Becoming Bereans in a Baffled World
Oct 16
10 The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. 12 Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men. (Acts 17:10-12; ESV)
Just Tell Me What I Should Believe
I wished I could begin to explain the cornerstone of this thinking, but there may be too many paths leading to it. I think one is we believe biblical leaders to be closer to God than we are and thus we forfeit our brains and hearts over to them. The other one could be the manipulation of “spiritual” leaders who persuade others to only listen to what they say and so we “touch not the prophets and do them no harm” this even happens outside of churches pastored by the likes of Creflo, Joel and Benny Hinn. This happens just as much in the Piper, MacArthur, Driscoll and other “biblically sound” churches. Whatever the former and latter group says is gold in their particular camps. So we have people taking pictures with the books of their favorite Christian author. We see people begin to quote them more than they do the bible and that my friend is very, very dangerous. However, in both camps we see the practitioners say “just tell us what to think so we can get on with our lives. This mindset should be very troubling to us.
The Priesthood of the Believers
The Priesthood of ALL Believers is a doctrine the Reformers taught but never followed through on. Unlike the Anabaptists who believed that all saints were minsters even when they gathered, the Reformers thought of the priesthood in the aspect of personal family, jobs…. so they did believe that you were a Christian and that Christian work was “ministry” however, when the Church gathered or when it came to the bible, you and I were to forfeit or defer to the “spiritual leaders”. The Empowerment of the “layman” was a myth if flushed out completely. Because of that we have perpetuated the idea that only certain people, the highly educated in the Reformed Circles and the super spiritual in some of the more Charismatic Circles, should address the Church. Everyone else is to be a passive participant, hoping to get “fed” by “the man of God”. So we come as desperate dogs to the bowl week after week and eat whatever is put before us, never examining, never questioning, never being diligent to search out, and very quick to get upset when our favorite teacher is challenged on some key point, yet with little bible to support it.
In his book “To Preach or Not to Preach“. Mr. Norrigton says “sermons have never proven to produce long lasting life change”. And I agree wholeheartedly. But not only that, as a Priest you have the right, no scratch that, the obligation to examine what is said in light of the scriptures and if it falls apart you are to reject it and even question the teacher on his conclusions. Not to be right but to help him search the mind of Christ because we are all fallen and as Jon Zen says “none of us possess all of the truth, so we need one another to help us see truth and pursue the mind of Christ more accurately”. As Priest/Living Stone/Bride/Temple of God you are called to examine and to reveal God’s truth to other members of the Body.
Why Not Be a Berean?
Being a Berean is hard work. I remember reading a post about how many hours MacArthur spends and how many hours he recommend a “preacher” spends before they “preach a sermon” (behind a pulpit fro 45 min- 1 hr, monologue, while you sit silent and if you disagree email him and if you are lucky he will respond). That number was around 32 hours (just do a google search for “how many hours MacArthur prepares for a sermon”) per sermon. That is about as much as I work on a slow week 
. However, this amount is spent so that you can here a “sermon” behind a “pulpit” with NO interaction and very rarely does anyone question these sermons, because they even go out and purchase “MacArthur Study Bibles” and carry them around proudly. However all the tools and resources at MacArthur’s disposal is at yours. But it takes hard work, Dave Black has some very reasonable resources. And if you feel you can’t learn Greek in your spare time, you can still purchase a concordance, lexicon or other reasonable bible dictionaries (Vines or Mounces) and encyclopedia to help yourself out.
I also can think of two other resources. Living By the Book and How to Read The Bible For All it is Worth are two invaluable resources and gifts to the body of Christ. Just like you spent 12-16 years learning how to read a regular book, you will have to invest time learning how to read the bible. Learning literary techniques take investment but it will be invaluable to your interpretation of scripture, at least that is if you want to interpret them properly not with your own presuppositions. Luke said “they received the word with eagerness and searched the scriptures daily”. We should receive the word when taught with “eagerness” which most of us do when we pack a church gathering on Sunday morning, I even hear “that was a good word”, but what I rarely ever see is “they search the scriptures daily to see if this is so”.
