Church Small Groups vs Biblical Gathering

The contemporary church (mostly irrespective of denomination) has seen a legitimate need to minister to individuals outside of the usual Sunday Service and Sunday School. This comes from a realization that a mass gathering does not often reflect the mentoring requirements for individual Christian growth and accountability. This is a valid realization. The Bible is clear that we are to study the scripture and be accountable in community, yet a large group generally stifles more intimate sharing and questioning.

In our time, however, this justification for mentoring and smaller group fellowship has often been combined with the theories and assumptions of both secular and New Age psychology surrounding personal growth, self esteem, group dynamics and the individual entitlement of man over the assembly. Not that these areas of study do not yield results for society, but they are frequently not based upon biblical principles and operate under very different assumptions about the status of man. They are at their root completely at odds with Biblical values.

Secular values are predominantly post-modern, with a relativistic value structure. They assume that all truth is relative either within society or individually, and that every individual is entitled to self-driven actualization. Most congregants operate unconsciously from a mindset which combines both these underlying values, with each given almost equal weight or the post-modern predominating.

This is completely at odds with the Biblical truth of divine sovereignty, absolute universal laws, and individual responsibility superseding individual entitlement.

Put more practically (and to use the biblical analogy of Isaiah 29:16 very loosely), society see the clay as entitled to a hearing and compliance from the potter, while the biblical truth of creation is precisely the opposite. The potter is completely independent and sovereign over the clay, owing it nothing whatsoever (Isaiah 64:8, Jeremiah 18:4).

Why does this matter? It matters because the view point that current small group ministry grows from determines whether it can fill the need that the formal church does not, that of the smaller integrated fellowship described in the early church.

So, we have something of a quandary. Does the present small group structure in most churches address the Biblical proscription modeled in the early church gatherings – one based on wholly biblical precepts?

Let me also close this post by pointing out that this discussion does not discount the many wonderful benefits of fellowship in current groups. The question is whether they address the biblical model and any regulative principle that is implies, since all biblical principles are by definition important.

Gathering in the Beloved

Let us start with a biblical prototype for believer interaction – “…be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord;” Ephesians 5:18-19.

Notice that there is no indication at all that this is culturally or time period relative. That is, it is a time independent prototype.

Now, continuing, we also have method. As we gather – ” Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” Colossians 3:16

And next, motivation to gather regularly – “…let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.” Hebrews 10:24-25.

So proto-typically, we have believers gathering together regularly to study and speak of the Word and of the Lord, thankfully (and by implication humbly) rejoicing in Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.

Further, the disciples documented in Scripture modeled this in their behaviour once they were on their own, after Pentecost – ” They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” Acts 2:42

And again ” Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart,” Acts 2:46. It is also significant to note the “Day by day continuing”. This was not something occurring only periodically, be that weekly or monthly. It was a daily mode of living the believing life.

Putting this all together, what do we have and what happens when we follow this paradigm in our day? First we should take note that, although church is vitally important, this does not sound anything like a church service anywhere that I know of, which is interesting in itself.

A key here is that the focus and feeling is centered around a humble thankfulness in salvation, and the upon the Lord, through the primary means he specified, scripture. This may have taken several forms and expressions, but the focus was on Him and His Word.

It is also edifying to note what the focus was not on. It was not on ‘activities’ outside of praise, worship and directly associated fellowship. It was not on the work of the assembly in the community. Not that this work did not exist or was not important, but it played no apparent part in the assembling. It was external to it. For example, there was no focus on the men who were helping the widows. In fact, it appears from their appointment elsewhere that they were appointed so that their work would not be disruptive to the gathering in the Lord’s name.

The sole reason for the beloved to gather was to fellowship in rejoicing in the Lord and His work of creating His people. All the activities were an expression of that rejoicing. And this was a daily way of life, which would result in that mindset overshadowing all other activities.

