Preface

This article may seem to have some strong statements. But the modern church also tends to ignore 1 Corinthians 14, and the role of men in the church assembly. Athough some of our statements may not be sufficiently supported at this time, we hope to support them better in time. We believe the scriptures show good evidence for our interpretation. Please let us know if you find anything in particular that needs more support or explanation.

(THIS ARTICLE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION)

Purpose

Participation in church is important. We are each individuals made in God's image and God has something very important for each Christian in church. God has appointed the original apostles to set the foundation of the church and we ought to listen. The modern church is required to submit to the apostles and is not free to interpret things as they see fit. This article is about ordinary men and their participation in the church assembly. If you are a faithful church attender, but avoid public speaking in church, this article may be for you. If you are a man, are you content to be silent in church? Are you ok with the usual way Christians meet as they gather in assemblies each week? Do you ever wonder about the tradition of one man speaking while the rest of the body is silent? According to the Bible, men are not supposed to be silent while one man regularly has all the attention. This is what the modern church teaches, but it is not the tradition set up by the apostles. Do you ever wonder why the early church enjoyed a full meal 'Lord's Supper' every week as a time of fellowship and commemoration of Christ? Does your modern church ever do this? Is there any support for the modern church model in the New Testament? We will show New Testament support for the ordinary man as the speaker in the primary church assembly. We will show that the ordinary man is expected to test what is said by other men who speak in church.

We only have one teacher, Christ

According to Matthew 23:8, no individual man is supposed to be given the title 'teacher' in the church except for Jesus Christ. Similarly, no one should be called "senior pastor", because only one, Jesus Christ is our "chief shepherd". The main problem is what you allow people to routinely call you. Do you allow titles to be used about you? Do you allow titles to be printed? Do you welcome the extra honor that is the subject of Matthew 23:8? The issue is that men tend to welcome the honor of titles and tend to easily take away the rights of the ordinary man who attends church. The scriptures actually expect all men to become teachers. If you have been a Christian for a while, the Bible seems to suggest you ought to be a teacher (Heb 5:12-14). This certainly includes ordinary men. But titles are not special when all men are teachers, under the primary teacher, Christ. This is the sense that all men can be teachers. All are carefully following Christ. All men can grow to become teachers without being the type of teacher that dominates church time (Matt 23:8). If you are an excellent preacher and you can deliver a top-notch sermon, you may be disqualified. The scriptures indicate that some men should sit down to allow time for the other men. Additionally, the other men must be granted and encouraged to test what is said (1 Cor 14:29-38). Any elder who does not follow the scripture by enforcing these rules may also be disqualified from being a biblically qualified elder. The New Testament is radical about supporting the role of the ordinary man in church. Any man who follows Christ by teaching what Christ has said is to be accepted. Any man who puts himself above the ordinary men, and is unwilling to share speaking time or to be tested, appears to be disqualified from speaking according to the Bible (1 Cor 14:29-38).

Participating In The Church Meeting

Do you ever wonder why the New Testament encourages ordinary men to actively participate in church? Do you ever wonder why we never allow this biblically granted participation by ordinary men in our modern churches? Do you ever wonder why the early church used to gather for a full Lord's Supper meal every week? Do you ever wonder why we never do this today? Before we go on, let's address a fear-based concern right away. What if you are afraid of public speaking, and you have no desire to be a church leader? Why can't we just go to church, listen to the sermon, and then go home? This is so much easier. There are many other ways to serve God. This would be a very reasonable feeling by men when you observe the professional stage of the modern church today. The modern church has a professional pastor, staff, bylaws of the 501(c)(3) organization, the expectation of being paid, and countless volunteers who have bought into the system. But this is not the context of the early church. The early church was simple and church does not need to be complicated. Have you ever wondered why the original apostles encouraged men to speak up in church? What if the apostles intentionally wanted ordinary men to speak up in church? What if God, through the example and instruction of the apostles, wanted to raise the rights of ordinary men to speak up and wanted to limit the women in the same meeting, because of a higher God-ordained design? One of the most ignored passages in the New Testament, 1 Corinthians 14, encourages men to speak for the edification of others and for the others (men) to test what is said (1 Cor 14:29-38). There are so many modern arguments against this simple model because the modern church does not accept the simple teaching of the Bible. We know God could intervene, but what if God has been testing the church for 2000 years to see who will follow the writings of the apostles and who will rebel? Should we grant the speaking role of the church to one man who is professionally trained and gifted rather than the ordinary man? Should we omit the full meal 'Lord's Supper' that was a clear pattern in the early church because it does not fit our theatre-style churches today? What if Christian fellowship based in a home, with a full meal, and city-wide connections, was exactly the intention of God, as the apostles made it pretty clear. Should we skip the fellowship Lord's Supper meal because it does not fit our formal modern church style? We believe it is wiser to follow the original apostles both in their teaching and in their traditions. Why would we rather do it our way than their way?