I will admit that a lot of this is redefined in the Simple/Organic Church setting. But I want to be honest most times my experience has been an over correction. In the Simple/Organic setting the mentality of “what this means to me” dominates when the only biblical response is “what was the Spirit conveying”. The latter is the only real option. “What the scripture means to me”, is irreverent. I know we have been taught that so I want to be gracious, but it has no place within the body of Christ. The proper response is “What was the Spirit trying to tell us” and that will take hard work and a dependency upon the Spirit. Not one or the other but both!!! We just can’t sit with our bibles and expect osmosis to occur to get an understanding, we just can’t open and read the bible hoping things will just fall in to place either. I know that sounds “unspiritual” but it is the truth. The bible is inspired LITERATURE. Literature which must be read and understood in its original context to its original readers and we have to do the work to bridge the cultural and time gap that exists between them and us. The dangers of not understanding produces legalism, liberalism, dependentism or outright ignorantism (not a word?).
What I Am Not Saying
We are not to be suspicious of other believers, even bible teachers, unless of course they give us a reason by their unfaithfulness to the handle the word with diligence and precision. The Bereans were both eager and they searched. The eagerness displays a level of love and acceptance of Paul’s message; however, they understood their responsibility of searching this out. In light of all the false teaching that dominates our air waves, lack of biblical understanding, and everyone lusting after “pulpit” ministry to gain disciples for themselves and have the next megaplex, we should become even the more diligent. In my circles (Simple/Organic) we don’t have most of those problems, but what does exist is a laziness and/or lack of understanding which is just as dangerous when it comes to understanding the scriptures and the mind of Christ. We have to remember this is/was God’s primary way of communicating His mind to us. Under the Old Covenant Moses commands the people of Israel to “teach it to your children”, “write it on the door posts”….. under the New Covenant we are commanded to “search the scriptures”. The written word is how the Spirit decided to communicate to us the risen Savior, what is to be our ethical compass, and what is to be our cognitive understanding of who God is and what He has done for us. We are not to take it lightly. But again we are not to be suspicious in our behavior, or demeaning in our correction of one another. This is about understanding Christ and this is centered on love, so right information without love can be very dangerous.
Let us be Bereans, we have to discern the times. We have to do the hard work and not be dependent on bible teachers, though I believe in a community hermeneutic, which I will talk about in my next post. We are not to be suspicious or demeaning but we are to loving pursue the mind of Christ through the scriptures. Laziness is not an option, our obedience and understanding depends on this.
To me the structure is just un-redeemable, wherever and whenever you find the unbiblical special caste pulpit/salaried staff coupled with the seated priesthood you will see all the resultant errors and attitudes present. You cannot arrive at biblical Christianity where the pulpit is present, the very fact that a pulpit is present is proof positive of that fact.
I think the guys at Messiah Baptist may have a stage/podium. I also think that Mike Adam’s and the crew does it also. Both are unpaid though. I think you can have a “pulpit” per se, as long as participation is present. Some things may shouldn’t be participated in until after the teaching. But the paying thing can be dangerous if that paid men is not a planter who will be leaving that church in the near future.
Lionel,
Like I’ve mentioned several times in the past, I’m glad to hear that you are still diligently searching the scriptures and continuing to grow in Christ.
Lionel-
I say tear down the pulpit! When I talk about a meeting as the church around Christ, I do not see one speaker talking for more than 5-10 minutes at a time. I believe the purpose of the mutual weekly meeting is to share burdens, pray for one another, meet needs, bring a psalm, hymn or spiritual song, exhort and encourage one another as we speak one by one as led by the spirit of Christ, all this doen around a table of fellowship starting with the breaking of the bread and ending with drinking from the cup, not to hear one individual deliver a lecture or teach an in-depth doctrinal study or catechize the “flock”. It certainly is not the place to hear an individual read their notes back to an audience. Keep in mind that my dream was to one day have a pulpit ministry and in the past I have preached expositional sermons from three different pulpits, now this idea is abhorrent to me as I know the damage the pulpit and seated priesthood has done to the life of the church. Why perpetuate the error?
