Enjoyed this conversation. I'm a pastor who has been teaching these same things for nearly 30 years now. It can feel pretty lonely sometimes, so it does my heart good to see others sharing these truths. May the lord grant you both favor and peace as you continue to share his word.
@@dainawebb3580 Right smack in the middle of Florida. Feel free to join us by Zoom until you find a healthy assembly in your area. Zoom allows for the interaction that Paul advocates for in 1 Corinthians 14 - which has been a major blessing to some of our community who can't always physically be there.
@@dainawebb3580 Ultimately the Bible needs to be your pastor. Pastors are really limited as to what they can do for you. But it is tempting to have a good pastor that will mentor us properly. But I can attest that everything we do need is right there in the Bible. For any new Christian, I would suggest to read the Bible through every 2 years. Gradually you will begin to understand things on your own after about 10 years but we also have examples of other Christians in our lives to help until we become a mature Christian. I say to read the Bible every 2 years just so you don't go crazy about it. The message really is a simple thing to understand and we don't need to go overboard about it. But in the "off" years, I would suggest also to start reading things about Christian living such as fruits of the spirit, discipleship, how to be a good witness, and things like that. Don't read anything about prophecy or end times until you get the bases covered. I call end times and prophecy teachings as "junk food". Also, get some books about how you too can be a good teacher so that you can spread the gospel and start doing small groups yourself. Because ultimately, you will need to become a "pastor" to others. To teach others. To guide or mentor others. Once you have been a Christian for about 15-20 years, you need to be the person to demonstrate Christ to others and to become that great ambassador of Christ. Over time, we need to develop into good leaders and knowledgeable about Scripture and God when others will have questions.
@@kevinerose While I disagree that the Bible needs to be your pastor, I agree that pastors are limited in what they can do for you - as is every other person gifted by God's spirit. Yet, not only is it tempting to have a good pastor that will mentor us properly - according to Ephesians 4.11-16, that is Christ's plan for his body. As a pastor, I implore people to read the Bible and follow as it directs. If I can be an aid to others in that process, then I have used my gifting for its intended purpose. As far as I can tell, the Bible presents all the elders of the assembly as pastors. They are commanded to be shepherds of God’s flock (Acts 20.28, Ephesians 4.11-12, 1 Peter 5.1-2). Keep up the good fight, my friend!
Tom’s message certainly strikes a cord with me. I have felt for a long time that we are not respecting the Holy Spirit in each other and suffer because of it. I see the real communion that we need to have is with Christ in each other as we in fact are the body of Christ and need to feed on Christ in each other. As Paul said because we don’t hold communion in the right way some of our members are weak and sick and a number sleep. Thanks for presenting this message of encouragement as our societies in which we live are in great need of seeing the love of Christ expressed through the common believer.
I love and appreciate what you shared and agree that we are not "respecting the Holy Spirit in each other." Instead people have somehow come to believe that the solo pastor is the only one with any authority to speak anything of a spiritual nature into anyone's life.
Very timely new video here. Thanks for another great one Tom. I’m still devouring all this info and de-programming my brain from institutional church mindset. This is so big. I can definitely see there’s going to be pushback in my world. “Shane has gone rogue” or whatever. But truth is truth. The Bible is our bottom line. Not men’s traditions.
This is excellent. It's the Lord's Supper, but churchgoers have the Supper in the morning. They can't even get the time of day right for Supper. Thank you, Tom, your teaching is a great blessing. This teaching is an international treasure.
Remember the lad who fell from a window , at an evening gathering , Paul went downstairs and healed him and they carried on , I know of a man on his death bed , had a vision memory of himself as a boy saying John 3 16 . . He was in a moment of terrible darkness and terror, at the time, and this vision memory came to him and drove the death darkness away. The next morning , his body restored , he was able to tell others , God restored him . 🙏
We are so blessed because of you! Thank you for being brave enough to put this out there. We who are searching for the truth appreciate what you're doing! Keep on Keeping on! God Bless you!!
30 years ago I did a few church history courses. Afterwards, I wondered how it all fitted together and said God help me understand. It was then that I saw what I call the lost and found model of church history. Basically ideas were lost or even stolen from Christ-followers until the reformation. It was then that the old ideas began to be restored i.e found by the church. I was relieved when I heard others use the same framework. I see the work you guys are doing as part of restoring what was lost. Something that in this model of church history suggests the end is getting closer.
I think a big part of assembling was basically having many aspects of life intertwined, living together. Today’s churches gather for an hour once a week & afterwards they are all strangers. Certainly they assembled to learn scriptures & what is written about in the Old/New Testament, but I’m certain they did ALL things together. They were a family, through Christ. We need to see the “assembly” as not only some specific dedicated time where we discuss scriptures/God, it should be a common occurrence that’s part of every day life. I can’t help but always talk about God with people, I don’t need a designated time or place to do it.
You know this idea of communities gathering together to worship is probably much closer than we realize. I agree it's gone today, but a hundred years ago? Good Point!
In my opinion, this video better summarizes TOM's thesis in what is fundamental than the video entitled Why the Early Church Didn't Have Worship Services - 7 videos in 1- For those who have the time, I recommend watching all 7 videos
As a Christian my whole life everyday is about worshipping the Lord. It is encouraging to meet with other believers on Sunday & sing to God together, give money for different needs, colaborate to help ppl etc. There is wiggle room for how a church conducts a service.
Another fantastic discussion on this "rethinking" that the Church truly needs to begin to do. Since first coming to faith 15 years, I looked at the Scripture and churches today and things just didn't seem right with what we're doing today. I'm going through the process of personally reassessing and shedding the built-up traditions that the Church has adopted. Tom Wadsworth has done a good work in presenting a better picture of what we as Believers ought to return to in our daily living with one another and Christ. We see a very similar deviation with the U.S. and its Constitution. We're about 300 years removed from the original founding and today's modern interpretation, practices, and function of the Constitution would be entirely unrecognizable to the founders and their vision of what America was going to become. May the Lord continue to bless your efforts and draw us back to our "love we had at first".
Fantastic conversation, thank you! The Lord gave me a dream about 1Cor 11 and obeying it, and so I have been covering in prayer & prophecy since 2001. A lonely journey indeed 🥺 I don't understand why so few saints follow this teaching now. Praying for revelation and unity in all these things 🙏
The most valuable in my experience of gatherings has been small-group “blble studies,” then, a little less, “Sunday School class,” and then least impactful ( though with some good moments), Sunday Big “worship.”
I live in SA and have wondered about the church for such a long time. How do we start with a home church? It can be such a blessing. Who leads it? I will pray about it because it makes so much sense. Thank you, I really enjoy your teachings. God bless you🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦
There are several books that go into detail about starting a home church. Go to Amazon and look up "house church." I recently reviewed Wolfgang Simson, Houses That Change the World (2001) and was impressed.
After recently studying the evolution of the Eucharist in the early church, this wonderful session gave me much needed clarification. Thank you, Tom. ✔️
@@tomwadsworth It’s as you have outlined, Tom. My recent studies into the early church had caused me a great deal of consternation over the way many of the church fathers referred to the Lord’s Supper. Your assessment of the Eucharist’s evolution has both opened my eyes and calmed my heart. I can now clearly see that the Eucharistic tradition was drawn from both the Hebrew and pagan temple systems with their alters, sacrifices and priests. I also agree with your assessment of our so-called “worship services”. I haven’t attended any of these services for a number of years, for the reasons you have covered in your other wonderful lectures. As my earthly pilgrimage draws me closer to the Celestial City, I’m convinced that the church age will conclude in the same manner in began with its gatherings taking place in the loving homes of Christ’s faithful and believing remnant. Your research work has been a wonderful blessing and I’m greatly looking forward to your coming publication. Thank you, my friend. ✔️
This is a lovely discussion. Keep it going. I wish to make a point which I humbly deem to be one for more consideration: So far we have been delving back to how 1st century/early Christians did church for want of a better term. It's historical and ours is modern. So it seems difficult for the modern "Christian" mind to grasp the importance of their model as opposed to our liturgical based gathering. To us it seems more like an evolution rather than a deterioration. It is therefore important to show how the early pattern is not merely consequential but the direct spin-off from embracing a new heart-regenerating WORLD VIEW. They did church differently from the judaic-temple worshippers primarily because they no longer subscribed to that idolatrous of ceremonial temple service to God in a system that had basically put their Lord to death. Primarily, they were seeking only those who were of the same mental/spiritual persuasion as themselves: "CAN TWO WALK TOGETHER EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED?" Secondly, if their reason for gathering was their newfound IDENTITY it follows that everything done when together should be with the interest of promoting and cultivating the understanding of all it's members in that new Way of Life. Hence Paul's admonition is the standard rule:DO ALL THINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUILDING UP EACH OTHERS FAITH [spiritual awareness/knowledge of christ] Mindfulness,humility,love,boldness,patience,simplicity, generosity etc were therefore necessary. This brings the point I want crystallize: Modern worship or liturgy is not about the New Life in Christ Jesus but the life of the particular denomination or church represented. Therefore all focus is on the purposes the organizations have in mind which hardly about the individual or community life of the members. It is therefore important to show Christians that it is a form of deception because it takes the christians mind away from the PURPOSE for which Christ died and saved them.
A creed like this ,I know , whom ,I have believed, and am persuaded ,that HE IS ABLE , to keep that ,which I've committed ,UNTO HIM,against That DAY. ❤
@@angelashort1331 Nothing can serve humanity without becoming an idol and a stumbling block. The goal is to serve Christ only and attribute all things to him and for him. Only this can guarantee a living creed that doesn't enlist men through pledges and vows.
Unfortunately, as a church, we can not seem to get beyond doing research and presenting the facts. I really love what Dr. Tom is doing here but I really don't see Christians breaking away from the idea that it is Religion that needs to tell us what to do. People will watch and listen and will say "oh, that's nice" and then go back to church on Sunday like nothing ever happened. More and more, I am viewing this Religion of going to a church building as a cult. All Religion can offer is a "shortcut" to heaven by giving us the script and telling us what to do and when to do it. But we all know and have read in the Bible that there are no shortcuts to heaven. Religion offers people an "easy" path and so the people want to believe that. And churches today are nothing more than "high places" and "groves". But the Bible tells us to destroy the high places and the groves. High places are where people go to "feel" spiritual and have lots of "emotions" to their gods. Groves are places of "popular" music and dancing to their gods. Preaching is supposed to be about confronting people to NOT do bad things which are against God. We don't get that in church. Teaching is supposed to be about instructing people on what they SHOULD do that would be pleasing unto God. And we don't get that in church either. Preaching, today, has been reduced to invoking "emotions" into the crowd to get them "excited" and to "feel" the presence of God. Teaching, today, has been reduced to "discovering" what is our "lion's den" in our daily lives and that we should "quote" scriptures to people so they will not want to be friends with us. Changing people from their cult of Religion is 10 times more difficult than winning a sinner to Christ. When I win someone to Christ, I am afraid to suggest they should go to church. Where they will only be taught about denominational precepts and statutes and doctrines. I'm just not sure how we can save the church and return it to a Gathering to Fellowship with other Christians. I almost feel like it should just be Christians gathering together for social activities. Maybe talk about current events. Find out who among us are sick or in the hospital or in prison. To visit the homebound. And just get rid of all the other Religious rituals and boundaries. Preaching, teaching, and the music. None of that seems to be edifying or exhorting anyone to spiritual growth. In fact it is doing the exact opposite. Let us gut all that out of our churches and just start Gathering and see how that develops naturally by the grace of God. 50:00 This whole argument about women speaking in church. Well, I don't know much about that but I was at a religious conference several years ago and a fellow listener who was woman asked me about it. She was seated next to me. I had to admit to her that I had no idea and had never thought about it before. So after many years later, here is my take. All the arguments seem to be based around women preachers or pastors. And as we are learning from Dr. Tom and others, we are not about putting anyone on a pedestal in church. It should all be horizontal and not vertical as Dr. Tom says. And that is absolutely true. So my stance today, is that nobody should be doing that. In which case, Paul was talking about something else (because they were all practicing 1st century Christianity). In that sense, it does sound cultural or that some women in that area were being too outrageous or interrupting conversation? IDK. But that is my take. Nobody should be doing that man or woman. Nobody should be taking money to spread the gospel. (Other than for food or travel where necessary.) (Or to support upkeep of a building.)
Great content! Incredibly interesting. From an interview perspective, would be good if you provided ONE question at a time. There were often 5+ questions asked at once. The result was guest lost the actual question asked as did the audience.
Therefor, spending millions of $$$ to build one of these church "temples" is really ungodly. It straps the assembly into a debt note payment & the emphasis turns from teaching the truth of God's word toward attracting more and more members to bear the burden of paying for the building / temple. If you have ever held a "house" assembly you have such a freedom to discuss the scriptures in an open & respectful manner w/o constraint for fear of offending the "rich" contributors.
One of the major factors that started the Protestant Reformation was the massive effort to raise funds to build St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. For that project, Pope Leo X promoted the sale of indulgences, which promised to reduce the punishment for sins in purgatory. Luther objected, and the Reformation exploded throughout Europe.
One way to look at the first century church is to acknowledge that the disciples were trained by the Lord Jesus in the way they gathered together. There must be a lot of inspired wisdom in the way they conducted meetings.