One might say that in consideration of what the Lord has done, rejoicing in Him in a way that eclipses all else would seem only appropriate to believers. But here we see it modeled explicitly.

So, how about us in the 21st century? I don’t see that anything has changed. Yes, life has become cluttered with countless new distractions of the world, and that same world would have us believe that this clutter is of over-riding importance. Remember who the world represents and to whose ends this worldly emphasis contributes – none other than the Prince of the Air (Ephesians 2:2). Further, the Scriptures have not changed. There has not been any new revelation that changes these prototypes as given in the existing canon.

The result is that we are to follow suit in our focus. And having said that, I would atest that when we actually manage it, which as sinners is often sporadic at best, the experience is wonderful, humbling and convicting. It mirrors David in Psalm 139:6 “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; It is too high, I cannot attain to it.” The humble thankfulness and joy of gathering with other believers to give thanks and rejoice in the Lord in Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs is just too wonderful for us to fully take in.

To be awestruck is the only appropriate response. T’would that it were our only way of life…

 

Beyond the Good-O-Meter

In the previous post containing the Good-O-Meter clip, I mentioned that the theology had some issues. What issues, you might ask?

Well, the meter implies in its evaluations that each of the lost individuals has some amount of good credited to them at judgment. It surges up to as much as the half way mark, then falls back to the level assigned by judgment – that of ‘bad’. Though this works well dramatically, it is very important to understand that this is not the case in reality. There is an implication that the ‘good’ parts of the individuals have some value before God. That is completely wrong.

Scripture is clear that all are tainted in every aspect, having no good at all unless they are regenerated in Christ. Works or virtues outside of Christ have no value whatsoever before God.

Isaiah 64:6 states it clearly “For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment”

Even the finest virtues and character of the unregenerate are a ‘filthy garment’ before God. All of the virtues and any good that is done by the unregenerate is tainted by the imputed sin that is passed on to every one of Adam’s seed. Every superficially Godly or good dead is in fact an abomination to the Lord because it is done in a spirit of rebellion against Him and denial of Him. That makes every human being (past, present and future) that has not been saved unacceptable before a righteous and holy God. Scripture is again clear that nothing of them is counted as of any value.

So, in this clip, the meter should not move at all from initial ‘bad’ position except in the case of the regenerated.

That said, however, the most important point is made very clearly – salvation is through Christ Alone.

Yes, we have no bananas

You can hear it from the Pulpit of countless churches now “If you are saved you must see the fruits of the spirit actualized in your life” with the implication that is must be clear, continuous and now. It is also heard as church lobby chit chat about whether so and so is a real believer since they haven’t been behaving very well. They are clearly not demonstrating the fruits of the Spirit in a proper (as the speaker sees it) ‘Christian’ manner or not consistently. You have surely heard this in one form or another, right? I have, and for reason that will become clear, it makes steam come out of my ears…

These scenarios naturally lead believers (especially new ones) to ask themselves whether they are truly saved, assuming that they occasionally do not behave as a the perfect believer or they do not at times overtly show the fruits of the spirit particularly prominently.

This is well and clearly addressed in the Canons of Dordt. Remember those? No? Well since they form the foundation and effect virtually all Reformed confessions, you should. However, let us not digress on that for now.

First Head of Doctrine: Divine Election and Reprobation

“Article of faith 12: The Assurance of Election
Assurance of this their eternal and unchangeable election to salvation is given to the chosen in due time, though by various stages and in differing measure. Such assurance comes not by inquisitive searching into the hidden and deep things of God, but by noticing within themselves, with spiritual joy and holy delight, the unmistakable fruits of election pointed out in God’s Word–such as a true faith in Christ, a childlike fear of God, a godly sorrow for their sins, a hunger and thirst for righteousness, and so on.”

And in Scripture we have (as one example of many) in Romans 10:9 ”if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved”

As the Canons imply, the fruits of Spirit do not even enter the equation as more than a side effect, a significant one admittedly, but not a determinant one for salvation.