Question: In the assemblies you mentioned, does the next individual who has something to share then get up after the person who spoke from the pulpit is finished and deliver their message from the same pulpit and so on and so on throughout the whole meeting? If not it would look as if what the person said from the sacred desk/pulpit is more important than what the person says from the pew. It makes it look like the person speaking from behind the pulpit is the main or the authorized speaker and perpetuates the clergy/laity heresy.
Deep doctrinal studies of the word of God is for each individual priest to engage in as they meet with the Lord on a daily basis-I would guess that is what you and I do daily? I think it is also important to be involved in mentoring and teaching new believers how to study the word of God on their own-but the mutual weekly meeting is not the place for that in my opinion.
I’m with you on the church planter getting paid after it has been determined that they cannot do what Paul did and work to provide for their own needs or a combination of both like Paul. I think it telling if a man will not try to find a way to work a trade while on a while church planting. Do you think they should receive pay from ther church they are planting or from the church that sent them?
Of course missionary reports and testimonies can go on for longer than 5-10 minutes. Grin. But think about it, the last thing you or I need is to sit through another bible study posing as a meeting around Christ as the church, we need mature men and women like Mr & Mrs Black, Alan Knox, Jon Zens to exhort and admonish us to live out the claims Christ has against our lives, to teach us by word and example to live sacrificial lives of service to others, we need to hear about dying to self and following Christ, we need to hear about stories of others who are sharing in the sufferings of Christ. I am all for a good bible study, but lets not confuse a mutual weekly meeting with a bible study.
End of rant! Grin.
Hutch,
What about an immature church who has very little understanding of scripture. You and I know it may take a while to get there and instruction is one way married with authenic open lives. If that young man/woman doesn’t have an understanding their input should be a little less into they understand more. The problem I have is that ALL never get to instruct and it only becomes the “teachers” who end up teaching. In most churches that is two, in my last church it was about 5 of us, but as the church matures that number should grow and not be left to the best orator.
So I do believe a “pulpit” type of teaching is okay, just that this teaching should be open to all mature christians who have a desire to teach. So I think through scripture we see this type of teaching especially through Acts. I think that is a church planter who is doing the majority of the teaching with a VERY YOUNG church. The other problem today is we start the church with mature Christians but there is still one or two who dominate the teaching and that is wrong also. However, if a church was planted with all new believers, I believe the majority of the teaching should come from the more mature and gifted teacher.
So it really depends Huth on the group. If it is young with little understanding instruction should occur by the mature as that church matures all begin to instruct. Thoughts?
You know me, I believe the teaching of and the study of God’s Word is very important. I am currently working on putting a series of new covenant theology lessons together in workbook format for discipling new believers, but I would never suggest we break out the workbook, or that I lecture doctrine during a mutual meeting. We know that Paul taught daily in Ephesus for a long period of time. I am sure this was a common practice for him and should be a pattern for a church planter. I cannot prove that Paul did this and then facilitated something different during a mutual meeting, just like nobody can prove that is what Paul prescribed for a mutual meeting. What we know is that he taught brand new believers daily. Then we come to a recently planted church like the Corinthian assembly and Paul encourages them to facilitate their mutual meetings in an orderly fashion, but does not tell them to stop mutual ministry and sharing and adopt a one man pulpit ministry. So, I believe the biblical approach is for a church planter to spend a season with a new congregation teaching them to gather around Christ as the church during a mutual meeting as well as spend time on other days underpinning the assembly by teaching doctrine and theology, (to me this would include teaching them how to study God’s Word on their own) especially if the church planter knows what he is doing and is teaching a new covenant Chisto-centric theology and ecclesiology. Then the church planter leaves the assembly in the hands of the Lord and checks in with that assembly from time to time in person and by written correspondence, phone calls, e-mail etc. But, right from the beginning, I would never suggest a mutual meeting around Christ be facilitated with any one individual teaching from a pulpit as it will start to set the wrong pattern from the get go. Any inaccurate handling of God’s word by a less mature brother or sister during the mutual meeting can be handled gently and lovingly by the church planter and those who are growing in maturity. I used to be scared to death of the idea that somebody would teach something heretical or make some kind of goofey prophecy or prediction in a mutual meeting, but I am not anymore, we can all grow up together in the love of Christ.
