House church article on eldershio

[TaylorOtwell]

I would appreciate any critique of the following article. Is it Biblical? If not, please provide some Biblical reasons showing such... A brother recently sent to me and asked my thoughts on it, and I'd like to get some insight from my PB brethren before responding.

The Ministry of Elders | Articles | NTRF

Wow, sorry about the thread title... Still getting used to typing on a touch screen keyboard!

 

[LawrenceU]

I do not have time to read the article thoroughly right now. NTRF historically has had some good things to say, and some that are not so good. They are strong proponents of house churches being THE biblical model. (Wonder how they would feel knowing that some of the houses early Christians met in probably could have handled 75-125 folks pretty easily in the atrium and peristylium?)

 

[Scott1]

There are many things seemingly right in the article. Its content wanders a bit, and I'm glad, as a presbyterian, he got to the notion of presbyteries, where there is further accountability.

One concern is he quotes "Watchman Nee" in his notes- not a reputable source.

 

[Skyler]

It looks reasonably accurate to me. I didn't catch anything obviously erroneous. Of course part of that is because I'm a Baptist--the view of church government espoused is decidedly non-Presbyterian.

 

[Scott1]

From the article....

7. A Deliberative Assembly — The gathered assembly is a deliberative body. The men in the assembly are encouraged to interact in an orderly manner with the reading, exhortation, and teaching in the assembly, regardless of what form that interaction assumes - informative lecture, thoughtful consideration and discussion of propositions of Scripture, logical debate of different sides of a question, or consultation on practical issues. This is not a Quaker-like meeting of "whenever-the-spirit-leads," nor is it a family-friendly-style meeting of token affirmations by heads of household, nor is it a worship-centered meeting of lively entertainment, but it is a genuine discipleship learning process which edifies and brings the whole assembly to maturity in Christ through the interaction of the men of the assembly.

8. Independent Congregational Accountability — Each congregation constitutes its own communion and is independently accountable to the Lord, but all true congregations exist within the same spiritual kingdom. They depend upon the same Lord, and they cooperate as much as circumstances require and allow, both on the level of individual persons and on a congregational level. There should be no ungodly jealousy between brother believers, nor between sister assemblies.

— Steve Atkerson

A pretty good explanation of a session as a "deliberative assembly." As a presbyterian, I would like the appeal mechanism and accountability that a presbytery provides for their authority (kind of like the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15).

It's also helpful I think, but can't make this point dogmatically from Scripture, more of practical convenience but not contrary to scriptural principle,
differentiating between elders who rule and those who teach. Freeing the latter more to concentrate on their priority gifting.

 

[Scott1]

Here's an explanation of the way this works, I really like this:

John Murray, "The Form of Government," in Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2, pp. 348-349:

4. Local Government. We have found that the kind of government set forth in the New Testament is that of a plurality of elders or bishops exercising oversight on a parity with one another. It is all-important to take account of the fact that it is on the local level that this must, first of all, be applied. It is in the local assembly, or congregation of God's people, that the ordinances of Christ's appointment for his church are regularly administered. The importance of the local congregation is therefore paramount and it is in the local congregation that the presbyterian principle must first be exemplified. If it is not preserved and practised at this point, it is not in operation at all. If and when it so happens that a particular congregation is not able, for reasons of geographical isolation, or for reasons of loyalty to the whole counsel of God, to establish a broader fellowship with other congregations of like faith and practice, that congregation must not consider itself pre-empted from discharging all the rights and prerogatives, as well as duties, of presbytery. In the New Testament the presbuterion is simply the elders gathered together for the discharge of those functions of government devolving upon them when acting in that capacity. The presbyterian principle begins at the level of the particular flock or congregation, and if, for good reasons, it does not extend further than one congregation, we are not to deem it unpresbyterian. To be concrete, to that local presbytery belong all the functions that Christ has accorded to presbytery.

 

[dudley]

There are many things seemingly right in the article. Its content wanders a bit, and I'm glad, as a presbyterian, he got to the notion of presbyteries, where there is further accountability.

One concern is he quotes "Watchman Nee" in his notes- not a reputable source.

I agree with Scott and point particular attention to this section of the article which I think is critical:
The Appointment of Elders
How should elders be appointed? All potential overseers must meet a lengthy list of qualifications (1Ti 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9). That a man is both willing and able to be an elder is obviously the work of the Holy Spirit (Ac 20:28). Once these prerequisites are met, the would-be elder is then appointed. In Ac 14:23 Paul and Barnabas apparently did the appointing, and Titus was left in Crete by Paul to appoint elders (Tit 1:5). As Nee observed, “they merely established as elders those whom the Holy Spirit had already made overseers in the church.”2
After the apostles (missionaries/church planters) appointed elders and moved on, there is virtual silence as to how subsequent elders were, or ought to be, chosen. Operating from the principle of Acts 1:15-26 & 6:1-6, one could conclude that the succeeding elders were chosen by the whole congregation (following the requirements laid out in 1 Timothy 3:1-7), under the leadership of the existing elders, and under the advisement of any itinerant ministers that have earned the right to be heard by that local congregation.