Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope
Rather, what and how should we practice? Are we centered on Christ and looking to Him directly to head us up? Are we bestowing more abundant honor on the member who lacks? Are we seeking to bear the one who has no strength? If we are in the reality of the above, we probably are okay regarding discerning the Body and keeping the oneness.
The problem with the majority of the Christian assemblies goes far beyond the issue of oneness. Oneness is not the whole story. What about the function of the members of the Body of Christ? Paul introduces us to the fact and vision of the Body of Christ. The first mention in the New Testament is Romans chapter 12. There the stress in not on oneness but on the function of the members. The goal of God’s salvation and the perfect will of God is to have a fully functioning Body of Christ on the earth.
When we consider the church, we must consider the Headship of Christ.
|
Don,
(First, I probably should start all my posts to you in this way. You say so many things that make me think. And it takes me to things that you are not talking about. I write my comments to you, but they are really more for general thought by anyone reading. Don’t think I am taking you to task. If I were, there would be no mistaking it.)
I would generally agree with your notions of what might indicate some true oneness. I must admit that my view is from within one particular assembly, but I see these things effectively happening.
When you get to the idea of the function of the members of the body, there is much to be said.
Is the “function of the members” something that needs to be analyzed to discover a thriving assembly worthy of the moniker “church?” If so, what is the function of the members? Is it strictly spiritual, partly practical, or always some kind of mix to be truly functioning? How many must be observed to be “functioning,” however it is that we have defined it? Does the fact that people who are not yet Christian participate in meetings diminish the group?
I do not ask these questions to shame anyone, or poke fun at anything. I have been thinking “outside the box” as is so often said these days. Even just three years ago, I would have answered these questions in a manner that I would not today. I believe that “functioning” can be all kinds of things. Often, the visible functioning may seem less spiritual. Other times more so. Of course, the “less spiritual” things would need to have true spirituality behind them or they could be simply the works of man.
But I no longer see functioning as popcorn testimonies in meetings ─ although they would be included. It is not just doing Saturday “service groups” at the meeting hall, or volunteering to work in the LSM publishing (fill-in volunteer activities at your assembly in the place of these). Doing community service is not, on its face, functioning, but if the spirit rises in some to “help the widow and orphan” so to speak, then doing so is functioning.
There is a lot that could go in there.
And what about the propensity for the functioning to be done by less than all members? We easily understand that it is probably rare (and was probably rare in the first century) to have everyone doing all the things we like to think of as “functioning.” But what is functioning? Is it really those “church things” we think of, or is it just being the full-time Christian that we are called to be? If it is the latter, then anyone who is moving forward in their Christian journey is functioning, even if someone’s idea of what is functioning is not met.
Last, when you mention the Headship of Christ, I wonder how much contemplation these things require. Paul made mention of them as facts for perspective. In Ephesians 4, there were things we were to do (speak and grow up) and He would supply the nourishment and connections. We are not tasked with supplying the connections or the nourishment.
Be careful when you use the analogies of the dry bones joined and raised up to become an army. I’m not saying that it is not true, but it is not everything. We are an army in certain ways. We are a household in others. There are many metaphors that describe aspects of the body of Christ. That dry bones raised up and came together to demonstrate that the Lord could raise up an army from wherever he pleases does not mean that our living is as an army. Sometimes it may be so. And in some ways it may be for everyone, but in other ways, only for a few.
I’m not denying the reality in the spiritual side of things that the LC took on everything, but I am saying that their “always the spiritual side of things” view was lopsided. I think that we often return to it without thinking of the vast reality that is Christ, that is the Christian life, that is the fullness of the church.