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…

 

An Ecclesiastical Paradox

My church experiences over the years leads me to recall an interesting ecclesiastical puzzle that a friend brought up some time ago and that I have observed several times across congregations.

Case 1: The Pastor of a protestant church (I have no Catholic experience to offer) announces that he has been ‘called’ to a new church and will leave shortly.

Although people may be sad and regret the situation (or not in some cases), they do not question for a moment that the ‘call’ is devine. He is wished well and sent off into the sunset as an obedient servant.

Case 2: Same scenario except that this time a congregant member of a protestant church announces that he doesn’t fit at the church for one reason or another, and is moving to or looking for a new church.

In this case, the congregant is more often than not told that he or she has been placed in that congregation by the Lord for a reason and shouldn’t ‘run away’ from problems. His or her reason is assumed to be a man-centered one and certainly not devine in origination. If they do leave, the well wishes are often grudging as best, possibly judgemental and assumes that the congregant has the problem.

So, what is wrong with these pictures?

In many (I won’t go so far as to say most) instances, the pastor in Case 1 was less than happy with the current church or he wouldn’t have bothered with the new offer. The legitimacy of that unhappiness is not relevant to our discussion here. The new ‘call’ may legitimately be a better devine utilization of pastoral gifts. It may also be just a more comfortable fit for the person. In either case, no fault is attributed.

The situation in Case 2, however, present a problem. Why can a Pastor feel a calling to a new situation (even one that suits better) and it is okay, even a blessing for all, while the same move by a congregant is treated as man-centered and a problem in the congregant?

It just doesn’t wash, folks.

Is the Pastor intrinsically closer to the Lord? I don’t buy it as universal. Is the congregant intrinsically farther from the Lord? Again, makes no sense.

If the congregant should be working through whatever the issues are, then the pastor should be doing no less. If the pastor can hear a new and exciting call, then the congregant can do likewise and should have equal blessing. The congregant and Pastor should be regarded with unanimity.

Now, that doesn’t mean that there is not a clear time to go, or to stay. That is always between the believer and the Lord. The problem illuminated here is the use of man-centered values and reasons to treat two situation differently.

Just something to ponder…

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.