscn.org .

            Much of the reference information about the three tithes is at the end of the blog of September 25, 2011 (the immediately previous one).

            The information about the middle ages return of the tithe can be found in George Barna and Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity.

            The .02% statistic comes from Steven S. Lyzenga, ASSESSING THE STATE OF SIMPLE CHURCHES IN THE USA  REGARDING RELEASING RESOURCES TOWARD FINISHING THE GREAT COMMISSION.

http://house2harvest.org/docs/Simple_Churches_Releasing_Resources_S_Lyzenga.pdf