From my experience the church assembly ( or church gathering) is more like Bible Study in some Evangelical churches I have gone to. 🤷♀️ I have always thought we are supposed to be a family but sometimes it doesn’t feel like that on Sundays unless you have showed up for Bible study. Most people don’t show up for bible study so they don’t have a relationship with everyone else. Which makes sense as to why church IS supposed to be the assembly like the first church in the first place. I don’t know if I explained correctly. I may be rambling here. 😅
The concept of clergy is a pagan construct that lacks biblical foundation. The New Testament does not support a distinct clergy class; instead, it presents the church as a "priesthood of all believers." This model emphasizes shared ministry and equal access to God, contrary to the hierarchical systems seen in pagan religions. In early Christian communities, leadership was characterized by elders and deacons, serving alongside all members rather than exerting control over them. The rise of the clergy coincided with the merging of church and state in the Roman Empire, leading to abuses of power and a disconnect from the congregation. To truly reflect the early church's intent, a return to communal governance, where every believer is vital in ministry, is essential.
@@1Whipperin as far as I’m aware, unprogrammed Quakers are the only group still following this primitive Christian method. But I did see Tom on a house church movement channel, so perhaps others are reviving it.
As a saved hippy girl , i experienced home gatherings ,and watched the numbers grow,Then our gatherings got taken over by the abuse spoken of here, Men of ambition began to move us into a church building , and they put on crimpolene suits and began appointing hierarchy , It divided us , Mans ambitions broke up a thriving , revived gathering of about 30 adults ,with children , It was a real family ,in Christ ,and i miss it . , love from Fern Flat revival . Nz@@1Whipperin
I've wondered about head coverings too, I remember when every woman or girl wore a headscarf or hat in church. They did that because of 1Cor.11, Now because women don't want to be inconvenience by it, they say that it doesn't apply to this day and age, so therefore we could use that excuse for everything else that Paul taught in the New Testament.
Yes and thank you for saying this. When I've heard people talk about going back to first century practices, headcoverings typically gets ignored or explained away.
Head coverings for women in the Bible, particularly in 1 Corinthians 11:5-6, have often been interpreted as a symbol of Biblical coverture, which refers to the legal doctrine that married women were under the authority and protection of their husbands. In this context, the head covering signifies a woman's submission and respect for her husband's authority, reflecting societal norms of the time regarding gender roles and marriage. The practice of wearing head coverings is associated with several cultural and theological perspectives. Some scholars argue that head coverings serve as a physical representation of a woman's marital status and her commitment to her husband, emphasizing the idea of protection and authority within the marital relationship. In ancient societies, including those of the biblical era, a woman's identity and honor were often linked to her husband, making the head covering a visible sign of that bond. Additionally, head coverings can be seen as a reflection of the order established by God in the family structure, where the husband is viewed as the head of the household. This hierarchical model aligns with various interpretations of Biblical texts that emphasize male authority and female submission.
I see young men ,leading songs from the stage,with hat s , worn backwards , on heads , and it seems so unthought about , it seemscso dismissive , . Somehow , . Hmm ? ❤@@1Whipperin
@@1Whipperin Amen! That's a good thing! And that's the natural order that God intended it to be (1Cor.11:3) But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
Highly agree with 50:00. Most congregations/denominations pick and choose which scriptures they like best, violate the 3rd commandment with them, and turn them into tradition. Then people too lazy or too beaten down to trust their own interpretation of the scriptures pick and choose a congregation/denomination based on what liturgy/tradition tickles their ears, then call that worship… when not even the early churches called it that.
The clergy system stands as a glaring contradiction to the biblical principle of the priesthood of all believers, devolving into a scheme of grifters who exploit their positions for personal gain. Instead of empowering congregants, clergy act as gatekeepers, creating a hierarchy that stifles the spiritual gifts and voices of ordinary believers. This not only breeds a toxic culture within the church but also fosters an environment ripe for manipulation and control. Many church leaders prioritize their own financial interests and institutional power over the genuine spiritual development of their communities. This is particularly evident in the way modern churches focus on growth metrics, often at the expense of authentic discipleship and pastoral care. Such practices undermine the very essence of the early church, which operated on principles of shared leadership and mutual accountability. Furthermore, the idea that a select group of individuals possesses exclusive spiritual authority directly contradicts the New Testament's call for every believer to be involved in ministry. This elitism breeds disillusionment among congregants and ultimately leads to a church culture where faith is commercialized, and spiritual manipulation is commonplace. The clergy system not only diminishes the role of believers in the body of Christ but also cultivates an atmosphere of distrust, where the spiritual well-being of individuals is sacrificed on the altar of financial gain and institutional survival. It's time to dismantle this harmful hierarchy and reclaim the true biblical vision of a church where every member actively participates in ministry, reflecting the diverse gifts of the body of Christ.
I love the song by Jim Reeves , My Cathedral . I hope it blesses others as it does me , ive always questioned the difference of biblical demonstrations of gatherings and what grew after the sacking of the Hebrew temple , Thankyou for helping sift the answers out , im from a brethren assembly , V modest . ❤nz
ταῖς προσευχαῖς “the prayers” is mentioned (liturgy) in acts 2 42. I’m surprised the Dr. didn’t mention this. It would be good to hear him talk about the liturgy of the earliest Jewish believers since they were the majority in the church for decades before gentiles started coming into the church in mass. James, as a pillar, was likely using the same liturgical prayers as Jesus.
The problem is answered in the Lord's Prayer we are to go to him daily and he Jesus Christ is supposed to interact with us by his Spirit and were suppose to communicate with Him DAILY! Check out the end of proverbs 8 where Christ is speaking to us to wait DAILY FOR HIS WORD TO US!
“If Any man Desires to come after ME, Let him DENY ‘himself’ (REPENT), AND take up his Cross ‘D-A-I-L-Y’ and Follow ‘ME’.” ~ JESUS CHRIST ~ (St Luke 9:23) ~~~ :)
They gathered as the temple, the body of Christ in the temple which is Christ. I'm very sorry Tom even though I kind of struggle with your position even though I can't honestly dismiss it, I'm listening to your name sake Dr Thomas Wright who's Temple theology Jewish premise out of 2nd Temple Jewish scholarship.
Modern day worship/services strikes me as very Roman. That is, pre-Christian pagan traditions being continued by hitherto pagan priests that have just been told they’re Christian by Constantine.
Do you know of any evidence that Constantine turned pagan priests into Christian priests? I do not. While Constantine and Licinius legalized Christianity in 313 AD, they also allowed paganism to continue freely. I am unaware that Constantine ever forced any pagan priest to become a Christian priest.
Constantine did not explicitly force pagan priests to become Christian priests, but his reign marked a significant transformation in religious dynamics. Following his conversion to Christianity around 312 AD, he began promoting the faith and decriminalizing Christian practices, effectively encouraging many pagans to adopt Christianity, often for political or social gain. The concept of clergy as a distinct, privileged class did emerge during and after Constantine's reign. Before this, the early church did not have a formal clergy structure as we understand it today. Instead, leadership was more communal and based on spiritual gifts. Constantine's actions, including his financial support for Christian leaders and church construction, led to a more structured ecclesiastical hierarchy that increasingly resembled the pagan priesthood, blending church and state in ways that were new for Christianity.
@@1Whipperin I don't mean to be argumentative, but "the concept of clergy as a distinct privileged class" had emerged long before Constantine. It is evident even as early as 105 AD with Ignatius, and the concept of ministers as "priests" was extensively used by Cyprian in 250 AD.
@@tomwadsworth Thank you. While you are correct that some concepts of clergy had begun to emerge early on, it’s crucial to understand that this development evolved over time and wasn't fully established until later centuries. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35-110 AD), one of the earliest Christian writers, did emphasize a form of hierarchical structure, particularly regarding bishops, presbyters, and deacons. His writings, such as his letters to various churches, describe a need for unity under a single bishop and point toward an early ecclesiastical organization. However, his writings don’t suggest a privileged clergy class in the way later institutionalized Christianity would. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 200-258 AD), writing in the mid-3rd century, further developed this idea, often referring to the leaders of the church as priests. His use of "priest" language for Christian ministers reflected an evolving understanding of leadership, incorporating Old Testament imagery and functions into the New Testament church structure. However, while these early figures contributed to the formation of a distinct clergy class, the kind of clericalism that became entrenched-where the clergy was seen as a privileged class distinct from the laity-didn't fully solidify until the time of Constantine and afterward. Constantine's conversion and the subsequent integration of Christianity into the Roman Empire played a significant role in the institutionalization of the clergy, leading to the eventual division between clergy and laity as a formalized class system. So while seeds of this concept existed earlier, it was through Constantine’s influence and later developments that the clergy fully emerged as a distinct, privileged class with considerable political and social power within the church.
Sometimes I go to the "church" where my family attend. They are adamant that you have to wear a hat or some sort of head covering😬🙄 but the congregation is 99% female, the pastor is female, the Teachers are female (and they are v.good teachers). So much for "women being silent"🤭💯🇬🇧
Thank you for this information. I could be wrong regarding the following, but this is what comes to mind for me. "Church" has become big business. If believers met in various houses throughout a city or town, how could "church" justify the various staff members? About a year ago, I was curious about a religious group. I could not believe all the staff members they had listed on their web page. If there were house churches throughout a city, we would not need all these paid staff members. I met with a religious group many years ago. One of the elders saw his paid position as "calling men's meetings". If the deacons could not make it to the building by 5 p.m. on a Wednesday, then they were putting their jobs ahead of Jesus. This particular elder could not teach. Most of the time we never knew what he was saying. Bad dentures and a British accent made understanding him next to impossible. But hey, he had a paid position...to make life difficult for men who actually had real jobs.
The idea that the early Christians met in homes rather than formal church buildings is significant because it made it much harder for the state to control or monitor their gatherings. In contrast, the modern pastor system, which often includes designated church buildings, creates a centralized authority structure that can be more easily regulated and influenced by the state. When Christians gather in homes, they operate in a decentralized manner, which fosters a sense of community and autonomy. This model can lead to greater resilience against governmental control or persecution, as seen in the early church during periods of Roman persecution. In contrast, the establishment of formal church institutions with paid clergy can inadvertently create a system where state authority can exert more influence, as the church may become intertwined with state interests. Many scholars argue that the institutional church, with its hierarchical structures and buildings, is conducive to control and compliance, making it easier for the government to oversee and regulate religious practices. This has led to criticism of the pastor-centric model as a potential means of social control, which can dilute the original, grassroots nature of Christian fellowship.
(I have to admit that I laughed out loud at "Bad dentures and a British accent"!) I feel your pain. But I'm not sure that "staff members" are necessarily a problem. I can see how a first century assembly might have grown so large that one of the elders needed to quit his day job to devote his time to organizing and coordinating all the gatherings. "Elders" are frequently mentioned in the NT as essential leaders for the assemblies. As Paul argues at length in 1 Cor 9 and 1 Tim 5:17-18, such elders are "worthy of their wages." Having said all that, I still think you have a point that needs to be heard.
As I understand profecy,I see it as interpetation of Gods word. Paul and the other apostels,it seems to me that they are interpeting the old testament and Jesus own words through the inlightening of the Holy Spirit or am I wrong? Paul says in 1 Corinth 13: Let me show you a more exelent gift and then he recide the Love chapter is most exelent of all the gifts:And here I think about the gift of the Spirit:Love peace joy and etc. And as you say to come together to edfy eachother in the understanding of The Gopel,the dead and resurection of Chrit our pass over lamb,reminding eachother about the gift of our salvation of Grace for our sins. Thank you both for opening up about this topic.
I have yet to encounter an elegant interpretation of I Corinthians 11 that accounts for all details. Keep in mind that a couple of translation astonishments are present in many versions. The woman doesn’t have a symbol of authority; she has authority - and, there is no *such* custom, not no *other* custom in the churches. Here so many make a big deal about the head covering for the woman, but how is Paul making shame of a man being covered - when God commanded the priests to cover their heads? What do the angels care about any of this? Does head mean authority, so that God is authority over Christ who is God? Or does head mean source or at least beginning point, as in Genesis 2’s splitting of the one river into four heads, and Daniel 2’s head of the successive human governments? Did God send Christ? Did Christ create the man? Did the woman come out of the man? Source, source, source - emphasizing oneness? Then the man now coming out of the woman is not a random mitigation of authority but support of the overall point of oneness…. To answer the speculation in this video about taking the silence of women with equal seriousness as the head covering, or vice versa - I Corinthians 11 as clearly as it says anything, says women may prophesy. Which is not silence. Sin is lawlessness, but there is no law of Moses that silences women in the assembly, or for that matter which commands the unilateral submission of women to men in any configuration. So why do verses 34-35 of chapter 14 appeal to laws that cannot be found? This is a significant conflict if we think it’s referring to God’s ethics. But if ekklesia referred to male-only civic assemblies for the Greeks, long before Jesus said he’d build his - mightn’t the quotation theory of these verses be more reasonable than the idea that Paul meant women to be silent in contradiction to his own self a mere three chapters earlier?