I’ve figured out how to be a Berean myself. I haven’t figured out how to share what I discover with others. No matter what method I use, I get cut up, insulted, and even called names….and all from professing Christians. This post is encouraging.
BLD-
I don’t think its you or the way you share things brother:
22Blessed (happy–[a]with life-joy and satisfaction in God’s favor and salvation, apart from your outward condition–and [b]to be envied) are you when people despise (hate) you, and when they exclude and excommunicate you [as disreputable] and revile and denounce you and defame and cast out and spurn your name as evil (wicked) on account of the Son of Man.-Luke 6:22
Hutch,
I agree, the problem today is we don’t have that type of Church planting in the states. Most churches are planted by “elders/pastors” thus they aren’t a group of peers pursuing Christ, there is structured leadership, salaried men, who are looking for people to be the coal, build the train track, and maintain the cars of their vision train. So we are already headed in the wrong direction at high speeds and you can either get out the way or buy your ticket; however, the train will continue and only pick up speed.
..I’d just get off the train.
Thanks Hutch! I needed that.
Greed for money is at the bottom of much of our sad plight. Men make a profession of dispensing the water of life which God has freely given to all. They then inaugurate a special caste to minister in this profession and demand support from the rest of God’s children. Others see an opportunity to make gain and seize power by instituting organizations to produce and train the professional clergymen. Theological seminaries under the guise of Bible colleges are begun and again a tax is levied against the “clergy of God” to produce a special clergy which will steal the very privileges of those who pay tribute to this earthly hand-maiden to produce them. Eventually the simplicity of God’s original plan of priesthood becomes so obscure, that those who plead for a return to the old paths are derided, maligned and laughed to scorn.-W. Carl Ketcherside
Great post, L..
I think the issue of scripture is a bit interesting—as on one end, you have it where others start out sincerly wishing to build up others and so they teach them from a pulpit…with it in time becoming a hinderance when that becomes the focus/no one is allowed/challenged to teach (as far as it concerns those with the gift/ability to do so) and people are stuck in a “spoon-feeding” mentality alongside a blaming mindset of “he is not feeding me enough…”…………………or one goes to the opposite end of the spectrum where reading scripture is divorced from reading in context, culture and history—with the idea of the Holy Spirit giving insight/revelation and showing the Word applying in our lives becoming something that equates to “Well, I think…..” being what we focus upon instead of what did it mean to them—-and from there, it gets kooky and ANYTHING can go.
Finding the middle ground/balance is key….and on the issue, I don’t think it’s either the pulpit or circle of learning (as in mutual learning) that’s what’s to be our focus.
Something coming to my mind is what Albert Einstein said when he stated, “I never teach my pupils; I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn.”
On a side note, what would anyone here say on the issue of what’s known as “Cell Groups” ( http://www.joelcomiskeygroup.com/articles/ )—as in what has been noted by many churches (including Organic Ones), it seems that these are one of the ways that one can have the best of both worlds and something working effectively in producing disciples…..with their being opportunity to break out/teach mutually in a MYRIAD of ways (as we’re called to do as Bereans).
Much love to all the people on the blog who bless me always (i.e Lionel, Bro Lawrence D, Hutch, Joe Miller, etc)—as it’s always a blessing to be wrestling together for the sake of Christ.