Published in 2003 and edited by Steve Atkerson, ekklesia addresses the roots of biblical church life. This book is an earlier version of a book published in 2008 entitled House Church. You can read an excerpt of House Church here. The ten contributing authors make ekklesia a well rounded book and I recommend it. I especially enjoyed the two different perspectives on women being silent in the church. Below is an excerpt written by my good friend Jon Zens on how to deal with conflicts and problems that will eventually arise in any group.
No human family can function indefinitely without having to face a conflict or problem. Likewise, in Christ’s family there will be problems that must be resolved. Indeed, much of what was written in the New Testament had to do with correcting errors of teaching and practice among the saints. What guidelines does the New Testament give for working through the bumpy times that any congregation will inevitably face? 1 Corinthians 1:10 reveals some critical apostolic teaching in this regard.
First, it can be noted that Paul directs his exhortation to the “brethren.” These were believers in a city who maintained an ongoing relationship with one another in the bonds of Christ. They were committed to one another because of their common interest in the Gospel. It is this deep mutual fellowship (koinonia) in Christ that provides the backdrop for Paul’s approach to them with correction. Larry Crabb notes a vital perspective that emerges from this consideration, “Change takes place when truth is presented in relationship. Perhaps a relationship of deep regard and empathetic concern is the context for change, creating an atmosphere in which the truth of God can be heard nondefensively and thus penetrate more deeply…to be healthy, a church must present truth in the context of encouraging relationships” (Encouragement: The Key to Caring, Zondervan, 1984, pp.84,91).
This insight reflects what we saw in Romans 15:7. A loving, caring, accepting atmosphere must be the context for speaking the truth to each other in love (Rom.15:14). What reason would we have to think that Gospel truth will take deep root in a setting which reflected instead the modified line from the old song, “Where seldom is heard, an encouraging word”?
Next, Paul confronts the Corinthians with a very serious problem. Paul had a number of issues with them, but this is the one at the top of his list. They were clustering around gifted personalities, and by such schism were ruining the image of an undivided Christ. “Each one of you is saying, ‘I’m of Paul; and I’m of Apollos; and I’m of Peter; and I’m of Christ.” This sinful division was already occurring and had driven the saints apart from one another.
To solve this problem Paul appeals to them “to agree” about the wickedness of this situation. If they “agreed” then the divisions could no longer exist. The participle katartismenoi used in verse 10 is significant. It is from the same verb used in Ep 4:12, translated there as “equip” or “prepare.” It is the verb used when the disciples were “mending” their nets (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19). We could loosely translate the verb, “mending with a view toward rendering something as functional again.” This idea also emerges again in Galatians 6:1, “restore such a one…”
As used in the context of 1Co 1:10, we can see an important implication of being “perfectly united in mind and thought.” While we are not given any of the details as to how they worked this out, at a minimum we can say that the Corinthians had to work through this matter until the breach was “mended” and they finally “agreed.” A process which results in unity is in view. They were already split apart, so in order for the torn garment to be repaired they had to: (1) take the apostolic instruction; (2) come back together; (3) face and discuss the word of the Lord together; (4) repent of their sins; and (5) be restored again to their original oneness.
The utterly amazing fact is that, even with all their problems, Paul assumes that the assembly has the spiritual resources to overcome their waywardness. Many posit that the problem-solving abilities Paul presupposes will only work among mature churches. But this is a bogus suggestion. Corinth was in many ways a very immature assembly, but Paul still expects them, for example, to deal with immorality in their midst (1Co 5) and to resolve their disputes internally without going to unbelieving courts (1Co 6).
The apostles taught that within the New Covenant community all were anointed by the Holy Spirit who enabled them to “test” and “discern” what the will of God might be (1Jn 2:20,27; 4:1; 1Th :21). The ekklesia, therefore, is first of all a discerning community, able to “bind and loose,” and thus is also a decision-making community. The very word chosen to earmark the New Covenant people of God, ekklesia, is taken from the secular political realm, not from a religious context. Ekklesia referred to a group of people with common interests getting together to accomplish certain business. It would be very similar to the town meetings that took place in developing America in the 1800’s. John H. Yoder observes that, “The word ekklesia itself…does not refer to a specifically religious meeting, nor to a particular organization: it rather mean the “assembly,” the gathering of a people into a meeting for deliberation or for a public pronouncement… The church is where, because there Jesus is confessed as Christ, people are empowered to speak to one another in God’s name… It is only in the local face-to-face meeting, with brothers and sisters, who know one another well, that this process can take place of which Jesus says that what has been decided stands decided in heaven” (“Binding & Loosing,” Concern #14, Feb. 1967, pp.2ff.; cf. TDNT, IV, p.336).
As you reflect on the New Testament epistles, it is quite striking that church leaders are not addressed separately, as if some special decision-making authority resided in them. Instead, Paul directs his writings to the entire assembly. For example, he does not rebuke the elders at Corinth for failing to deal with the immoral person or for not resolving the disputes among the brethren. He puts the nexus of responsibility on the whole congregation to carry out Christ’s revealed will.
Paul’s approach flies in the face of the traditional decision-making method, which views “the pastor,” or a body of leaders, as the source of decisions. Abraham Kuyper, for instance, removed the “right to judge” from the congregation and asserted that “the administrative authority over the church rests not with the members, but properly with the presbyters” (“Pamphlet on The Reformation of the Church,” The Standard Bearer, Oct. 1979, p.14). Jay Adams avers that “take it to the church” means “take it to the elders,” who then forgive or excommunicate (Ready to Forgive, Pres. & Reformed, pp.3-4). Such an interpretation is arbitrary, informed more by presuppositions than by the text itself. Elders will certainly be a part of the “discerning” process in the body, but the New Testament will not sustain the notion that elders are the process itself. The truth is, there is very little focus on elders in the New Testament, compared to the at least fifty-eight “one-another” imperatives found therein.
Both times Jesus uses ekklesia to identify His New Covenant people, He attaches “binding and loosing” to its function (Mt16:19; 18:18). This clearly indicates that we need to significantly broaden our ideas of what is entailed in doing “church.” Traditionally, doing church means going to a building, sitting in a pew, singing some songs, putting some money in a plate, hearing a sermon, shaking the pastor’s hand, and heading home to get your roast out of the oven. Most fundamentally, however, ekklesia means doing the whole gamut of kingdom activities with other committed believers in a local congregation. We are not used to thinking of resolving disputes within the body as “church,” but the essence of practicing ekklesia involves problem-solving and decision-making in an atmosphere of loving acceptance where Christ’s truth can be spoken in love.
It behooves us, therefore, to realize that it is expected of assemblies to “agree with one another” and to be “perfectly united in mind and thought”. This does not mean that we must have unanimity regarding every doctrinal nuance, but it does mean that we must be ready to work things out with our brethren as required in light of apostolic teaching. Paul was not surprised when congregations had problems, but he was upset when they failed to work through their problems together as a body. Here is a question each of us needs to face: when the inevitable day comes in my assembly that a problem surfaces, am I going to run and hide from it, or am I going to stand with the body and do my part to be part of its resolution? Real ekklesia requires hard work and commitment, but we must never forget that Jesus’ presence by the Spirit, persistent prayer, preferring others ahead of ourselves, and fervent love are where the battles are won.