Your observations about 1 Corinthians 11 raise several important points regarding interpretation, context, and translation. Here are some key considerations: 1. Authority vs. Symbol: The argument that women have authority rather than merely a symbol of authority is significant. Many interpretations focus on the cultural context of head coverings in ancient Corinth, where such practices were associated with honor and propriety. However, your emphasis on women having authority aligns with interpretations that recognize their active role in the church. 2. Head Coverings and Shame: The notion that Paul shames men for being uncovered while the Jewish tradition required priests to cover their heads does prompt a re-examination of the text. This invites questions about the cultural and theological implications of covering, suggesting a complex relationship between authority, honor, and gender roles. 3. Head as Source vs. Authority: The interpretation of "head" as either authority or source is a longstanding debate. Many scholars argue that Paul’s use of "head" implies a relationship of origin rather than hierarchy, supporting the idea of unity rather than division among believers. This perspective resonates with your points about oneness and the creation narrative in Genesis. 4. Silence and Prophecy: Your emphasis on women's ability to prophesy in 1 Corinthians 11 highlights a tension with Paul's instructions in chapter 14 regarding silence. Some scholars propose that the verses in 14 may reference specific cultural practices or issues within the Corinthian church rather than establishing a universal prohibition against women's speaking or prophesying. 5. Quotation Theory: The idea that verses 34-35 might reflect quotations or cultural norms rather than divine mandates is an intriguing approach. It acknowledges the potential for misapplication of cultural customs within the church while still maintaining a theological framework that allows for women's active participation. In summary, the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11 is complex, and your insights touch on significant theological and cultural dimensions.
So what did the first ‘Christian’s’ call GOD? What were the first Christians actually called? Did they really worship on the first day? Who changed The Word, the Commandment? If GOD is the same yesterday today and tomorrow where exactly is that??? What was being taught exactly, the law perhaps??? The way to live?? So many questions…..
@@tomwadsworth Why write a book? Why not consistently encourage discussion and encourage people to continue to read the word of God and be open to the Spirit of God and practice what works?
I agree with the fact that we need to go back and see how Apostle Paul, Peter and John worship. Before tbe book of revelation which was written about 90AD. How was Paul and Peter worship and preached before they were killed around 65-70 AD. There is no evidence that they used Lithergy before they died. We know Apostle paul goes into the synagogue when he arrive at any city in Asia minor. I'm also very interested in how the Apostles gatherered and what they do when they gathered. I agree with Tom that we all need to look into the 1st century gathering of the saints.
At 40 minutes your guest speaks of “THE leader,” but leadership in the NT always appears to be pluralistic. Paul himself, speaking of his home fellowship, says “I also am AN elder.” The only place one finds a SINGLE “leader” is 3 John 1:9, and John doesn’t sound very happy about him!
@@tomwadsworth Yes, you definitely made that clear. But almost no church has plurality of leaders today . They may have a board of elders, but unfortunately in my experience, THE pastor can trump the entire board. That to me says the plurality is a sham, and that is why I brought up the only passage that mentions the one guy “who likes to have the preeminence” among you. You did an excellent presentation- please forgive me if that came across as if I thought you missed something. You probably could have said a lot more on each topic, but for times sake you covered salient points and moved on - and you were very generous towards those who moved the church from fellowship to overloadship.
The earliest church met each Sabbath in synagogues to learn Moses teachings, but the believers in the Christ also met house to house in excited fellowship, sharing the gifts of the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 14:26 “How is it then brethren, when you come together EACH of you has a Psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.” It has been many years since I was able to find a house church that actually did this. It seems the gifts of the Spirit have been much abused in the last 40-50 years. So many counterfeits out there.
Thanks for your thoughts! I did a search for every time the word 'synagogue' is found in the Bible. I was surprised that the NT never says that Christians "met in the synagogue." It’s true that Paul used synagogue meetings as an opportunity to proclaim the gospel to the gathered Jews (Acts 9:20; 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:4, 19, 26; 19:8), but the Christians did not "meet in the synagogue" as has often been alleged. If you have evidence that indicates otherwise, I'm all ears!
@@tomwadsworth Please recall that even the leader of at least one synagogue was converted. Also, consider that the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31 is not made with Gentiles, but with the house of Israel. There is no Gentile covenant. Jewish converts were followers of the Way, not “Christians “, they were just a sub-group of Jews and until many years after the crucifixion of Jesus they worshipped in their synagogues every Sabbath. Paul himself always worshipped in the synagogues on his journeys. He tells the Corinthians to keep Passover - that would probably involve the synagogue. Sadly, Jewish believers were eventually cast from their synagogues every Sabbath by Jews AND cast from the church by Gentiles who denied any and every “Jewish custom” and placed a death penalty on any “Christian” who celebrated Passover, circumcised a male newborn, etc. The Catholic Church will not deny that, but they will say it was only “regional.” Sure!
@@tomwadsworth I’m afraid that I consider this to be a contrived coverup by the early Christian leaders who were wanting to separate themselves from the original Christians, who were all Jewish and numbered well into the tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands. Christianity was originally just a sect of Judaism, definitely not a new religion. I’m sure you agree with that statement. It is my belief that whenever the split occurred was when any NT documents that could be found in Hebrew were burned. It was at a great burning that a priest from France visiting in Rome saw an intact volume of Matthew and pulled it from the fire. He hid it and it is said to be on display today in the louvre. I have seen a copy of Matthew in Hebrew, but I do not read Hebrew. Full ancient copies have also been found in India where Thomas, I believe, is said to have gone. Acts 14:27 NKJV “Now when they had come and gathered (synago)G4863 the church (ekklesia) G1577 together they…” Hebrews 10:25 NKJV “… not forsaking the assembling of ourselves (episynagoge) G1997 together…” I think you can see that even in Greek it is hard to obscure the relationship between church and synagogue- both are assemblies of people to worship. Strongs makes the distinction that one is composed of Jews, the other of Christians …. So what is a Jewish Christian to attend, a church or a synagogue? Of course we see Paul many years after the resurrection attending synagogues in every city. We also see him celebrating the three festivals commanded by God (forever, no less,) and telling the Corinthians to celebrate them - at least we can assume all three since he specifically says Passover, and if you follow God, all three. Of course they were to be celebrated in Jerusalem annually at the Temple. When Jerusalem was sacked and the Temple torn apart and burned, the commandments could no longer be followed, but the story of Yavne is not for now. Blessings-
Amongst some anabaptist churches, I have met some who have similar beliefs as Tom about the church gathering. They use the term brotherhood to describe their group.
I've been studying this stuff and experimenting for 40 years, and there are some things to add that I've not heard from any house church or organic church advocates or from missionaries. Also its a HUGE misnomer that Paul was teaching or preaching until late the night that the guy fell out of the window. Those words aren't used in the Greek. Paul was there visiting, they hadn't seen him for a long time, and they all naturally stayed up late talking and didn't want to quit. Luke says they were "dialoging." Teaching literally didn't mean then what it does now. It was about training new converts in how to live according to Jesus's commands, it wasn't theology. Like the Didache shows, as the earliest training manual for converts. And all older or spiritually mature members would have been expected to help disciple the younger folks and the new converts. No public speaking skills required. What we would consider public speaking type preaching/teaching, is precisely what they would have termed "prophesying," but still would have involved more dialog, questions, discussions and debates than we would think...this is how both Jews and Greeks did things. Also, all the first churches were built around a core of Jewish people and God-fearers who all already had their customs. They went to synagogue and participated in that community--and continued to as Messianic until they were thrown out, but part of that custom was the Havdallah meal together at home on Saturday night/Sunday as soon as the sun went down according to Jewish reckoning. With friends and family a celebratory meal. And remember that ALL feasts, Sabbaths, and offerings in Jewish religion involved a meal at home, not a worship service in a sacred building other than sometimes at the Temple before feasting in a home. The Havdallah was a perfect time for a meal together and discussion of that days scripture readings, and what the Messiah did and was doing for them. As time passed and more and more of these core groups were getting kicked out of the local synagogue, even persecuted, they naturally needed to add scripture reading to their own meetings, but it's safe to assume they continued to be "dinner church" on Saturday evening for a long time. This was their love feasts. There is evidence that a sunrise gathering on Sunday morning to celebrate the resurrection began early on as well, (Sunday was a workday for everyone whether Jew or Gentile, so early morning was essential if they were to gather at all) --where a typical Mediterranean breakfast was just bread and wine anyway, but they were still eating a meal together as part of the gathering, not having a mere morsel as a religious ceremony. At some point as the split between Jew and Gentile became greater, the more Gentile- majority gatherings may have gradually switched to meeting on Sunday only, or at least to considering it more important as they distanced themselves from anything too "Jewish." But the first church buildings had dining halls in them, so we know the eating a full meal together went on until it was completely banned in later centuries, and churches forbidden to have dining rooms in their facilities. The Messianic Jewish gathering "Nazarenes" continued for centuries even though we are never taught about it, and kept meeting on the Sabbath and keeping Passover at the proper Jewish time, which contributed later to the East/West split over when to celebrate Pascha/Easter. As the Gentile church began to ban everything Jewish including keeping the Sabbath or Jewish festivals, they would naturally emphasize Sunday as the proper time to meet...but note that the NT nowhere mandates weekly meetings at all, nor what day to meet on. The expectation is actually more that we see each other informally every day and live life together as a community, caring for one another. Formal meetings are not the definition of, or the most important thing we do. Prophets in both the Old and NT would usually have been people learned/educated in the scripture and full of wisdom-- who could explain the Old Testament and Jesus's teachings and answer questions, not just supernaturally gifted in the absense of any normal learned knowledge, but people who also could hear God and help the group know God's mind during decision making or crises. This also differentiates between how all are able to and should be prophesying, but some people are still considered "prophets" as opposed to other ministries, and often seem to travel around encouraging assemblies from place to place full time or part time, vs the the rest of folks who stayed local. And since in both the Old and New Testaments women are prophets and are encouraged to prophesy, they obviously cannot be silenced, nor would Paul have any authority to silence them. So read reputable scholars about how Paul was quoting the Corinthians and refuting them about silencing women, and how many female co-workers he had.
But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
Worship as a christian is a dynamic experience as a group in a living relationship with The Living God. To attemp to say this is how worship was DONE in the first century misses the whole point of our relationship with God!!!!
The big question for me is "when it was happening", in other words when the Lord was pasturing his sheep how did He do it and for what reason and purpose. As the head of the body. Today so called pastors get their information for a man in a religion and not the head of the body The Lord. Why did they gather, is also written. What was their mission as commanded by The Lord. How do we keep the commands of The Lord? Why are we meeting? To Edify one and another in the body to bring glory to the Father through The Lord's ministry. Leaving one's own ways to be doers of the faith is a very subservient way of leading one to the gift of God. The Goodnews. Today everyone wants the drive through. We are in fear of our neighbors. Have only enough time to have an hour service at some place, because we don't really believe our body is the temple of The Holy Spirit, and our worship is in Spirit and Truth. Peace, Shalom.
Yeah that's a thing. Add blocker on a desktop works, you can also download the video and watch it back without adds. I'm a very understanding person, and listen to content on many devices, with and without adds. It's just that is seem wrong to stop spreading the Word to run an add. It just seems wrong.
In the AMPLIFIED version of the bible the word "prophesying" in 1Corinthians 14 is given as INSPIRED SPEAKING/TEACHING. This agrees with FORTH-TELLING. However this PREFERENCE is to do with MINISTRY and not with the PRIVATE praying in Tongues of the believer - 1Corinthians 14:2,4 Also I have found over 30 years that it is very important to lay down basic principles in a house church such as teaching them about The WILL OF THE LORD GOD that we have a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with HIM to know HIM as Our ONLY Teacher and FATHER - Matthew 23:8-10 TEACHING people to test every spirit - 1John 4:1, before they accept what is being said while walking in the command that we think of THE OTHER PERSON AS HIGHER THAN OURSELVES - Philippians 2:3-4 when expressing what they believe from that testing. This makes walking in the CHESSED (love) of 1Corinthians 13 all the more important.
Exactly , Differentiate between the early church . And 2000yrs later. New babes and maturing in Christ . Teaching appropriate to, for new borns and edification / exhortation for the building up of the whole body unto the fullness/ one complete man in Christ . We need to identify the stages assigned with appropriate scriptures . That all may prophesy .
Gifts are not developed. They were given, once, in the first century and not after. But edification continues by the more excellent way of love now in the Body that Paul's ministry brought to maturity. We also have the written word too both of which equips the church completely for edification beyond the (what I like to call) the nanny gifts. This is right in line with the excellent advance and recovery by Frank Viola! (Not a perfect recovery by Frank but a huge chunk!) Also Robert Banks.
What do the Church Fathers say about the early Church worship? Christianity was outlawed and if you admitted you believed in Christ you would be martyred church triumphant. it’s not so simply brushed over as to why Christians had house churches.
King David knew how to repay God for all His gifts to man: Psalm 116:12-13 “What shall I render to the LORD for all His benefits toward me? I will take up the Cup of Salvation and call upon the name of the LORD.” The Cup of Salvation has been the 3rd cup of four at Passover for 3 millinea now. That was the cup that Jesus blessed and shared with the disciples when He told them that He would not drink of it again until He drank it new in the Kingdom. It sounds strange, but King David was onto something. What do you give to God, Who owns the earth and all its fullness? You TAKE the Cup of Salvation and call upon His name.
