Feeding the sheep!

[Esaias]

Well, I guess the subject IS too dry.

lol

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Esaias

So I'm thinking and pondering on this...

How about this? A two-fold approach to discipleship and edification (building up). Or you could think of it as two tracks.

Track One: An elder in the local congregation would be responsible for the discipleship of new converts. The more elders the better, as long as they can actually do this work. New converts need to go through a sort of 'orientation' process, to get them up to speed so they can contribute meaningfully in the general gatherings of the assembly. So, elders should take new converts under their wing, so to speak, and spending one on one time with them (or preferably one on household time with them, an elder discipling a whole household... more on that in a moment...) they should begin a process of instruction in the fundamentals of the teaching of Christ. This would be two-fold, on the one hand 'doctrinal' or theological instruction in the basic teachings of the Bible, and on the other hand 'practical' instruction in things such as personal prayer, worship, holiness, Bible reading and study, witnessing to others, etc. So, new converts would have something akin to a 'sponsor', they would be somewhat like 'apprentices' learning the basics of being a Christian and living the Christian life. The goal is to establish them in the faith, enabling them to be productive members of the Body.

Track Two: This would be focused on the congregation as a whole. There would need to be a systematic approach to teaching the Bible, geared towards meeting the needs of the entire assembly, with ample room for admonition and exhortation. The individual members of the Body would put their personal training (discipleship) into action in the meetings, slowly but surely contributing more and more to the content of the meetings from their own prayerful studies, experiences, etc, sharing whatever revelations God has given them (see 1 Cor 12-14), as well as exercising whatever gifts that are more administrative or logistical in nature than simply 'speaking or singing' in the meeting. Each congregation of course, being composed of a unique blend of individuals different from any other congregation, would have to have its own 'tailor made' program of corporate teaching. This requires wisdom on the part of the elders who have the oversight. They need to rightly judge where the congregation is at, spiritually, and how best to get to where the Lord wants them to be. That is to say, they need to be discerning in regards to what the assembly needs in order to grow and fulfill its calling.

However, a basic structure or 'outline' or 'template' could be put in place, modified as needed for each articular congregation. Perhaps a systematic program of Bible reading and teaching, chapter by chapter, verse by verse, through the Bible in such a way that all the main points are hit on (recognizing of course that the entire Bible cannot be gone through in that way in any reasonable amount of time). The particular books of the Bible chosen for this purpose would depend on the teacher(s) and the congregation. However, there ought to be a way to esentially go through the entire Bible's truths.

Something like this:

1. There should be a reading from both the 'law and the prophets' as well as the Gospels and epistles. The Gospels can serve as the base template. Broken down into sections or passages for each reading, whoever is teaching would need to prepare before hand the 'corroborating scriptures' from the OT and the Epistles which give additional explanation or application of the main passage in the Gospel reading. OR if there is a particular passage in the OT or NT Epistle that needs to be taught or explained, it can be done once a corresponding Gospel reading is found, and then those OT and Epistle texts can be taught when the appropriate Gospel reading comes up. This way, the whole counsel of God can be taught while using the Gospels as a sort of 'lectionary' of readings. Additionally, teaching is restricted to the text of Scripture - the Word of God itself gives the subject matter and the outline, rather than relying on a particular teacher's fancy.

2. In addition to the readings and the teaching from the elders, space should be given to those who have the gift of exhortation, prophesying, etc to share whatever God has given them. This will take care of the need for 'preaching' (as opposed to 'teaching', as some make the distinction).

I think this would provide a well-rounded approach to both individual discipleship as well as the corporate needs of the assembly as a whole.

Also, elders should get together, and have discipleship themselves as to how to fulfill their calling as elders, overseers, etc in the assembly. The role of 'deacon', or servant of the assembly, would be useful for identifying those who have eldership potential, and as deacons they would be 'in training' by the elders to become the next generation of elders. This way, each congregaton provides its own leadership, no nobody needs to be 'imported' from outside the congregation.

Whaddya think? Is it workable? Is it too grandiose? Unrealistic? Scriptural?

*About household discipleship: The ideal would be evangelistic preaching that results in the conversion of entire households. Preaching should primarily target heads of households, with the expectation that if the head of house converts, his household will convert with him. Thus, the entire family can be discipled as one, together. This is of course simply an ideal, and reality is often not quite as neat as that. But it certainly should be a goal, I believe.

Both of these, track one and two, together sound good.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

So, how best to fulfill the obligation to teach?

I find there is more good to be found in teaching by example and by letting the student learn by doing.

Devotional instruction is important. I don't knock it at all. But much of it goes to head knowledge only. That's only half the battle. The other is heart knowledge, getting the truths of God's Word down deep, and that only comes through experience.

Many saints read, study, and take notes, and can quote Scriptures all day, but don't know how to be led by the Spirit moment to moment. They have no functional awareness of the activity of God.

There is a difference, for example, in teaching someone a great lesson on prayer. A whole three month series could be taught. But that's theory only. It has to be applied and practiced. Beginning to pray, and leading a person to an awareness on how to serve the Lord in prayer, how to listen, how move and flow with the Holy Spirit is completely different.

I think oral, devotional instruction should be more about equipping the saints to feed themselves in that way. More should be taught regarding life in the Spirit. A teacher's main duty is to equip the saints for the work of the ministry for the edifying of the Body. Traditional doctrinal exegesis doesn't do a whole lot to accomplish that calling, in my opinion.

For example, I could put together a six week class on how to drive. I could go page by page through the manual, with some great anecdotes, slideshow presentations, and witty insights. But no one learns to drive a car by merely reading the driver handbook.