You were saved by the Gospel message (Romans 10:9 and others). Your knowledge in your own heart of your belief in that message, and thereby belief in Christ, is salvation. All else is after the fact.

To preach otherwise is IMO to do the people of God a great dis-service and produce in those that might buy into it, unnecessary angst and worry. Hence the steam from my ears.

 

Reformation Day or Halloween?

Yes, I know it is almost Spring and not that season. But this has been on my mind, so here we go. It is about a  strange situation that I have puzzled about for years – the non-starter of Reformation Day in almost all Protestant denominations and churches.

Fact -> If the pivotal event of Reformation Day had not occurred (by God’s grace, of course), then each and every single person in all Protestant denominational churches would today be a Roman Catholic or a non-believer, or both. In the majority of cases, they would not be saved.

Fact -> Not only does Reformation Day and the events thereof it go largely unnoticed and uncelebrated in most churches today, but those churches seems much more concerned with Halloween silliness than with any awareness of the events that shaped (and still does) their own denominational history.

What does this mean? What does it say about the church today?

I have, over the years, attended a number of churches – mostly Baptist and mostly Reformed to one degree or another. With one exception, they have proceeded to ignore the Reformation almost completely, as if the work of the Reformers of the 1500 and 1600s was largely unrelated to their freedom from Rome and their beliefs. The historic martyrs are simply lost.

I have no explanation other than intellectual hubris and entitlement of the first order, and I just don’t understand it. I see it as a failure of the congregation but much more a huge pastoral failure.

They look hither and yon for alternatives to Halloween, running about in many case with great angst over things are for the most part meaningless. At the same time, they ignore that which formed the foundation of their beliefs and which would provide something to celebrate in the Lord.

I can only attribute the phenomena to a subtle man centered philosophy that will concentrate on almost anything of flesh rather than celebrate the reality of the sovereign Spirit of God that has shaped their Christian reality.

What can I say but WAKE UP!

 

Proscriptive Principles of Small Groups

In the previous posts, it was proposed that the paradigm of small assemblies from the early church was still applicable today. Further, there has been no other prototype given in biblical revelation that replaced that paradigm for Christian gatherings. That limited size structure is what properly supports the growth of each believer in all required ways. It effectively disavows the need for cookie cutter approaches.

Any assumptions that contemporary social science has developed new or even superior paradigms that make biblical paradigms less sufficient or outdated would in effect propose that the Scriptures are incomplete, insufficient, in need of help, or all three. That is simply not part of our system of beliefs.

So, are small groups the answer to the apparent insufficiency of mass Sunday assemblies in supporting biblical Christian growth and need for interpersonal connection? I would have to answer with the proverbial yes and no.

What, you say? All this palaver to take the fifth? Well, not quite…

Small groups have much to offer any sized church. They provide an intimate fellowship structure that is solidly Christian and with legitimate biblical oversight. That is no small contribution. They allow a membership that is (hopefully) voluntary and therefor can reflect individual preference. However, does this fulfill that same need as the fellowship of the regular assembly, where everyone knows one another? I would say no.

The church in the present age often seems about growth, growth and more growth. That is understandable to sustain building, staff, programs and other infrastructure. But that is not what the local church is about. The result can be a local church where people are there by alone. And the bigger the church, the bigger the issue. The solution given is small groups. My point is that they are not the solution and they are definitely not a reflection of the early church. The local church as a mega institution does not reflect the church of the Bible.

The church assembly is not present in Bible as scalable. Once it gets beyond a couple of hundred members there is no possibility for biblical  church fellowship and a Christian family relationship among the members and adherents. Splitting into small groups just yields a fragmented set of groups.

I would propose that the church should always divide once it has reached the point where members can know most other members, and where the care of the membership requires a staff infrastructure. Saying that small groups make it possible to provide the early church environment while having many hundreds or thousand of members is simply untrue even if it supports the organization.