The only New Testament books written in the 1st century are those of James, Paul, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 and 3 John and Mark. Those are best witnesses of it Decades ago, I was able to attend some meetings of the "Church of the City", i.e., one city, one meeting place for those in that city. It had the best idea on how to have everybody be equal while staving off disorganization: Everybody sat in ordinary chairs in a loose circle so everybody could see one another. And then everybody just sat. Nobody said or did anything until they felt moved to (preferably by the Holy Spirit). Everything then flowed effortlessly from one person to the next, nobody interrupting or disputing. I felt directed, knowing when not to speak, when to wait to speak, when to speak: when to listen Gifts are ordered by preference, not hierarchy. If one with a lower gift were moved by the Holy Spirit, then they are more relevant at the moment When Paul wrote of women being silent, he not only would have them have their hair long and covered, he would also have men have their short hair uncovered. Paul was writing to not only gentiles but specifically to Romans! Corinth wasn't a Greek city; it was a homebase of the Roman military. They were required to have short hair. It was a mark of Romanness. Having their heads uncovered by a helmet was a way to discourage fights by leaving the man more vulnerable. On women among them: Women were not allowed to be in the Roman military. Their long hair were just as Roman as their military men-folk's short hair
National Organization for Women December 1968: "WHEREAS, the wearing of a head covering by women at religious services is a custom in many churches and whereas it is a symbol of subjection within these churches, NOW recommends that all chapters undertake an effort to have all women participate in a "national unveiling" by sending their head coverings to the task force chairman immediately. At the Spring meeting of the Task force on Women in Religion, these veils will then publicly be burned to protest the second class status of women in all churches." Please notice how this Feminist organization decreed this to Christian women, not Jews, Muslims, or women of other faiths. This was spiritual warfare against the saints, and most of us don't know this history in the West. Either we want to be apostolic or we don't. 1st Corinthians 14:37 says what Paul wrote were commands of the Lord. 2nd Thessalonians 2:15😊
@@connieo1332 Paul uses the natural covering of a woman's hair as an example from nature to support the practice of women covering their glory in prayer and prophecy as men, who are the glory of God, remain uncovered during prayer and prophecy. In the passage, Paul used two different words to identify two different coverings. The church had this ordinance correct for 1900 years.
Thanks for sharing the Dec 1968 quotation about the "national unveiling." I didn't know about that. I don't know how many people were paying attention to NOW at that time, but I have noticed that head coverings for women in American churches were mostly gone by the 1970s.
@@tomwadsworth You're welcome. In 1969, Elizabeth Farians, a Roman catholic feminist, teamed up with NOW, and threw what was called the Easter Bonnet Rebellion at a church in Milwaukee. After a priest scolded a woman for not wearing a hat to mass, a group of 15 women wore obnoxious hats to Easter service, and threw them off in protest while receiving communion. I'm not catholic, but I find it interesting how one of the most wealthy, powerful, and political churches on earth eventually stopped expecting women and men to practice this ordinance in 1983. Most Protestant churches had already thrown out the ordinance as well, though many today still expect men to remove their hats at church. What was practiced for 1900 years did not become controversial until 70 years ago, and I don't think the timing is a coincidence.
@@tomwadsworth You're welcome. Elizabeth Farians, a Roman catholic feminist, teamed up with NOW to throw the Easter Bonnet Rebellion in Milwaukee in 1969. After a woman was scolded by a priest for not wearing a hat at mass, 15 women attended Easter service in obnoxious hats, and threw them off in protest while receiving communion. I'm not Roman Catholic, but I think it's interesting that one of the wealthiest and powerful churches eventually stopped requiring this practice in 1983. Protestant churches were also throwing away the ordinance at the same time. I don't think the timing of women's liberation and the vanishing of this practice is a coincidence. Meanwhile, many churches still do not allow men to cover their heads at church.
At 34 minutes: Paul’s emphasis on teaching just goes back to the Torah, which literally means teaching…not law. Every parent was told to teach God’s words to their children when they awaken, all through the day, and before they retire. Paul tells Timothy to study, he tells groups of Gentiles converts to attend synagogue and study Moses. Jesus told His disciples to go into the nations and make ( literally ) students of the Word. (Remember John 1:1, Jesus IS the Word.) Today’s churches are filled with spectators, not students. Your house churches turn spectators initially into students and participants.
I like your comments. But this comment gave me pause: "Paul ... tells groups of Gentiles converts to attend synagogue and study Moses." I can't find that idea in my Bible!
@@tomwadsworth Acts 15 is a wonderful chapter, but recall Peter’s assertion that Paul is easily misunderstood. I am a Messianic believer, and having been a mainline Christian since 1965 at age 21, I am quite aware of lots of places where the denominations I was in set Paul against the teachings God gave directly to Moses! In Acts 15, please note vss 16-21 and 21-31. Paul is saying these four things are essential if an idol worshipping Gentile is even to enter your fellowship. THOSE four things CHARACTERISTISED pagan worship. Many teach that these are the ONLY expectations to EVER be placed on Gentile converts. So why did Paul say “for Moses is preached in EVERY city in the synagogues” ? That’s where they will learn all the commandments of God (see Revelation 14:12.) The 10 words (mistranslated “commandments “ were not included in the Greatest Commandment nor the Second Commandment that Jesus quoted, you will recall. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD that proceeds from the mouth of GOD.” Sorry, didn’t mean to say so much, but Paul never tells Gentiles (former Gentiles) to disobey a single word from God’s mouth. Every time it looks like that, look for the twisting of what Paul actually says. Not only that, but John was caught up in a vision on The Day of The LORD in Revelation 1:10, not on Sunday. I’m told you cannot say “the Lord’s day” in Hebrew, so the translators mistranslated either in error or on purpose, leading to the heresy of changing the honoring of the Sabbath commanded by God to a different day. (The “Church” had great burnings of all Hebrew Scriptures much later in time. Not much survived besides Matthew and a fairly large number of scraps in Hebrew scattered in the diaspora.
At 50 you bring up an interesting point of inconsistency. There is a passage where,I believe Paul brings up “the inner MAN of the spirit” and several that speak of the “circumcision of the heart.” Women believers certainly have “Christ in (them) the hope of glory”, a sort of maleness for sure, and also women’s heart circumcision gives them a certain maleness. Gentiles MUST be circumcised in heart, but not in the flesh. So in the NT you have husband/wife teams, you have deaconesses, you have fellowships meeting in a woman’s house, etc. And I believe in their home fellowships women who were under authority (signified by their head coverings in that time period) could speak as well as men could or slaves could or probably as well as children who were mature could. A lot of women supported the ministry of Jesus - I seriously doubt they were treated as second class citizens. A really good discussion- depend on KHouse for good quality. I hope my frequent comments are not perceived as trolling - it has just been so very long since I have even heard a discussion like this. The “cell group” movement of the 1970’s degraded so much that a “cell group “ I was in in 2019 had A leader who was given a typed “teaching” to read to the group each week. You can only imagine how much we “grew “ from that! It is almost as if every church wants to be filled with Lone Rangers who only have the gift of giving.
“But, If ‘you’ do Not Forgive, Neither will your Father, which is in Heaven, Forgive ‘your’ trespasses.” ~ JESUS CHRIST ~ (St Mark 11:26) ~~~ :o ~~~ "We must develop and maintain The ‘Capacity’ To FORGIVE; He who is 'Devoid' of the Power To FORGIVE, Is 'Devoid' of the Power to LOVE." ~ Martin Luther King, Jr. ~~~ :o ~~~ “To Err is human; To Forgive, Divine.” ~ Alexander Pope ~~~ :)
Sick of looking. Wish there were a Calvary Chapel in my area. Since leaving RCC it's been hard to find a good Christian church without some agenda and they all think they're right!
Great discussion. Regarding women being silent, in that same letter to the Corinthians, it speaks of women who prophecy in the church which was ok. If you study the silent passage in context, this seems to be rather Paul condemning those who are trying to silence women. As a retired pastor, I’ve written a book on this subject myself. And I’ve come to the conclusion that I was wrong in much of my previous past spiritual life. Agree with your guest wholeheartedly. If only I had seen it in the past.
@@1Whipperin Totally true! Not even the apostles called each other by titles. In one of Peter's letters, he calls Paul "our brother Paul." Titles created a divide between brethren and establishes a Clergy/laity system.
@@martin9410 Yes, the apostles, including Paul and Peter, did not refer to themselves with titles like "Apostle Paul" or "Apostle Peter." Instead, they humbly identified themselves as "Paul, an apostle" (Galatians 1:1) or "Peter, an apostle" (1 Peter 1:1), emphasizing their role as messengers rather than creating formal titles of distinction. This reflects a biblical pattern of focusing on the function and calling given by God, rather than elevating oneself through titles. Their authority came from Christ, but they presented themselves as servants of the gospel, rejecting the hierarchical structures often seen in modern church leadership.
I understand that chapter 11 is not directly related to chapter 14. I am a woman who finds plenty of other places to prophecy and pray with others outside of a gathering. I'm not sure it gets any clearer than "it is shameful for a woman to speak in a meeting" ☺️
@@maryflood3125 and yet, in the same letter, Paul is ok with women giving prophecies and tongues in the assembly. In chapter 14, instead of Paul saying women shouldn’t speak, he’s attacking the ones who refuse women to speak.
i can’t make ekklesia legitimately translate to church. Church connotes much more than Yeshua’s called out and i have to believe our church organizations are our own sin and nothing to do with what Yeshua wants. it is like the jews at the mount and again when they demanded a king. God wants relationship with individuals not organizations.
Pastoring is what you do not who you are. Drop the unscriptual privileged title/position of pastor. Peter called himself a fellow elder. Nobody in the first century went around saying "I'm a pastor" It's actually offensive.
Am I correct in assuming that this was directed at me? I'm fascinated that you find my use of this word offensive. We regularly call people who shepherd, shepherds. Pastor is just the Latin word meaning shepherd. That term is scriptural and used in multiple places to describe the work of all elders of the assemblies of the body of Christ. I didn't introduce myself that way because it represents some privileged title/position, but because many who share my profession are opposed to what Dr. Wadsworth and Mr. Pryor are advocating for in this discussion. I find that people are more often confused when I refer to myself as a shepherd or elder than when I use the term pastor. Hence, my use of the term pastor was chosen for clarity and support, not exaltation. But having witnessed the misbehavior and ungodly attitude of many who are pastors, I understand the source of your visceral disdain. No harm, no foul. But please don't slander me - or other pastors/shepherds/elders - for something we are not actually guilty of.
Pastor is a descriptor of activity. A pastor pastors just as a shepherd shepherds. It is an appellation used by God to describe the activity of those who teach and care for his sheep - or at least those appointed to do so. I never stated that people should address me as Pastor. In this case you have read into my words something that was neither intended by me nor implied by the word itself. Your offense in this case is not justified. If God calls these people shepherds, than so should I. And pastor is commonly used today to refer specifically to those who shepherd God's sheep. By your logic, I can't call myself a teacher either. So apparently I teach but am not a teacher and shepherd but am not a shepherd. I see no difference in saying I am an overseer, an elder, a shepherd, or a teacher, as each describes the same biblical work. Many pastors view their position as one of exaltation and prestige. I do not. Though I do believe that elders who labor in word and teaching are worthy of double honor. The problem is not that I correctly referred to what I do, but that many who have been appointed as elders do so poorly and not as our lord directs. You have falsely convicted me in this matter. Please do not continue to do so to me or others like me who are not misusing the term or the appointment.
Hello Everyone: I had a UFO dream in 2012. I'm an endtimes messenger for Jesus for the past 12 years This teaching is really important for the Body of Christ around the world right now. Thank you:) endtimes dreams on my channel. And my community posts too warn on what's coming.
Go to the Scripture (Old Testament). Everything is there. How they worship and gather. New Testament is only following carefully and lawfully what was established before.
@@ShaneIrwin7 Word of YHWH is not subject to change regardless of anyone's opinion! This is why it was validated and confirmed to ALL Israel (Native-born and Grafted Gentiles) as an everlasting covenant, a statute for a thousand generation. If you study carefully what Jesus taught, it was nothing new but the Doctrine of His Father Himself, the Law and the Prophets which is commanded by Jesus to be obeyed and taught even the least of it.
Enjoyed this conversation. I'm a pastor who has been teaching these same things for nearly 30 years now. It can feel pretty lonely sometimes, so it does my heart good to see others sharing these truths. May the lord grant you both favor and peace as you continue to share his word.
Where are you?
I need a decent pastor?
@@dainawebb3580 Right smack in the middle of Florida. Feel free to join us by Zoom until you find a healthy assembly in your area. Zoom allows for the interaction that Paul advocates for in 1 Corinthians 14 - which has been a major blessing to some of our community who can't always physically be there.
@@dainawebb3580 Ultimately the Bible needs to be your pastor. Pastors are really limited as to what they can do for you. But it is tempting to have a good pastor that will mentor us properly. But I can attest that everything we do need is right there in the Bible. For any new Christian, I would suggest to read the Bible through every 2 years. Gradually you will begin to understand things on your own after about 10 years but we also have examples of other Christians in our lives to help until we become a mature Christian. I say to read the Bible every 2 years just so you don't go crazy about it. The message really is a simple thing to understand and we don't need to go overboard about it. But in the "off" years, I would suggest also to start reading things about Christian living such as fruits of the spirit, discipleship, how to be a good witness, and things like that. Don't read anything about prophecy or end times until you get the bases covered. I call end times and prophecy teachings as "junk food". Also, get some books about how you too can be a good teacher so that you can spread the gospel and start doing small groups yourself. Because ultimately, you will need to become a "pastor" to others. To teach others. To guide or mentor others. Once you have been a Christian for about 15-20 years, you need to be the person to demonstrate Christ to others and to become that great ambassador of Christ. Over time, we need to develop into good leaders and knowledgeable about Scripture and God when others will have questions.
@@kevinerose While I disagree that the Bible needs to be your pastor, I agree that pastors are limited in what they can do for you - as is every other person gifted by God's spirit. Yet, not only is it tempting to have a good pastor that will mentor us properly - according to Ephesians 4.11-16, that is Christ's plan for his body. As a pastor, I implore people to read the Bible and follow as it directs. If I can be an aid to others in that process, then I have used my gifting for its intended purpose. As far as I can tell, the Bible presents all the elders of the assembly as pastors. They are commanded to be shepherds of God’s flock (Acts 20.28, Ephesians 4.11-12, 1 Peter 5.1-2). Keep up the good fight, my friend!
