As I am convinced of reading the Bible on face value, I'm strictly complementarian. That is, while confirming equality in value, men and women have different roles within the church. This is not to be confused with complimentarianism which is the belief that both sexes should be praised and encouraged.
My beloved co-worker in the gospel Tracey asked me a question the other day;
Have we worked out practically how complementarianism works within small group Bible studies but not as well within the larger Sunday gatherings?
It's a good question. And I think the answer is related to the difference between prophesying and teaching.
As soon as I've worked out exactly what that difference is, I will have an answer for Trace.
Can I give a suggestion on this one? I reckon it's harder to figure out the small group Bible study question if you give no significance to the idea of 'formal church gathering'. If you have a slippery view of church that is nothing more than 'gathering around the word' you end up in these sorts of sticky problems...
ReplyDeleteThanks Mikey, that is a helpful way of framing the discussion. There's a lot of things to hold together here. Such as the reality of what the gathering actually looked like in the early church. My completely unreferenced understanding is it may have looked much closer to our small groups than our formal gatherings.
ReplyDeleteIn what sense is the small group church? Small groups are clearly formalised. While not as formal as the larger Sunday gathering church, it is more formal than you coming over to my place for dinner and we talk about Jesus. There is a spectrum.
It is interesting working with AFES who "don't do churches". That's the official line, but if not church, then what is it they are doing? At what point does the boiling down of church to it's essence as 'people gathered around the word of God' become a negative? Perhaps in the area of prophecy/teaching is one example.
Perhaps I am just overcorrecting as my experience is that guys are ready to abdicate responsibility whenever possible. Therefore taking a bible study becomes purely facilitating conversation without responsibility, rather than leading through facilitating conversation. They need to hear that Bible study is church. And they are leaders.
Hmm... more thought is needed
Hey Izaac, been enjoying your blog and your your freewheeling approach!!! Good stuff.
ReplyDeletea comment on prophecy, not related to the above. I reckon that in Ephesians, when it says apostles and prophets, the prophets are not the old Testament prophets but actually NT prophets. Generally I've heard it explained, or understood it myself, as OT prophets. Not sure what more to do with it- perhaps a search through Hebrews (written by a prophet, not an apostle?) might be a starter. Cheers brother, Martin
Hi Martin,
ReplyDeleteIt's great to hear from people enjoying and reflecting upon my reflections.
I think you're spot on with the Ephesians reference. There were certainly New Testament prophets as seen in Acts 13:1. There will be a future post on what prophecy looks like today, but my summary thoughts for the moment are:
Today all Christians can prophecy including men and women as a fulfilment of Joel 2 as seen in Acts 2. This is because one of the requirements of prophecy in the OT was to be filled with the Spirit of God which indicated special relationship leading to special revelation. This particular type of prophet began with Abraham in Genesis 20:7 and ended with the apostolic generation (the apostles and prophets of Eph 2:20). There was a brief period of overlap before the old type prophet disappeared and the new type began at Pentecost. Now all Christian's have the Spirit of God and so can prophecy, but as we aren't included in the old type prophecy therefore we cannot add extra chapters to the Bible.
As for the content of prophecy. I am still working that out. Rev 19:10 "The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy" is about the best I can do. As well as some stuff from 1 John which will not come immediately to mind. But I remember reading it and thinking I need to go back there.
Hmm. I am sensing there is not much clarity there, but I promise it is coming (along with a helpful diagram)!
Btw, I had always heard the Ephesians reference as OT prophets too until James Davidson was preaching at Baulkham Hills North Anglican a few weeks ago on that very passage and said it was clearly two groups and most likely not OT prophets but NT. I questioned this and his answer began the process of preparing this elective for MYC.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I preached on 2 Peter last year at UniChurch and I'm pretty sure when Peter talks about the prophets there it is almost certainly the Old Testament prophets. 2 Peter 3:2 "that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles." So it's not easy to have a simple definition of prophets in the NT.
Thanks for the reminder of Ephesians. Do you have a suggestion for a definition of the content of NT prophecy?