The reality of our Modern Church

The reality of our modern church way is that one man is honored instead of the ordinary man each week. The beauty of the New Testament model, that we no longer follow, is the equality of the forum. Each man is allowed to speak, but only for edification. The current model honors one man above the rest, which is the pragmatic approach. The New Testament talks about men speaking in the church meeting and women being silent. But in our modern church, the men are silent. If you do this long enough, ordinary men are never given the opportunity to speak and become weak, fragile, and no longer interested in any kind of speaking to encourage the church. The ordinary man becomes perfectly happy to sit and listen. This is the easy way. The ordinary man knows he is most likely not going to be a church leader, so he has no reason to speak up about anything. He may be serious about following Jesus, and he may occasionally speak in a mixed format class, but he is never given the opportunity to speak up in the 1 Corinthians 14 way. He may be happy to help with the church landscaping work or assist with deacon needs, but he is not inclined to say anything in the weekly church meeting. In fact the weekly church meeting sometimes becomes very formal and structured where almost everything that is said is pre-planned. This keeps the quality high because the real purpose of the modern church is to look good. The ordinary many may say that church is wonderful, but he may also get sleepy during sermons. He goes through the weekly ceremony and then has a few minutes of real conversation with a few people after the sermon. Some men are stronger in their opinions about the church as an 'organized religion' and they remain quietly frustrated. Many men will attend church all their lives without ever speaking up in the church assembly. They know they don't have a special gift for speaking, teaching, or preaching, so they remain quiet. What does the Bible say about participation in the church assembly? Does the modern church make any choices that quietly undermine and suppress the intention of the apostles? Are there modern church practices that essentially fight against the design of the original apostles? In 1 Corinthians 14, Christian men are encouraged to speak up and build up one another in the church. The design of the apostles was to meet in homes, meet at the city/town level, enjoy a full Lord's Supper meal, listen to men sharing (as they are led), always ensure what is said is tested, etc. The reality of the modern church is that almost all these things are abandoned and new practices emerge. We may call our church building a 'tabernacle.' We may allow one man to do all the speaking. We may associate at the sub-town/city level and associate with optional government guidelines. We may abandon the regular full meal Lord's Supper. We may not allow children in Christian homes to join in the Lord's Supper meal (horrid thought in Jewish Passover days). No one is allowed to test or question these things. The church system controls everything. Everything is said with perfect oratory skill. Everything is smooth. Almost everything is perfectly edifying. Everything is theatre quality. Issues are never discussed. The ordinary man is clueless and ignorant. Men and women who are fraternal members of the church organization can question things, but no man who is outside the order knows. All issues are ignored. Everything is done to look good.