 

Regulative Principles

A couple of verses that we have discussed before to start…

“And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” Acts 2:42.

Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” Colossians 3:16.

And there are numerous others addressing the assembling of the beloved in Christ.

The question is, are these regulative for the gathering of believers now? And what precisely are they describing?

As I stated in another post, my interest in this was initially focused by several articles in the Canons of Dordt. In those sections it is pointed out that the believer can draw great assurance from the fact that they are assured of their standing before God by the very beliefs that saved them – in Christ and Him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2), and not necessarily in other outward signs. Further, it is pointed out that believers should continue to diligently avail themselves of the ‘Means of Grace” that were provided by the Lord in support of their justification, sanctification and assurance.

In the two verses quoted above we find a Scriptural proscription not only for the assembling of the Saints, but even more for their ongoing life in Christ. I am more and more convicted that these specifications from Scripture are both regulative in nature and exclusive in scope. Moreover, there are no alternatives specified in Scripture.

The obvious counter argument is that these were culturally based, for those times alone, and thereby can be redefined today for modern cultural norms. However, I do not see any specifics of times and culture in these verses or their context that would indicate that. In fact, the terms used are sufficiently general to define a model for life as opposed to some specific actualization of a cultural venue. As such, I reject that argument.

Next, am I implying a narrow reading of the principles that would imply a specific instrumentation (a big issue today) or style of hymnody? Not at all. Although I think that there are some restrictions implied, we are not talking about an RPW (Regulative Principle of Worship) which demands the acapella singing of KJV-only Psalms (to take an extreme but existing example). In its restrictiveness, I think that would defy the regulative principles implied here, just as much as many emergent approaches most certainly do.

I am talking about an ‘attitude’ model as much as anything else, and the actualization falls naturally from that, not the other way around.

What is that model? Well, let me close this post by parsing the verses above for the implied components:

1. devoted to the Apostles’ teachings – for us, the Scriptures
2. fellowship – notice that is fellowship in the teachings
3. breaking of bread (communion, not dinner)
4. prayer
5. Word dwell richly within you, (the Word) teaching and admonishing in
5.1 songs
5.2 hymns
5.3 spiritual songs
all rejoicing in thankfulness to God.

There you have it – a gathering focused upon the Lord in every way, directly and primarily through the Scriptures and things drawn from them – always looking up so to speak. Not a single word about anything at all of man – no mention of programs, books about programs and self-actualization, etc.

These plus a few others that expand upon them embody the sole regulative model in Scripture and thereby the regulative model for God’s people, the beloved in Christ – a model for all time.

 

Are Small Groups Biblical?

The contemporary church (irrespective of denomination) has seen a legitimate need to minister to individuals outside of the usual Sunday Service and Sunday Schools. This comes from a realization that a mass gathering does not often reflect the mentoring requirements for individual Christian growth and accountability. The Bible makes clear that we are to study the scripture and be accountable in community (for example Acts 17:11). But a large group can easily stifle more intimate sharing and questioning.

In our time, this rational for smaller group mentoring and fellowship has often been unconsciously melded with the theories and assumptions of secular and New Age psychology surrounding personal growth, self esteem, group dynamics and the individual entitlement of man. Not that these areas of study do not yield results for society, but they are frequently not based upon biblical principles and make very different assumptions about the status of man in creation. They are, at their root, completely at odds with Biblical values based upon the absolute sovereignty of God.

Secular values are predominantly post-modern. They have a relative value structure, assuming that all truth is relative (either socially or individually), and that every individual is entitled to self-drive actualization. Many congregants operate unconsciously from a mindset which selectively uses these values, with each set given almost equal weight or the post-modern more weight.

This is completely at odds with the Biblical truth of a sovereign God, His absolute universal laws, and individual responsibility to precepts beyond individual entitlement of any sort.