My Friend, how lonely do we feel who don't even have a Pastor who cares for his sheep. I hope you feel beter soon.
Tom’s message certainly strikes a cord with me. I have felt for a long time that we are not respecting the Holy Spirit in each other and suffer because of it. I see the real communion that we need to have is with Christ in each other as we in fact are the body of Christ and need to feed on Christ in each other. As Paul said because we don’t hold communion in the right way some of our members are weak and sick and a number sleep. Thanks for presenting this message of encouragement as our societies in which we live are in great need of seeing the love of Christ expressed through the common believer.
I love and appreciate what you shared and agree that we are not "respecting the Holy Spirit in each other."
Instead people have somehow come to believe that the solo pastor is the only one with any authority to speak anything of a spiritual nature into anyone's life.
Very timely new video here. Thanks for another great one Tom. I’m still devouring all this info and de-programming my brain from institutional church mindset. This is so big. I can definitely see there’s going to be pushback in my world. “Shane has gone rogue” or whatever. But truth is truth. The Bible is our bottom line. Not men’s traditions.
I agree. I have been looking for this for a lifetime. Thank you, Tom.
If you would like some more facts. 119 ministries on TH-cam did a video called the Sabbath day. They expose how Satan changed the word.
This is excellent. It's the Lord's Supper, but churchgoers have the Supper in the morning. They can't even get the time of day right for Supper. Thank you, Tom, your teaching is a great blessing. This teaching is an international treasure.
Remember the lad who fell from a window , at an evening gathering , Paul went downstairs and healed him and they carried on , I know of a man on his death bed , had a vision memory of himself as a boy saying John 3 16 . . He was in a moment of terrible darkness and terror, at the time, and this vision memory came to him and drove the death darkness away. The next morning , his body restored , he was able to tell others , God restored him . 🙏
We are so blessed because of you! Thank you for being brave enough to put this out there. We who are searching for the truth appreciate what you're doing! Keep on Keeping on! God Bless you!!
30 years ago I did a few church history courses. Afterwards, I wondered how it all fitted together and said God help me understand. It was then that I saw what I call the lost and found model of church history. Basically ideas were lost or even stolen from Christ-followers until the reformation. It was then that the old ideas began to be restored i.e found by the church. I was relieved when I heard others use the same framework.
I see the work you guys are doing as part of restoring what was lost. Something that in this model of church history suggests the end is getting closer.
Or ... maybe a new beginning is getting closer.
If you would like some more facts. 119 ministries on TH-cam did a video called the Sabbath day. They expose how Satan changed the word.
I think a big part of assembling was basically having many aspects of life intertwined, living together. Today’s churches gather for an hour once a week & afterwards they are all strangers. Certainly they assembled to learn scriptures & what is written about in the Old/New Testament, but I’m certain they did ALL things together. They were a family, through Christ. We need to see the “assembly” as not only some specific dedicated time where we discuss scriptures/God, it should be a common occurrence that’s part of every day life. I can’t help but always talk about God with people, I don’t need a designated time or place to do it.
You know this idea of communities gathering together to worship is probably much closer than we realize. I agree it's gone today, but a hundred years ago? Good Point!
In my opinion, this video better summarizes TOM's thesis in what is fundamental than the video entitled Why the Early Church Didn't Have Worship Services - 7 videos in 1- For those who have the time, I recommend watching all 7 videos
It's all better than gold.
As a Christian my whole life everyday is about worshipping the Lord. It is encouraging to meet with other believers on Sunday & sing to God together, give money for different needs, colaborate to help ppl etc. There is wiggle room for how a church conducts a service.
So thankful to have stumbled upon Tom W.
Another fantastic discussion on this "rethinking" that the Church truly needs to begin to do.
Since first coming to faith 15 years,
I looked at the Scripture and churches today and things just didn't seem right with what we're doing today.
I'm going through the process of personally reassessing and shedding the built-up traditions that the Church has adopted.
Tom Wadsworth has done a good work in presenting a better picture of what we as Believers ought to return to in our daily living with one another and Christ.
We see a very similar deviation with the U.S. and its Constitution.
We're about 300 years removed from the original founding and today's modern interpretation, practices, and function of the Constitution would be entirely unrecognizable to the founders and their vision of what America was going to become.
May the Lord continue to bless your efforts and draw us back to our "love we had at first".
Half way through the video and I'm loving this. So much information, hopefully they will mention books I can read to learn more!!
Fantastic conversation, thank you! The Lord gave me a dream about 1Cor 11 and obeying it, and so I have been covering in prayer & prophecy since 2001. A lonely journey indeed 🥺 I don't understand why so few saints follow this teaching now. Praying for revelation and unity in all these things 🙏
If you would like some more facts. 119 ministries on TH-cam did a video called the Sabbath day. They expose how Satan changed the word.
The most valuable in my experience of gatherings has been small-group “blble studies,” then, a little less, “Sunday School class,” and then least impactful ( though with some good moments), Sunday Big “worship.”
My experience has been exactly the same.
Same here.
Thanks Tom. Excellent teaching.
I live in SA and have wondered about the church for such a long time. How do we start with a home church? It can be such a blessing. Who leads it? I will pray about it because it makes so much sense. Thank you, I really enjoy your teachings. God bless you🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦🇿🇦
It starts with you. The Spirit leads it.
There are several books that go into detail about starting a home church. Go to Amazon and look up "house church." I recently reviewed Wolfgang Simson, Houses That Change the World (2001) and was impressed.
After recently studying the evolution of the Eucharist in the early church, this wonderful session gave me much needed clarification. Thank you, Tom. ✔️
Can you summarize here your conclusions about "the evolution of the Eucharist in the early church"? I'm curious what you found.
@@tomwadsworth It’s as you have outlined, Tom. My recent studies into the early church had caused me a great deal of consternation over the way many of the church fathers referred to the Lord’s Supper. Your assessment of the Eucharist’s evolution has both opened my eyes and calmed my heart. I can now clearly see that the Eucharistic tradition was drawn from both the Hebrew and pagan temple systems with their alters, sacrifices and priests. I also agree with your assessment of our so-called “worship services”. I haven’t attended any of these services for a number of years, for the reasons you have covered in your other wonderful lectures. As my earthly pilgrimage draws me closer to the Celestial City, I’m convinced that the church age will conclude in the same manner in began with its gatherings taking place in the loving homes of Christ’s faithful and believing remnant.
Your research work has been a wonderful blessing and I’m greatly looking forward to your coming publication. Thank you, my friend. ✔️
This is a lovely discussion. Keep it going.
I wish to make a point which I humbly deem to be one for more consideration:
So far we have been delving back to how 1st century/early Christians did church for want of a better term. It's historical and ours is modern. So it seems difficult for the modern "Christian" mind to grasp the importance of their model as opposed to our liturgical based gathering. To us it seems more like an evolution rather than a deterioration.
It is therefore important to show how the early pattern is not merely consequential but the direct spin-off from embracing a new heart-regenerating WORLD VIEW. They did church differently from the judaic-temple worshippers primarily because they no longer subscribed to that idolatrous of ceremonial temple service to God in a system that had basically put their Lord to death.
Primarily, they were seeking only those who were of the same mental/spiritual persuasion as themselves: "CAN TWO WALK TOGETHER EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED?"
Secondly, if their reason for gathering was their newfound IDENTITY it follows that everything done when together should be with the interest of promoting and cultivating the understanding of all it's members in that new Way of Life.
Hence Paul's admonition is the standard rule:DO ALL THINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUILDING UP EACH OTHERS FAITH [spiritual awareness/knowledge of christ]
Mindfulness,humility,love,boldness,patience,simplicity, generosity etc were therefore necessary.
This brings the point I want crystallize: Modern worship or liturgy is not about the New Life in Christ Jesus but the life of the particular denomination or church represented. Therefore all focus is on the purposes the organizations have in mind which hardly about the individual or community life of the members.
It is therefore important to show Christians that it is a form of deception because it takes the christians mind away from the PURPOSE for which Christ died and saved them.
Creeds are things of the past ,that I believe would serve humanity ,if they were resuscitated again , . They are mortar to the living stones . ❤❤❤
A creed like this ,I know , whom ,I have believed, and am persuaded ,that HE IS ABLE , to keep that ,which I've committed ,UNTO HIM,against That DAY. ❤
@@angelashort1331 Nothing can serve humanity without becoming an idol and a stumbling block.
The goal is to serve Christ only and attribute all things to him and for him.
Only this can guarantee a living creed that doesn't enlist men through pledges and vows.
Unfortunately, as a church, we can not seem to get beyond doing research and presenting the facts. I really love what Dr. Tom is doing here but I really don't see Christians breaking away from the idea that it is Religion that needs to tell us what to do. People will watch and listen and will say "oh, that's nice" and then go back to church on Sunday like nothing ever happened. More and more, I am viewing this Religion of going to a church building as a cult. All Religion can offer is a "shortcut" to heaven by giving us the script and telling us what to do and when to do it. But we all know and have read in the Bible that there are no shortcuts to heaven. Religion offers people an "easy" path and so the people want to believe that. And churches today are nothing more than "high places" and "groves". But the Bible tells us to destroy the high places and the groves. High places are where people go to "feel" spiritual and have lots of "emotions" to their gods. Groves are places of "popular" music and dancing to their gods. Preaching is supposed to be about confronting people to NOT do bad things which are against God. We don't get that in church. Teaching is supposed to be about instructing people on what they SHOULD do that would be pleasing unto God. And we don't get that in church either. Preaching, today, has been reduced to invoking "emotions" into the crowd to get them "excited" and to "feel" the presence of God. Teaching, today, has been reduced to "discovering" what is our "lion's den" in our daily lives and that we should "quote" scriptures to people so they will not want to be friends with us.
Changing people from their cult of Religion is 10 times more difficult than winning a sinner to Christ. When I win someone to Christ, I am afraid to suggest they should go to church. Where they will only be taught about denominational precepts and statutes and doctrines. I'm just not sure how we can save the church and return it to a Gathering to Fellowship with other Christians. I almost feel like it should just be Christians gathering together for social activities. Maybe talk about current events. Find out who among us are sick or in the hospital or in prison. To visit the homebound. And just get rid of all the other Religious rituals and boundaries. Preaching, teaching, and the music. None of that seems to be edifying or exhorting anyone to spiritual growth. In fact it is doing the exact opposite. Let us gut all that out of our churches and just start Gathering and see how that develops naturally by the grace of God.
50:00 This whole argument about women speaking in church. Well, I don't know much about that but I was at a religious conference several years ago and a fellow listener who was woman asked me about it. She was seated next to me. I had to admit to her that I had no idea and had never thought about it before. So after many years later, here is my take. All the arguments seem to be based around women preachers or pastors. And as we are learning from Dr. Tom and others, we are not about putting anyone on a pedestal in church. It should all be horizontal and not vertical as Dr. Tom says. And that is absolutely true. So my stance today, is that nobody should be doing that. In which case, Paul was talking about something else (because they were all practicing 1st century Christianity). In that sense, it does sound cultural or that some women in that area were being too outrageous or interrupting conversation? IDK. But that is my take. Nobody should be doing that man or woman. Nobody should be taking money to spread the gospel. (Other than for food or travel where necessary.) (Or to support upkeep of a building.)
Excellent information! Blessings.
Great content! Incredibly interesting. From an interview perspective, would be good if you provided ONE question at a time. There were often 5+ questions asked at once. The result was guest lost the actual question asked as did the audience.
Therefor, spending millions of $$$ to build one of these church "temples" is really ungodly. It straps the assembly into a debt note payment & the emphasis turns from teaching the truth of God's word toward attracting more and more members to bear the burden of paying for the building / temple. If you have ever held a "house" assembly you have such a freedom to discuss the scriptures in an open & respectful manner w/o constraint for fear of offending the "rich" contributors.
One of the major factors that started the Protestant Reformation was the massive effort to raise funds to build St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. For that project, Pope Leo X promoted the sale of indulgences, which promised to reduce the punishment for sins in purgatory. Luther objected, and the Reformation exploded throughout Europe.
But where would you put the drum set and the sound and light show systems 🤣?
@@nancybaumgartner6774 Right next to the fog machine, of course.
@@tomwadsworth 😂😂😂😂
It's way less scalable to build one large place where people have to travel long distances to get there.
One way to look at the first century church is to acknowledge that the disciples were trained by the Lord Jesus in the way they gathered together. There must be a lot of inspired wisdom in the way they conducted meetings.
From my experience the church assembly ( or church gathering) is more like Bible Study in some Evangelical churches I have gone to. 🤷♀️ I have always thought we are supposed to be a family but sometimes it doesn’t feel like that on Sundays unless you have showed up for Bible study. Most people don’t show up for bible study so they don’t have a relationship with everyone else. Which makes sense as to why church IS supposed to be the assembly like the first church in the first place. I don’t know if I explained correctly. I may be rambling here. 😅
Agreed.
Do a study on the word clergy ... scary they started to separate the layman from the clergy ... clergy coming from the word to Inherit !
That’s why Quakers didn’t eliminate the clergy - they eliminated the laity!
The concept of clergy is a pagan construct that lacks biblical foundation. The New Testament does not support a distinct clergy class; instead, it presents the church as a "priesthood of all believers." This model emphasizes shared ministry and equal access to God, contrary to the hierarchical systems seen in pagan religions.