The Underlying Issue And The Easy Way

We think the original apostles have some things to say about the ordinary man in the church that are quietly dismissed in our modern church. Since we have no active forum for discussion, the topic does not even come up. No one cares because no one even knows there is a problem. No one cares because no one is allowed to discuss these things. If you do discuss ideas about the ordinary man and his rights to speak and test in the church, you might get dismissed, argued against, or considered divisive. You may get turned into a person who is out of touch with reality. You may be ignored. You may be confronted with an unrelated issue. Generally, the ordinary man is not wanted in any open forum in the typical modern church. Leadership must support and defend the status quo even if it does not have much support in the Bible. The ordinary man has certain rights and privileges in the Bible, but these are stripped away in the modern church. But like a frog in a warm bath, most men get used to the passive option and are content as it is. The modern church makes it easy to do very little. There is a call to be involved in supporting the program of the church organization, but there is a fraternal membership goal that is partly the reason why. This same church will not make any great effort to support another assembly/organization in the same town/area. The organization is focused on its success. This means men are encouraged to support the programs of the church, but they are not encouraged in any way to look to the scriptures and consider if there are any issues with anything said by the church spokesmen. The ordinary man is very intimidated by the formidable force of the institution. The ordinary man retreats to his home responsibilities and the selection of church activities that fit his schedule. Overall, the man does not have to do much thinking and certainly no testing. Most men like it this way. This means less stress to just go with the flow. This way the ordinary man can simplify his life. Church becomes a consumer activity. He is not a producer. In the New Testament, the church meeting is different. Any ordinary man can share a thought to encourage the group and any ordinary man can test you if you say something in disagreement with apostolic teaching. The goal is not to try to nit-pick each other, of course. The goal is to encourage each other. The amazing thing is that once you have the basic Christian meeting setup where the ordinary man is honored as an equal, then the church is now ready to honor some men as especially gifted teachers and some men as preachers to the unbelievers. Once the main assembly meeting is fair, according to 1 Corinthians 14, there are so many other good things that follow. But there is always the potential for an ordinary man to speak nonsense or heresy. If no other man steps up to address this right away, then the elders are responsible. If the elders and church as a whole go bad, God is always watching and may take away the "lampstand." He may end the church.

Some Questions

When the Bible says "act like men" (1 Cor 16:13), what does it mean? When the Bible says, "Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!", what does it mean? Are you preparing yourself for these heavenly responsibilities? If you are a man, what is your role in the church? What is your basis and source of truth for all you are and what you do? Where do you get your ideas about your role in the church? Have you considered what the Bible has to say about your role in the church? What is the point of going to church, sitting in the pew, and listening to one man week after week? What is the purpose of the church?

Something Really Big

Here is something Jesus said that is really huge. He said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations... teaching them to observe all I have commanded you." (Matt 28:19-20)   Do you think this verse is for you? How do you do this? Are you involved in teaching others all the things Jesus has commanded? Is this important to you? What is the purpose of your life and how does your "hotness" or "coldness" show? How do you make sure you are not lukewarm? (Rev 3:16)   How does Jesus expect you to act in the church today? Aside from others doing mission work, does the Great Commission mean anything to you personally? If you know you are not an elder and probably never will be. If you know you are not an influencer. How do you show your encouraging thoughts about ideas like this to others? This is just an example. Perhaps you don't care about this idea... but then maybe there is another ordinary man (who is not a leader of any sort) who is also silent like you. He could influence you (in a positive way), but he, like you may be silenced by the modern way we do church.

Church, Elders and 501(c)(3)

Do you desire to be an elder? If you are an ordinary guy you should feel like the role of elder is a bit out of touch. That is for the guys who have built the church, attended seminary, or are related to the pastor. The ordinary man is not usually inclined to follow this path. But if you do, that is great, as the Bible does encourage some men to become elders. But what is the biblical role of an elder anyway? Must an elder attend elder meetings? What is the role of the elder? We ask this from an ordinary man's perspective who wonders about eldership today and also about eldership in the Bible.

Should the church be led by professional leaders and organized in the US 501(c)(3) structure (for those in the US). Should the church be organized when there are about 14 or 15 IRS rules that must be followed? Should the church be led by clergy? Where does ordination come from? Should the clergy be pastors? Should the church have a plurality of elders? If there is a plurality, should there be a "first among equals" where one man is the "senior pastor?" How does the role of "senior pastor fit the ideas in Matthew 23:8 that says you should not be called teacher? Should the church be organized at the assembly level or at the city/town level? Should the elders be responsible for one assembly or at the city/town level? Should we support denominations or should we support the independent church idea? How does the ordinary man make sense of these questions?

When you read about the expectations of Jesus said to the original apostles, do you assume these verses are for you also? What do you think of the verses that speak about talents, about the first being last and the last being first, or about counting the cost of discipleship? Are these ideas important? If so, how does the ordinary man participate in these ideas? How does the ordinary man fulfill the "teaching" if he does not feel like a teacher? How does he fulfill the "going into all the world" and "teaching" all his "commandments?" Perhaps you do not feel this concern. This article is focused on the ones who wonder about this even when you know you are not really a teacher.