Put more practically (and to use the biblical analogy of Isaiah 29:16 very loosely), society see the clay as entitled to a hearing and compliance from the potter, while the biblical truth of creation is precisely the opposite. with the potter having completely independent and sovereign control over the clay, owing it nothing whatsoever (Isaiah 64:8, Jeremiah 18:4).

Why does this matter? It matters because the view point that current small group ministry grows from determines whether it can fill the need that the formal church does not, that of the smaller integrated fellowship described in the early church (see Gathering in the Beloved).

So, we have something of a quandary. Does the present small group structure in most churches address the Biblical proscription modeled in the early church gatherings – one based on wholly biblical precepts?

Let me also close this post by pointing out that this discussion does not discount the many wonderful benefits of fellowship in current groups. The question is whether they address the biblical model and any regulative principle that it implies, since all biblical principles are by definition important.

 

Gathering in the Beloved

Let us start with biblical prototypes for believer interaction.

“…be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord” Ephesians 5:18-19. There is no indication at all that this is culturally or time period relative. It is a time independent prototype.

In Colossians 3:16 we have method. As we gather “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.”

And in Hebrews 10:24-25, motivation to gather regularly. “…let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

Thus, we have believers exhorted to gather together regularly, to study and speak of the Word, to exhort and support one another in holiness, while thankfully (and by implication humbly) rejoicing in Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.

The disciples modeled this in their behaviour once they were on their own, after Pentecost.

“They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” Acts 2:42

“Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart,” Acts 2:46.

It is significant to note the “Day by day continuing” phrase. This was not something occurring only periodically, be that weekly or monthly. It was a daily mode of living the believing life.

Putting this prototypical model together, what do we have and what happens when we follow this paradigm? As an aside, we should take note that, although church is vitally important, this does not sound anything like many, if not most, church services – an issue for another blogging day.

A key here is that the focus and feeling of these gatherings centered around a humble thankfulness in salvation, and the upon the Lord, through the primary means he specified, scripture. This may have taken several forms and many possible expressions, but the focus was on Him and His Word.

It is useful to note what the focus was not on. It was not on ‘activities’ outside of praise, worship and directly associated fellowship. It was not on the work of the assembly in the community. It was not that this work did not exist or was not important, but it played no apparent part in the assembling. That work was external to and a result of  it. For example, there was no focus on the men who were helping the widows. In fact, it appears from the necessity of their appointment that they were appointed so that work would not be disruptive to the gathering in the Lord’s name. “Then we can appoint those men over this business, and we apostles will continue to devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” Acts 6:4

The sole reason for the beloved to gather was to fellowship in rejoicing in the Lord and His work of salvation. All part of gathering were an expression of that rejoicing. And this was a daily way of life, which would result in that mindset overshadowing all other worldly activities. It was their worldview¹.

Considering what the Lord has done, especially in salvation, rejoicing in Him in a way that eclipses all else would seem only appropriate. But here we see that path modeled explicitly.

So, how about us in the 21st century? I don’t see that anything has changed much or at all. Yes, life has become cluttered with countless distractions of the world, and as with the early church world it would have us believe that this clutter is of over-riding importance. But remember who the world represents and to whose ends this worldly emphasis contributes – none other than the Prince of the Air, Satan (Ephesians 2:2). And the Scriptures have not changed. There has not been any new revelation that changes the prototypes as given in the existing canon.

The implication is that we and our earthly brethren are to follow suit in our focus. Our worldview is to be centered on the Lord.

The resultant experience, though mine has been tiny and sporatic, is wonderful, humbling and convicting even on a small, tentative scale. The gatherings in this model that I have experienced can only be expressed in the words of David in Psalm 139:6 “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; It is too high, I cannot attain to it.” The humble thankfulness and joy of such gathering with other believers is just too wonderful to be truly take in. And that, I think, is how it is intended to be.

¹For more on worldview, see Naming the Elephant, Worldview as a concept, 2ed., James W. Shire.