In early Christian communities, leadership was characterized by elders and deacons, serving alongside all members rather than exerting control over them. The rise of the clergy coincided with the merging of church and state in the Roman Empire, leading to abuses of power and a disconnect from the congregation.
To truly reflect the early church's intent, a return to communal governance, where every believer is vital in ministry, is essential.
@@1Whipperin as far as I’m aware, unprogrammed Quakers are the only group still following this primitive Christian method. But I did see Tom on a house church movement channel, so perhaps others are reviving it.
@@1WhipperinAaaaMennn!!!! Laos = we the people, which should be every human in the body
As a saved hippy girl , i experienced home gatherings ,and watched the numbers grow,Then our gatherings got taken over by the abuse spoken of here, Men of ambition began to move us into a church building , and they put on crimpolene suits and began appointing hierarchy , It divided us , Mans ambitions broke up a thriving , revived gathering of about 30 adults ,with children , It was a real family ,in Christ ,and i miss it . , love from Fern Flat revival . Nz@@1Whipperin
I've wondered about head coverings too, I remember when every woman or girl wore a headscarf or hat in church. They did that because of 1Cor.11, Now because women don't want to be inconvenience by it, they say that it doesn't apply to this day and age, so therefore we could use that excuse for everything else that Paul taught in the New Testament.
Yes and thank you for saying this. When I've heard people talk about going back to first century practices, headcoverings typically gets ignored or explained away.
Head coverings for women in the Bible, particularly in 1 Corinthians 11:5-6, have often been interpreted as a symbol of Biblical coverture, which refers to the legal doctrine that married women were under the authority and protection of their husbands. In this context, the head covering signifies a woman's submission and respect for her husband's authority, reflecting societal norms of the time regarding gender roles and marriage.
The practice of wearing head coverings is associated with several cultural and theological perspectives. Some scholars argue that head coverings serve as a physical representation of a woman's marital status and her commitment to her husband, emphasizing the idea of protection and authority within the marital relationship. In ancient societies, including those of the biblical era, a woman's identity and honor were often linked to her husband, making the head covering a visible sign of that bond.
Additionally, head coverings can be seen as a reflection of the order established by God in the family structure, where the husband is viewed as the head of the household. This hierarchical model aligns with various interpretations of Biblical texts that emphasize male authority and female submission.
I see young men ,leading songs from the stage,with hat s , worn backwards , on heads , and it seems so unthought about , it seemscso dismissive , . Somehow , . Hmm ? ❤@@1Whipperin
@@1Whipperin Amen! That's a good thing! And that's the natural order that God intended it to be (1Cor.11:3) But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
Makes sense that the Christians were considered atheists - they "bowed down" and "sacrificed" to no gods.
Highly agree with 50:00.
Most congregations/denominations pick and choose which scriptures they like best, violate the 3rd commandment with them, and turn them into tradition. Then people too lazy or too beaten down to trust their own interpretation of the scriptures pick and choose a congregation/denomination based on what liturgy/tradition tickles their ears, then call that worship… when not even the early churches called it that.
The clergy system stands as a glaring contradiction to the biblical principle of the priesthood of all believers, devolving into a scheme of grifters who exploit their positions for personal gain. Instead of empowering congregants, clergy act as gatekeepers, creating a hierarchy that stifles the spiritual gifts and voices of ordinary believers. This not only breeds a toxic culture within the church but also fosters an environment ripe for manipulation and control.
Many church leaders prioritize their own financial interests and institutional power over the genuine spiritual development of their communities. This is particularly evident in the way modern churches focus on growth metrics, often at the expense of authentic discipleship and pastoral care. Such practices undermine the very essence of the early church, which operated on principles of shared leadership and mutual accountability.
Furthermore, the idea that a select group of individuals possesses exclusive spiritual authority directly contradicts the New Testament's call for every believer to be involved in ministry. This elitism breeds disillusionment among congregants and ultimately leads to a church culture where faith is commercialized, and spiritual manipulation is commonplace.
The clergy system not only diminishes the role of believers in the body of Christ but also cultivates an atmosphere of distrust, where the spiritual well-being of individuals is sacrificed on the altar of financial gain and institutional survival. It's time to dismantle this harmful hierarchy and reclaim the true biblical vision of a church where every member actively participates in ministry, reflecting the diverse gifts of the body of Christ.
I love the song by Jim Reeves , My Cathedral . I hope it blesses others as it does me , ive always questioned the difference of biblical demonstrations of gatherings and what grew after the sacking of the Hebrew temple , Thankyou for helping sift the answers out , im from a brethren assembly , V modest . ❤nz
ταῖς προσευχαῖς “the prayers” is mentioned (liturgy) in acts 2 42. I’m surprised the Dr. didn’t mention this.
It would be good to hear him talk about the liturgy of the earliest Jewish believers since they were the majority in the church for decades before gentiles started coming into the church in mass. James, as a pillar, was likely using the same liturgical prayers as Jesus.
Watch the video. Great video. Listen harder. Watch the video 2 times.
Dr Tom 'Dissects' these thoroughly in his 7 video series !!!
~~~
:)
What's a lot easier to love one another when we love the Lord and realize our place in him
The problem is answered in the Lord's Prayer we are to go to him daily and he Jesus Christ is supposed to interact with us by his Spirit and were suppose to communicate with Him DAILY! Check out the end of proverbs 8 where Christ is speaking to us to wait DAILY FOR HIS WORD TO US!
“If Any man Desires to come after ME,
Let him DENY ‘himself’ (REPENT),
AND take up his Cross ‘D-A-I-L-Y’ and Follow ‘ME’.”
~ JESUS CHRIST ~
(St Luke 9:23)
~~~
:)
very encouraging thankyou
They gathered as the temple, the body of Christ in the temple which is Christ. I'm very sorry Tom even though I kind of struggle with your position even though I can't honestly dismiss it, I'm listening to your name sake Dr Thomas Wright who's Temple theology Jewish premise out of 2nd Temple Jewish scholarship.
Modern day worship/services strikes me as very Roman. That is, pre-Christian pagan traditions being continued by hitherto pagan priests that have just been told they’re Christian by Constantine.
Do you know of any evidence that Constantine turned pagan priests into Christian priests? I do not. While Constantine and Licinius legalized Christianity in 313 AD, they also allowed paganism to continue freely. I am unaware that Constantine ever forced any pagan priest to become a Christian priest.
Constantine did not explicitly force pagan priests to become Christian priests, but his reign marked a significant transformation in religious dynamics. Following his conversion to Christianity around 312 AD, he began promoting the faith and decriminalizing Christian practices, effectively encouraging many pagans to adopt Christianity, often for political or social gain.
The concept of clergy as a distinct, privileged class did emerge during and after Constantine's reign. Before this, the early church did not have a formal clergy structure as we understand it today. Instead, leadership was more communal and based on spiritual gifts. Constantine's actions, including his financial support for Christian leaders and church construction, led to a more structured ecclesiastical hierarchy that increasingly resembled the pagan priesthood, blending church and state in ways that were new for Christianity.
@@1Whipperin he didn’t force them at first, he just allowed Christianity. But later he made it mandatory and eliminated all others.
@@1Whipperin I don't mean to be argumentative, but "the concept of clergy as a distinct privileged class" had emerged long before Constantine. It is evident even as early as 105 AD with Ignatius, and the concept of ministers as "priests" was extensively used by Cyprian in 250 AD.
@@tomwadsworth Thank you. While you are correct that some concepts of clergy had begun to emerge early on, it’s crucial to understand that this development evolved over time and wasn't fully established until later centuries.
Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35-110 AD), one of the earliest Christian writers, did emphasize a form of hierarchical structure, particularly regarding bishops, presbyters, and deacons. His writings, such as his letters to various churches, describe a need for unity under a single bishop and point toward an early ecclesiastical organization. However, his writings don’t suggest a privileged clergy class in the way later institutionalized Christianity would.
Cyprian of Carthage (c. 200-258 AD), writing in the mid-3rd century, further developed this idea, often referring to the leaders of the church as priests. His use of "priest" language for Christian ministers reflected an evolving understanding of leadership, incorporating Old Testament imagery and functions into the New Testament church structure.
However, while these early figures contributed to the formation of a distinct clergy class, the kind of clericalism that became entrenched-where the clergy was seen as a privileged class distinct from the laity-didn't fully solidify until the time of Constantine and afterward. Constantine's conversion and the subsequent integration of Christianity into the Roman Empire played a significant role in the institutionalization of the clergy, leading to the eventual division between clergy and laity as a formalized class system.
So while seeds of this concept existed earlier, it was through Constantine’s influence and later developments that the clergy fully emerged as a distinct, privileged class with considerable political and social power within the church.
Sometimes I go to the "church" where my family attend. They are adamant that you have to wear a hat or some sort of head covering😬🙄 but the congregation is 99% female, the pastor is female, the Teachers are female (and they are v.good teachers).
So much for "women being silent"🤭💯🇬🇧
Is this church connected to a particular denomination?
Where are the husbands?
Thank you for this information.
I could be wrong regarding the following, but this is what comes to mind for me. "Church" has become big business. If believers met in various houses throughout a city or town, how could "church" justify the various staff members?
About a year ago, I was curious about a religious group. I could not believe all the staff members they had listed on their web page. If there were house churches throughout a city, we would not need all these paid staff members.
I met with a religious group many years ago. One of the elders saw his paid position as "calling men's meetings". If the deacons could not make it to the building by 5 p.m. on a Wednesday, then they were putting their jobs ahead of Jesus. This particular elder could not teach. Most of the time we never knew what he was saying. Bad dentures and a British accent made understanding him next to impossible. But hey, he had a paid position...to make life difficult for men who actually had real jobs.
The idea that the early Christians met in homes rather than formal church buildings is significant because it made it much harder for the state to control or monitor their gatherings. In contrast, the modern pastor system, which often includes designated church buildings, creates a centralized authority structure that can be more easily regulated and influenced by the state.
When Christians gather in homes, they operate in a decentralized manner, which fosters a sense of community and autonomy. This model can lead to greater resilience against governmental control or persecution, as seen in the early church during periods of Roman persecution. In contrast, the establishment of formal church institutions with paid clergy can inadvertently create a system where state authority can exert more influence, as the church may become intertwined with state interests.
Many scholars argue that the institutional church, with its hierarchical structures and buildings, is conducive to control and compliance, making it easier for the government to oversee and regulate religious practices. This has led to criticism of the pastor-centric model as a potential means of social control, which can dilute the original, grassroots nature of Christian fellowship.
(I have to admit that I laughed out loud at "Bad dentures and a British accent"!)
I feel your pain. But I'm not sure that "staff members" are necessarily a problem. I can see how a first century assembly might have grown so large that one of the elders needed to quit his day job to devote his time to organizing and coordinating all the gatherings. "Elders" are frequently mentioned in the NT as essential leaders for the assemblies. As Paul argues at length in 1 Cor 9 and 1 Tim 5:17-18, such elders are "worthy of their wages."
Having said all that, I still think you have a point that needs to be heard.
As I understand profecy,I see it as interpetation of Gods word.
Paul and the other apostels,it seems to me that they are interpeting the old testament and Jesus
own words through the inlightening of the Holy Spirit or am I wrong?
Paul says in 1 Corinth 13: Let me show you a more exelent gift and then he recide the Love chapter is most exelent of all the gifts:And here I think about the gift of the Spirit:Love peace joy and etc.
And as you say to come together to edfy eachother in the understanding of The Gopel,the dead and resurection of Chrit our pass over lamb,reminding eachother about the gift of our salvation of Grace for our sins.
Thank you both for opening up about this topic.
I have yet to encounter an elegant interpretation of I Corinthians 11 that accounts for all details. Keep in mind that a couple of translation astonishments are present in many versions. The woman doesn’t have a symbol of authority; she has authority - and, there is no *such* custom, not no *other* custom in the churches. Here so many make a big deal about the head covering for the woman, but how is Paul making shame of a man being covered - when God commanded the priests to cover their heads? What do the angels care about any of this? Does head mean authority, so that God is authority over Christ who is God? Or does head mean source or at least beginning point, as in Genesis 2’s splitting of the one river into four heads, and Daniel 2’s head of the successive human governments? Did God send Christ? Did Christ create the man? Did the woman come out of the man? Source, source, source - emphasizing oneness? Then the man now coming out of the woman is not a random mitigation of authority but support of the overall point of oneness….
To answer the speculation in this video about taking the silence of women with equal seriousness as the head covering, or vice versa - I Corinthians 11 as clearly as it says anything, says women may prophesy. Which is not silence. Sin is lawlessness, but there is no law of Moses that silences women in the assembly, or for that matter which commands the unilateral submission of women to men in any configuration. So why do verses 34-35 of chapter 14 appeal to laws that cannot be found? This is a significant conflict if we think it’s referring to God’s ethics. But if ekklesia referred to male-only civic assemblies for the Greeks, long before Jesus said he’d build his - mightn’t the quotation theory of these verses be more reasonable than the idea that Paul meant women to be silent in contradiction to his own self a mere three chapters earlier?
Your observations about 1 Corinthians 11 raise several important points regarding interpretation, context, and translation. Here are some key considerations:
1. Authority vs. Symbol: The argument that women have authority rather than merely a symbol of authority is significant. Many interpretations focus on the cultural context of head coverings in ancient Corinth, where such practices were associated with honor and propriety. However, your emphasis on women having authority aligns with interpretations that recognize their active role in the church.