One way to avoid obedience to these ideas is to retrain our thinking and focus on "worship" instead. If we define "worship" as the highest goal of our church assembly meetings, then the other one-another ideas can be second-tier issues. But what is good "worship" and how do we be assured that our "worship" is appreciated by God? There were times when God was not interested in solemn assemblies. Hopefully, we don't have those kinds of character issues that make God think that of us. But what if we are not listening to part of the church that was instructed to speak in the New Testament, but has been silenced by the modern professional church that is more interested in the smooth-running "worship" service than allowing an ordinary man to speak? How do men imitate Christ as Paul imitated Christ? How do we follow the original apostles? A lot has changed in 2000 years. Are we sure we are following the original apostles in their guidance on church practice?

We have a good idea of how men should behave at home. We are supposed to earn money, pay the bills, and teach children to follow God. Yes, there are some homes where the roles are a bit reversed, but that is rare. But our questions want to probe the deepest root of how and why we do things. What is our source of truth? It seems the role of men is a little more confusing if we consider the original writings of the original apostles. These apostles wrote what Jesus said. These apostles showed by example how men and women should behave at home and in the church. In this article, we focus on the men. How should men act in the church? Should the ordinary man go to church and passively accept all that is voted on by the democratic-elder-led consensus without question? Should the ordinary man assume everything is just fine, go to church, and quietly listen to one man speak each week? Should the men take turns? Should there be a pulpit? Should the men and women take turns? Is there a special class of speakers, sometimes called prophets, but now we call them pastors? What do elders do and how do they relate to the pastor? Where did pastors originate in the history of the church? We also don't want to overlook scripture on the topic. Some passages like 1 Corinthians 14, are rather interesting as we ask these kinds of questions.

Men are passive

Men are usually active or passive when there is a formal organized church they attend. They are usually highly involved in the organized church, or they tend to become quite uninvolved. There is the busy pastor who does everything and stays in leadership for years. There are the elders who come and go. There are the bylaws and there is the voting process (assuming 501(c)(3)). These are too much for the ordinary man to deal with. He needs to focus on his thing while the church does its thing. Some are willing to go along with the church's decisions, while others would rather stay home. Sometimes men are quiet and supportive of the church, but others are quietly bothered about things in the church. How do we understand men? What is the basis for right and wrong when there are disagreements? What is the church model that Jesus wanted? From the supportive perspective, there seems to be a consensus that men tend to be less involved in church than they should. Men are often said to be passive and uninterested. On the other hand, some of the men who stay away from the organized church would say the church has been feminized, is way too organized, etc. Some men may blame the church for focusing too much on the "show" and professionalism. Many of these men are hesitant to get involved at church. That would make sense. But is there anything that the church is doing that may be a little bit off from what Jesus designed? What is the root issue? How can the church better follow the goals that Jesus has for the church? This article questions a few issues that are hard to detect. One thing we know. We need to look to what the Bible says and avoid looking for solutions from our modern day. We need to get out of our current century and look to the source. We need to hear what the original apostles said. This article was started shortly after an excellent sermon that mentioned Malachi 3:16. "Then those who feared the LORD spoke with one another." This was a sign of health. The sermon mentioned this idea of men having some deficiencies in speaking to each other. But this sentiment may be hiding the fact that some men don't have a natural forum for expressing their thoughts. My son and I were in the assembly on that day and exchanged some comments on paper during the sermon. Sometimes things are not what they seem. The usual guidance is for men to get their act together, obey God more, and support the church. Our idea is that men need to get their act together and obey God more. But we would add that they need to question their own behavior more along with the church. Everything should be constantly assessed by the Bible. We should constantly look to the writings of the original apostles in active discussion. We should constantly be reforming. We should not get stuck in our day. We don't know our own failings and weaknesses without outside input. We need to look at what the original apostles said and think a bit deeper about the foundations of the church before we can "fix" our men's problems. In fact the men are a key part of the "reforming" process. The sermon was actually quite excellent and we applaud the presenter. But there are deeper issues at stake. Some problems can't be fixed with a band-aid.