2. Head Coverings and Shame: The notion that Paul shames men for being uncovered while the Jewish tradition required priests to cover their heads does prompt a re-examination of the text. This invites questions about the cultural and theological implications of covering, suggesting a complex relationship between authority, honor, and gender roles.
3. Head as Source vs. Authority: The interpretation of "head" as either authority or source is a longstanding debate. Many scholars argue that Paul’s use of "head" implies a relationship of origin rather than hierarchy, supporting the idea of unity rather than division among believers. This perspective resonates with your points about oneness and the creation narrative in Genesis.
4. Silence and Prophecy: Your emphasis on women's ability to prophesy in 1 Corinthians 11 highlights a tension with Paul's instructions in chapter 14 regarding silence. Some scholars propose that the verses in 14 may reference specific cultural practices or issues within the Corinthian church rather than establishing a universal prohibition against women's speaking or prophesying.
5. Quotation Theory: The idea that verses 34-35 might reflect quotations or cultural norms rather than divine mandates is an intriguing approach. It acknowledges the potential for misapplication of cultural customs within the church while still maintaining a theological framework that allows for women's active participation.
In summary, the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11 is complex, and your insights touch on significant theological and cultural dimensions.
This is good discussion , i pray Ruach Ha Kodesh ,be at work ,guiding wise outcome of such thoughts , ❤@@1Whipperin
So what did the first ‘Christian’s’ call GOD? What were the first Christians actually called? Did they really worship on the first day? Who changed The Word, the Commandment? If GOD is the same yesterday today and tomorrow where exactly is that??? What was being taught exactly, the law perhaps??? The way to live?? So many questions…..
And why would women need to go if they can’t share a word?
Do you have a book on “HOW TO WORSHIP GOD CORRECTLY”?
I highly recommend you to watch Tom's series of 7+1 videos, there you will get the answer.
I'm working on a book that has a similar direction.
@@tomwadsworth Why write a book? Why not consistently encourage discussion and encourage people to continue to read the word of God and be open to the Spirit of God and practice what works?
@@tomwadsworthLooking forward to its’ publication, Tom. May God greatly bless this important work. ✔️
@@Fredericko-k7p Yes, we have a book called The Bible.
I agree with the fact that we need to go back and see how Apostle Paul, Peter and John worship. Before tbe book of revelation which was written about 90AD. How was Paul and Peter worship and preached before they were killed around 65-70 AD. There is no evidence that they used Lithergy before they died. We know Apostle paul goes into the synagogue when he arrive at any city in Asia minor.
I'm also very interested in how the Apostles gatherered and what they do when they gathered. I agree with Tom that we all need to look into the 1st century gathering of the saints.
At 40 minutes your guest speaks of “THE leader,” but leadership in the NT always appears to be pluralistic. Paul himself, speaking of his home fellowship, says “I also am AN elder.” The only place one finds a SINGLE “leader” is 3 John 1:9, and John doesn’t sound very happy about him!
I thought I was rather clear that the early church typically has a plurality of leaders/elders. See 40:12.
@@tomwadsworth Yes, you definitely made that clear. But almost no church has plurality of leaders today . They may have a board of elders, but unfortunately in my experience, THE pastor can trump the entire board. That to me says the plurality is a sham, and that is why I brought up the only passage that mentions the one guy “who likes to have the preeminence” among you. You did an excellent presentation- please forgive me if that came across as if I thought you missed something. You probably could have said a lot more on each topic, but for times sake you covered salient points and moved on - and you were very generous towards those who moved the church from fellowship to overloadship.
The earliest church met each Sabbath in synagogues to learn Moses teachings, but the believers in the Christ also met house to house in excited fellowship, sharing the gifts of the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 14:26 “How is it then brethren, when you come together EACH of you has a Psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.”
It has been many years since I was able to find a house church that actually did this. It seems the gifts of the Spirit have been much abused in the last 40-50 years. So many counterfeits out there.
Thanks for your thoughts! I did a search for every time the word 'synagogue' is found in the Bible. I was surprised that the NT never says that Christians "met in the synagogue." It’s true that Paul used synagogue meetings as an opportunity to proclaim the gospel to the gathered Jews (Acts 9:20; 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:4, 19, 26; 19:8), but the Christians did not "meet in the synagogue" as has often been alleged. If you have evidence that indicates otherwise, I'm all ears!
@@tomwadsworth Please recall that even the leader of at least one synagogue was converted. Also, consider that the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31 is not made with Gentiles, but with the house of Israel. There is no Gentile covenant. Jewish converts were followers of the Way, not “Christians “, they were just a sub-group of Jews and until many years after the crucifixion of Jesus they worshipped in their synagogues every Sabbath. Paul himself always worshipped in the synagogues on his journeys. He tells the Corinthians to keep Passover - that would probably involve the synagogue.
Sadly, Jewish believers were eventually cast from their synagogues every Sabbath by Jews AND cast from the church by Gentiles who denied any and every “Jewish custom” and placed a death penalty on any “Christian” who celebrated Passover, circumcised a male newborn, etc. The Catholic Church will not deny that, but they will say it was only “regional.” Sure!
@@tomwadsworth I’m afraid that I consider this to be a contrived coverup by the early Christian leaders who were wanting to separate themselves from the original Christians, who were all Jewish and numbered well into the tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands. Christianity was originally just a sect of Judaism, definitely not a new religion. I’m sure you agree with that statement.
It is my belief that whenever the split occurred was when any NT documents that could be found in Hebrew were burned. It was at a great burning that a priest from France visiting in Rome saw an intact volume of Matthew and pulled it from the fire. He hid it and it is said to be on display today in the louvre. I have seen a copy of Matthew in Hebrew, but I do not read Hebrew. Full ancient copies have also been found in India where Thomas, I believe, is said to have gone.
Acts 14:27 NKJV “Now when they had come and gathered (synago)G4863 the church (ekklesia) G1577 together they…”
Hebrews 10:25 NKJV “… not forsaking the assembling of ourselves (episynagoge) G1997 together…”
I think you can see that even in Greek it is hard to obscure the relationship between church and synagogue- both are assemblies of people to worship. Strongs makes the distinction that one is composed of Jews, the other of Christians …. So what is a Jewish Christian to attend, a church or a synagogue? Of course we see Paul many years after the resurrection attending synagogues in every city. We also see him celebrating the three festivals commanded by God (forever, no less,) and telling the Corinthians to celebrate them - at least we can assume all three since he specifically says Passover, and if you follow God, all three. Of course they were to be celebrated in Jerusalem annually at the Temple. When Jerusalem was sacked and the Temple torn apart and burned, the commandments could no longer be followed, but the story of Yavne is not for now.
Blessings-
Amongst some anabaptist churches, I have met some who have similar beliefs as Tom about the church gathering. They use the term brotherhood to describe their group.
I've been studying this stuff and experimenting for 40 years, and there are some things to add that I've not heard from any house church or organic church advocates or from missionaries.
Also its a HUGE misnomer that Paul was teaching or preaching until late the night that the guy fell out of the window. Those words aren't used in the Greek. Paul was there visiting, they hadn't seen him for a long time, and they all naturally stayed up late talking and didn't want to quit. Luke says they were "dialoging."
Teaching literally didn't mean then what it does now. It was about training new converts in how to live according to Jesus's commands, it wasn't theology. Like the Didache shows, as the earliest training manual for converts. And all older or spiritually mature members would have been expected to help disciple the younger folks and the new converts. No public speaking skills required. What we would consider public speaking type preaching/teaching, is precisely what they would have termed "prophesying," but still would have involved more dialog, questions, discussions and debates than we would think...this is how both Jews and Greeks did things.
Also, all the first churches were built around a core of Jewish people and God-fearers who all already had their customs. They went to synagogue and participated in that community--and continued to as Messianic until they were thrown out, but part of that custom was the Havdallah meal together at home on Saturday night/Sunday as soon as the sun went down according to Jewish reckoning. With friends and family a celebratory meal. And remember that ALL feasts, Sabbaths, and offerings in Jewish religion involved a meal at home, not a worship service in a sacred building other than sometimes at the Temple before feasting in a home. The Havdallah was a perfect time for a meal together and discussion of that days scripture readings, and what the Messiah did and was doing for them.
As time passed and more and more of these core groups were getting kicked out of the local synagogue, even persecuted, they naturally needed to add scripture reading to their own meetings, but it's safe to assume they continued to be "dinner church" on Saturday evening for a long time. This was their love feasts. There is evidence that a sunrise gathering on Sunday morning to celebrate the resurrection began early on as well, (Sunday was a workday for everyone whether Jew or Gentile, so early morning was essential if they were to gather at all) --where a typical Mediterranean breakfast was just bread and wine anyway, but they were still eating a meal together as part of the gathering, not having a mere morsel as a religious ceremony. At some point as the split between Jew and Gentile became greater, the more Gentile- majority gatherings may have gradually switched to meeting on Sunday only, or at least to considering it more important as they distanced themselves from anything too "Jewish." But the first church buildings had dining halls in them, so we know the eating a full meal together went on until it was completely banned in later centuries, and churches forbidden to have dining rooms in their facilities. The Messianic Jewish gathering "Nazarenes" continued for centuries even though we are never taught about it, and kept meeting on the Sabbath and keeping Passover at the proper Jewish time, which contributed later to the East/West split over when to celebrate Pascha/Easter. As the Gentile church began to ban everything Jewish including keeping the Sabbath or Jewish festivals, they would naturally emphasize Sunday as the proper time to meet...but note that the NT nowhere mandates weekly meetings at all, nor what day to meet on. The expectation is actually more that we see each other informally every day and live life together as a community, caring for one another. Formal meetings are not the definition of, or the most important thing we do.
Prophets in both the Old and NT would usually have been people learned/educated in the scripture and full of wisdom-- who could explain the Old Testament and Jesus's teachings and answer questions, not just supernaturally gifted in the absense of any normal learned knowledge, but people who also could hear God and help the group know God's mind during decision making or crises. This also differentiates between how all are able to and should be prophesying, but some people are still considered "prophets" as opposed to other ministries, and often seem to travel around encouraging assemblies from place to place full time or part time, vs the the rest of folks who stayed local. And since in both the Old and New Testaments women are prophets and are encouraged to prophesy, they obviously cannot be silenced, nor would Paul have any authority to silence them. So read reputable scholars about how Paul was quoting the Corinthians and refuting them about silencing women, and how many female co-workers he had.
But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
Worship as a christian is a dynamic experience as a group in a living relationship with The Living God. To attemp to say this is how worship was DONE in the first century misses the whole point of our relationship with God!!!!
The big question for me is "when it was happening", in other words when the Lord was pasturing his sheep how did He do it and for what reason and purpose. As the head of the body. Today so called pastors get their information for a man in a religion and not the head of the body The Lord. Why did they gather, is also written. What was their mission as commanded by The Lord. How do we keep the commands of The Lord? Why are we meeting? To Edify one and another in the body to bring glory to the Father through The Lord's ministry. Leaving one's own ways to be doers of the faith is a very subservient way of leading one to the gift of God. The Goodnews. Today everyone wants the drive through. We are in fear of our neighbors. Have only enough time to have an hour service at some place, because we don't really believe our body is the temple of The Holy Spirit, and our worship is in Spirit and Truth. Peace, Shalom.
Too many annoying ads
Yeah that's a thing. Add blocker on a desktop works, you can also download the video and watch it back without adds. I'm a very understanding person, and listen to content on many devices, with and without adds. It's just that is seem wrong to stop spreading the Word to run an add. It just seems wrong.
In the AMPLIFIED version of the bible the word "prophesying" in 1Corinthians 14 is given as INSPIRED SPEAKING/TEACHING. This agrees with FORTH-TELLING.
However this PREFERENCE is to do with MINISTRY and not with the PRIVATE praying in Tongues of the believer - 1Corinthians 14:2,4
Also I have found over 30 years that it is very important to lay down basic principles in a house church such as teaching them about The WILL OF THE LORD GOD that we have a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with HIM to know HIM as Our ONLY Teacher and FATHER - Matthew 23:8-10
TEACHING people to test every spirit - 1John 4:1, before they accept what is being said while walking in the command that we think of THE OTHER PERSON AS HIGHER THAN OURSELVES - Philippians 2:3-4 when expressing what they believe from that testing. This makes walking in the CHESSED (love) of 1Corinthians 13 all the more important.
facts, but the problem is people don't want the truth
Sone do,it's changing something we do that is not hard but as humans we do not like change,at least alot of people
“Truth it’s the new ‘hate’ speech.
During times of universal deceit, telling the Truth becomes a revolutionary act.”
~ George Orwell
~~~
:o
Exactly , Differentiate between the early church . And 2000yrs later. New babes and maturing in Christ . Teaching appropriate to, for new borns and edification / exhortation for the building up of the whole body unto the fullness/ one complete man in Christ . We need to identify the stages assigned with appropriate scriptures . That all may prophesy .
Gifts are not developed. They were given, once, in the first century and not after. But edification continues by the more excellent way of love now in the Body that Paul's ministry brought to maturity. We also have the written word too both of which equips the church completely for edification beyond the (what I like to call) the nanny gifts. This is right in line with the excellent advance and recovery by Frank Viola! (Not a perfect recovery by Frank but a huge chunk!) Also Robert Banks.
What do the Church Fathers say about the early Church worship?
Christianity was outlawed and if you admitted you believed in Christ you would be martyred church triumphant. it’s not so simply brushed over as to why Christians had house churches.
The church needs to move away from carnal ordinances.
King David knew how to repay God for all His gifts to man: Psalm 116:12-13 “What shall I render to the LORD for all His benefits toward me? I will take up the Cup of Salvation and call upon the name of the LORD.”
The Cup of Salvation has been the 3rd cup of four at Passover for 3 millinea now. That was the cup that Jesus blessed and shared with the disciples when He told them that He would not drink of it again until He drank it new in the Kingdom.
It sounds strange, but King David was onto something. What do you give to God, Who owns the earth and all its fullness? You TAKE the Cup of Salvation and call upon His name.
You definitely don’t want to be ”honestly honest” when talking to businesses and their customers😉
The only New Testament books written in the 1st century are those of James, Paul, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 and 3 John and Mark. Those are best witnesses of it
Decades ago, I was able to attend some meetings of the "Church of the City", i.e., one city, one meeting place for those in that city. It had the best idea on how to have everybody be equal while staving off disorganization: Everybody sat in ordinary chairs in a loose circle so everybody could see one another. And then everybody just sat. Nobody said or did anything until they felt moved to (preferably by the Holy Spirit). Everything then flowed effortlessly from one person to the next, nobody interrupting or disputing. I felt directed, knowing when not to speak, when to wait to speak, when to speak: when to listen
Gifts are ordered by preference, not hierarchy. If one with a lower gift were moved by the Holy Spirit, then they are more relevant at the moment
When Paul wrote of women being silent, he not only would have them have their hair long and covered, he would also have men have their short hair uncovered. Paul was writing to not only gentiles but specifically to Romans! Corinth wasn't a Greek city; it was a homebase of the Roman military. They were required to have short hair. It was a mark of Romanness. Having their heads uncovered by a helmet was a way to discourage fights by leaving the man more vulnerable.
On women among them: Women were not allowed to be in the Roman military. Their long hair were just as Roman as their military men-folk's short hair
National Organization for Women
December 1968:
"WHEREAS, the wearing of a head covering by women at religious services is a custom in many churches and whereas it is a symbol of subjection within these churches, NOW recommends that all chapters undertake an effort to have all women participate in a "national unveiling" by sending their head coverings to the task force chairman immediately. At the Spring meeting of the Task force on Women in Religion, these veils will then publicly be burned to protest the second class status of women in all churches."
Please notice how this Feminist organization decreed this to Christian women, not Jews, Muslims, or women of other faiths. This was spiritual warfare against the saints, and most of us don't know this history in the West.
Either we want to be apostolic or we don't.
1st Corinthians 14:37 says what Paul wrote were commands of the Lord.
2nd Thessalonians 2:15😊
Isn't a woman's hair her covering? Her hair is given to her as a covering.
@@connieo1332 Paul uses the natural covering of a woman's hair as an example from nature to support the practice of women covering their glory in prayer and prophecy as men, who are the glory of God, remain uncovered during prayer and prophecy.
In the passage, Paul used two different words to identify two different coverings. The church had this ordinance correct for 1900 years.
Thanks for sharing the Dec 1968 quotation about the "national unveiling." I didn't know about that.
I don't know how many people were paying attention to NOW at that time, but I have noticed that head coverings for women in American churches were mostly gone by the 1970s.
@@tomwadsworth You're welcome.
In 1969, Elizabeth Farians, a Roman catholic feminist, teamed up with NOW, and threw what was called the Easter Bonnet Rebellion at a church in Milwaukee. After a priest scolded a woman for not wearing a hat to mass, a group of 15 women wore obnoxious hats to Easter service, and threw them off in protest while receiving communion.
I'm not catholic, but I find it interesting how one of the most wealthy, powerful, and political churches on earth eventually stopped expecting women and men to practice this ordinance in 1983. Most Protestant churches had already thrown out the ordinance as well, though many today still expect men to remove their hats at church.
What was practiced for 1900 years did not become controversial until 70 years ago, and I don't think the timing is a coincidence.
@@tomwadsworth You're welcome.
Elizabeth Farians, a Roman catholic feminist, teamed up with NOW to throw the Easter Bonnet Rebellion in Milwaukee in 1969.
After a woman was scolded by a priest for not wearing a hat at mass, 15 women attended Easter service in obnoxious hats, and threw them off in protest while receiving communion.
I'm not Roman Catholic, but I think it's interesting that one of the wealthiest and powerful churches eventually stopped requiring this practice in 1983. Protestant churches were also throwing away the ordinance at the same time.
I don't think the timing of women's liberation and the vanishing of this practice is a coincidence. Meanwhile, many churches still do not allow men to cover their heads at church.
At 34 minutes: Paul’s emphasis on teaching just goes back to the Torah, which literally means teaching…not law. Every parent was told to teach God’s words to their children when they awaken, all through the day, and before they retire. Paul tells Timothy to study, he tells groups of Gentiles converts to attend synagogue and study Moses. Jesus told His disciples to go into the nations and make ( literally ) students of the Word. (Remember John 1:1, Jesus IS the Word.) Today’s churches are filled with spectators, not students. Your house churches turn spectators initially into students and participants.
I like your comments. But this comment gave me pause: "Paul ... tells groups of Gentiles converts to attend synagogue and study Moses." I can't find that idea in my Bible!
@@tomwadsworth Acts 15 is a wonderful chapter, but recall Peter’s assertion that Paul is easily misunderstood. I am a Messianic believer, and having been a mainline Christian since 1965 at age 21, I am quite aware of lots of places where the denominations I was in set Paul against the teachings God gave directly to Moses!
In Acts 15, please note vss 16-21 and 21-31. Paul is saying these four things are essential if an idol worshipping Gentile is even to enter your fellowship. THOSE four things CHARACTERISTISED pagan worship. Many teach that these are the ONLY expectations to EVER be placed on Gentile converts. So why did Paul say “for Moses is preached in EVERY city in the synagogues” ? That’s where they will learn all the commandments of God (see Revelation 14:12.) The 10 words (mistranslated “commandments “ were not included in the Greatest Commandment nor the Second Commandment that Jesus quoted, you will recall. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD that proceeds from the mouth of GOD.”
Sorry, didn’t mean to say so much, but Paul never tells Gentiles (former Gentiles) to disobey a single word from God’s mouth. Every time it looks like that, look for the twisting of what Paul actually says.
Not only that, but John was caught up in a vision on The Day of The LORD in Revelation 1:10, not on Sunday. I’m told you cannot say “the Lord’s day” in Hebrew, so the translators mistranslated either in error or on purpose, leading to the heresy of changing the honoring of the Sabbath commanded by God to a different day. (The “Church” had great burnings of all Hebrew Scriptures much later in time. Not much survived besides Matthew and a fairly large number of scraps in Hebrew scattered in the diaspora.
At 50 you bring up an interesting point of inconsistency. There is a passage where,I believe Paul brings up “the inner MAN of the spirit” and several that speak of the “circumcision of the heart.” Women believers certainly have “Christ in (them) the hope of glory”, a sort of maleness for sure, and also women’s heart circumcision gives them a certain maleness. Gentiles MUST be circumcised in heart, but not in the flesh. So in the NT you have husband/wife teams, you have deaconesses, you have fellowships meeting in a woman’s house, etc. And I believe in their home fellowships women who were under authority (signified by their head coverings in that time period) could speak as well as men could or slaves could or probably as well as children who were mature could. A lot of women supported the ministry of Jesus - I seriously doubt they were treated as second class citizens.
A really good discussion- depend on KHouse for good quality. I hope my frequent comments are not perceived as trolling - it has just been so very long since I have even heard a discussion like this. The “cell group” movement of the 1970’s degraded so much that a “cell group “ I was in in 2019 had A leader who was given a typed “teaching” to read to the group each week. You can only imagine how much we “grew “ from that! It is almost as if every church wants to be filled with Lone Rangers who only have the gift of giving.
“But, If ‘you’ do Not Forgive,
Neither will your Father, which is in Heaven,
Forgive ‘your’ trespasses.”
~ JESUS CHRIST ~
(St Mark 11:26)
~~~
:o
~~~
"We must develop and maintain
The ‘Capacity’ To FORGIVE;
He who is 'Devoid' of the Power To FORGIVE,
Is 'Devoid' of the Power to LOVE."
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.
~~~
:o
~~~
“To Err is human; To Forgive, Divine.”
~ Alexander Pope
~~~
:)
Sick of looking. Wish there were a Calvary Chapel in my area. Since leaving RCC it's been hard to find a good Christian church without some agenda and they all think they're right!
This was interesting, but gave me no hope as someone looking for a true Christian biblical church today coming out of RCC!
As long as they're not worshiping Mary the Eucharist or any saint
Great discussion. Regarding women being silent, in that same letter to the Corinthians, it speaks of women who prophecy in the church which was ok. If you study the silent passage in context, this seems to be rather Paul condemning those who are trying to silence women. As a retired pastor, I’ve written a book on this subject myself. And I’ve come to the conclusion that I was wrong in much of my previous past spiritual life. Agree with your guest wholeheartedly. If only I had seen it in the past.
Do you realize that the title, Pastor is a violation of Matthew 23: 8-12?
@@1Whipperin Totally true! Not even the apostles called each other by titles. In one of Peter's letters, he calls Paul "our brother Paul." Titles created a divide between brethren and establishes a Clergy/laity system.
@@martin9410 Yes, the apostles, including Paul and Peter, did not refer to themselves with titles like "Apostle Paul" or "Apostle Peter." Instead, they humbly identified themselves as "Paul, an apostle" (Galatians 1:1) or "Peter, an apostle" (1 Peter 1:1), emphasizing their role as messengers rather than creating formal titles of distinction. This reflects a biblical pattern of focusing on the function and calling given by God, rather than elevating oneself through titles. Their authority came from Christ, but they presented themselves as servants of the gospel, rejecting the hierarchical structures often seen in modern church leadership.
I understand that chapter 11 is not directly related to chapter 14. I am a woman who finds plenty of other places to prophecy and pray with others outside of a gathering. I'm not sure it gets any clearer than "it is shameful for a woman to speak in a meeting" ☺️
@@maryflood3125 and yet, in the same letter, Paul is ok with women giving prophecies and tongues in the assembly. In chapter 14, instead of Paul saying women shouldn’t speak, he’s attacking the ones who refuse women to speak.
i can’t make ekklesia legitimately translate to church. Church connotes much more than Yeshua’s called out and i have to believe our church organizations are our own sin and nothing to do with what Yeshua wants.
it is like the jews at the mount and again when they demanded a king. God wants relationship with individuals not organizations.
Pastoring is what you do not who you are. Drop the unscriptual privileged title/position of pastor. Peter called himself a fellow elder. Nobody in the first century went around saying "I'm a pastor" It's actually offensive.
Am I correct in assuming that this was directed at me? I'm fascinated that you find my use of this word offensive. We regularly call people who shepherd, shepherds. Pastor is just the Latin word meaning shepherd. That term is scriptural and used in multiple places to describe the work of all elders of the assemblies of the body of Christ. I didn't introduce myself that way because it represents some privileged title/position, but because many who share my profession are opposed to what Dr. Wadsworth and Mr. Pryor are advocating for in this discussion. I find that people are more often confused when I refer to myself as a shepherd or elder than when I use the term pastor. Hence, my use of the term pastor was chosen for clarity and support, not exaltation. But having witnessed the misbehavior and ungodly attitude of many who are pastors, I understand the source of your visceral disdain. No harm, no foul. But please don't slander me - or other pastors/shepherds/elders - for something we are not actually guilty of.
Pastor is never a title in the NT. It's a function like teacher. Jesus commanded against all titles among the brethren. Matthew 23: 8-12
Pastor is a descriptor of activity. A pastor pastors just as a shepherd shepherds. It is an appellation used by God to describe the activity of those who teach and care for his sheep - or at least those appointed to do so. I never stated that people should address me as Pastor. In this case you have read into my words something that was neither intended by me nor implied by the word itself. Your offense in this case is not justified. If God calls these people shepherds, than so should I. And pastor is commonly used today to refer specifically to those who shepherd God's sheep. By your logic, I can't call myself a teacher either. So apparently I teach but am not a teacher and shepherd but am not a shepherd. I see no difference in saying I am an overseer, an elder, a shepherd, or a teacher, as each describes the same biblical work. Many pastors view their position as one of exaltation and prestige. I do not. Though I do believe that elders who labor in word and teaching are worthy of double honor. The problem is not that I correctly referred to what I do, but that many who have been appointed as elders do so poorly and not as our lord directs. You have falsely convicted me in this matter. Please do not continue to do so to me or others like me who are not misusing the term or the appointment.
Don't leave out mormons
Hello Everyone: I had a UFO dream in 2012. I'm an endtimes messenger for Jesus for the past 12 years This teaching is really important for the Body of Christ around the world right now. Thank you:) endtimes dreams on my channel. And my community posts too warn on what's coming.
Do you have more insight?
@@dainawebb3580 my channel has the endtimes dreams on it. My last live video.
Go to the Scripture (Old Testament). Everything is there. How they worship and gather. New Testament is only following carefully and lawfully what was established before.
I’m pretty sure almost everything was changed in the new covenant. So much of the OT was shadows of what was to come spiritually.
@lansan3430
Kindly listen again to 11:45 about pan liturgy.
@@ShaneIrwin7 Word of YHWH is not subject to change regardless of anyone's opinion! This is why it was validated and confirmed to ALL Israel (Native-born and Grafted Gentiles) as an everlasting covenant, a statute for a thousand generation. If you study carefully what Jesus taught, it was nothing new but the Doctrine of His Father Himself, the Law and the Prophets which is commanded by Jesus to be obeyed and taught even the least of it.