Conversation and Dialog

The idea of conversation, talk, fellowship, etc, is one thing but in this article, we are focused on men in relationships in the church. So the idea of leadership is not the focus. The focus is on men and their role in the church along with the history and ideas in the Old Testament that set the foundation for the New Testament. Men are encouraged to be godly of course, and we see the "elder" idea as something all men should strive for. But sometimes we lose the biblical idea because the English word "elder" is not always used to refer to older men. In Greek, "elder" means older. But in English, "elder" means an official in an organized religion. In many churches, "elder" is supposedly identical to "pastor" and "overseer". But in this article, we care a lot about the ordinary man and not just the leadership of the church. We want to discover how the ordinary man acts within the church today and if there is any guidance from the original apostles on the topic. The Bible does not say much about this, but there are some significant differences between our modern-day church and the example set by the original apostles. At this point, we are not trying to solve any issues with men, leadership, men and women, ordinary men vs elders, etc. We are just raising some concepts so you know there are some things we have in mind that need to be explored. If we do not address some of these ideas, we have not dealt with real issues mentioned in the Bible. We do not want to be guilty of living in the present without looking to the scriptures. We don't want to assume our modern church is doing things right without a bit of questioning. The Bible encourages us to test things to know what is true (I Corinthians 14, 1 John 4:1, 1 Thess 5:21, 2 Peter 3:17).

The Conversational Context

The first thing we want to mention is that there is a modern church way that is very different from the New Testament church. The modern church is very formal and professional. The early church in the 1st century was different. Each week on the "Lord's Day" (Sunday), men were allowed and encouraged to speak up in a house church setting. The families that gathered in house-based churches also had a full meal each Sunday where everyone participated. This is clear if you listen to the scholars who talk about this (like Robert Banks) and many others. The reason we have to even say it like this is because there is almost immediately a shutting down reaction to this by most Christians that it was that way back then but it does not make sense for today. There is a quick connection made that the early church faced persecution, so they had to meet in homes. But that is not very accurate. If you read a bit more on the topic, there is more to the story. There are many Christians and even scholars who will make it sound like it was a primitive form of Christianity, but we have grown up and matured into the form of Christianity and church that we have today. How does this affect men? This is huge. Imagine a man sitting in the modern church pew, never encouraged to participate (other than singing or volunteering at events). Now, imagine the participation in an early church-style meeting where each man was encouraged to participate week after week, month after month, and year after year. The open forum kind of church was so normal that the apostle Paul was even asked to speak at a Jewish synagogue, even though they didn't know him at all. The key idea we are pointing out is openness. We are pointing to the culture-church style that was so different from today. Men were always encouraged to participate. Men were told to say only what was edifying (not some mean-spirited attack and not a self-interested agenda). Men were encouraged to speak in a very easy format... in a living room. What man would be intimidated in that setting? But today, at many large churches, there are very few men who would feel perfectly comfortable speaking in front of a crowd.

Modern-day "sermons" with their emphasis on oratory and skill are so appreciated that the home-based New Testament style church is completely replaced by the modern church way. We know of no home-based church in our area. If there was one, it would be seen as strange. There are no churches that we know of in the area that encourage men to speak in the biblical way that we see in 1 Corinthians 14. There is no full meal 'Lord's Supper' that fits 1 Corinthians and how the early church had a very different kind of fellowship. So with these huge differences. Is it really fair to ask why men are not involved in the church the way some may expect? The expectation of some is that the men should volunteer to fill out all the needed areas of the modern church. But God made men to be the ones who are responsible for speaking and testing everything said in the meeting. If we think 1 Corinthians has any truth in it for our day, this should be obvious. God made men the way he did and men will tend to one way or another... but they are not inclined to passively follow. Men tend to pick up a sword and fight. This can be either good or bad, depending on the situation. In many cases in the Old Testament, a man must pick up a sword and fight. To sit back and not join the fight would be the worst thing you could do. But we have to think differently in the New Testament of course. Now, today, men are the same, but we have a different fight. God has told us to go and preach the gospel to every nation and to teach all that he has commanded. What does that mean?

Pausing For Feedback, Before We Continue

There is a lot more that could be said. But let's pause and wait for some feedback before we continue... The supporting footnotes could be added, but let's wait for some feedback.