It's the same with the ministry of teaching. No one learns how to live for God just by reading the Book. A Christian has to get behind the wheel, so to speak.

Consider this: Jesus told Peter "Feed my sheep". But earlier in John, Jesus told the disciples "I have meat to eat you know not of...My meat is to do the will of the Father who sent me".

When we think of feeding God's sheep, we think merely of teaching them the Bible. We rarely think of teaching a saint how to seek, discover, ascertain, understand, and fulfill God's personalized will for their life. That's the true feeding Jesus wants us to do.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I find there is more good to be found in teaching by example and by letting the student learn by doing.

Devotional instruction is important. I don't knock it at all. But much of it goes to head knowledge only. That's only half the battle. The other is heart knowledge, getting the truths of God's Word down deep, and that only comes through experience.

Many saints read, study, and take notes, and can quote Scriptures all day, but don't know how to be led by the Spirit moment to moment. They have no functional awareness of the activity of God.

There is a difference, for example, in teaching someone a great lesson on prayer. A whole three month series could be taught. But that's theory only. It has to be applied and practiced. Beginning to pray, and leading a person to an awareness on how to serve the Lord in prayer, how to listen, how move and flow with the Holy Spirit is completely different.

I think oral, devotional instruction should be more about equipping the saints to feed themselves in that way. More should be taught regarding life in the Spirit. A teacher's main duty is to equip the saints for the work of the ministry for the edifying of the Body. Traditional doctrinal exegesis doesn't do a whole lot to accomplish that calling, in my opinion.

For example, I could put together a six week class on how to drive. I could go page by page through the manual, with some great anecdotes, slideshow presentations, and witty insights. But no one learns to drive a car by merely reading the driver handbook.

It's the same with the ministry of teaching. No one learns how to live for God just by reading the Book. A Christian has to get behind the wheel, so to speak.

Consider this: Jesus told Peter "Feed my sheep". But earlier in John, Jesus told the disciples "I have meat to eat you know not of...My meat is to do the will of the Father who sent me".

When we think of feeding God's sheep, we think merely of teaching them the Bible. We rarely think of teaching a saint how to seek, discover, ascertain, understand, and fulfill God's personalized will for their life. That's the true feeding Jesus wants us to do.

And so how would that be accomplished?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And so how would that be accomplished?

I suppose there are a diversity of ways, depending on the situation, the people involved, and etc. But it seems to me it will always come back to using the methods Christ Himself used.

There was a time of devotional instruction. Christ saturated the Apostles in His doctrine. But not just with words. He exampled everything He taught in front of them. They saw Him do the very things He spoke about. Next came empowerment/authority to take what they had learned and seen, and do it themselves. Then they were sent. It was all on the 12 to apply everything they had experienced. Following the sending of the 12, there was a time of rest, with feedback and additional instruction, after which came deeper revelation.

So, let's say a saint came to me, asking me to teach him how to evangelize (the following will be a bit generic, just to get your question answered).

I would first do a thorough job explaining the Biblical doctrines surrounding the topic, while at the same time taking the person out into the community to show practical application, by doing the very things I had already explained (probably 4-5 times). Next, I would pray with and for the saint in question, giving encouragement, letting them know they are empowered by God to evangelize the world. Then, I would offer an opportunity for the saint to go and do what he had heard and seen me do (a community event, for example). I would not go with. We would reconvene and talk about how it went, what doors God opened, challenges, etc. I would give some feedback with some additional teaching, then talk about the deeper aspects of evangelism (e.g. the real meaning of the Gospel, it's power and purpose, why it's so important, how it saves, and etc.)

If it all went well, in about a month, there would be a fairly well trained and ready evangelist chomping at the bit to hit the streets.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I suppose there are a diversity of ways, depending on the situation, the people involved, and etc. But it seems to me it will always come back to using the methods Christ Himself used.

There was a time of devotional instruction. Christ saturated the Apostles in His doctrine. But not just with words. He exampled everything He taught in front of them. They saw Him do the very things He spoke about. Next came empowerment/authority to take what they had learned and seen, and do it themselves. Then they were sent. It was all on the 12 to apply everything they had experienced. Following the sending of the 12, there was a time of rest, with feedback and additional instruction, after which came deeper revelation.

So, let's say a saint came to me, asking me to teach him how to evangelize (the following will be a bit generic, just to get your question answered).

I would first do a thorough job explaining the Biblical doctrines surrounding the topic, while at the same time taking the person out into the community to show practical application, by doing the very things I had already explained (probably 4-5 times). Next, I would pray with and for the saint in question, giving encouragement, letting them know they are empowered by God to evangelize the world. Then, I would offer an opportunity for the saint to go and do what he had heard and seen me do (a community event, for example). I would not go with. We would reconvene and talk about how it went, what doors God opened, challenges, etc. I would give some feedback with some additional teaching, then talk about the deeper aspects of evangelism (e.g. the real meaning of the Gospel, it's power and purpose, why it's so important, how it saves, and etc.)

If it all went well, in about a month, there would be a fairly well trained and ready evangelist chomping at the bit to hit the streets.

Over the years I've trained a lot of people at various jobs. It's the same kind of thing. Take the new recruit, "show 'em the ropes", and let them go. Monitor, reinforce, answer questions, hand-hold for a bit, but ultimately, expect them to learn by doing.

Imagine if the church actually made disciples instead of merely acquiring converts?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I suppose there are a diversity of ways, depending on the situation, the people involved, and etc. But it seems to me it will always come back to using the methods Christ Himself used.

There was a time of devotional instruction. Christ saturated the Apostles in His doctrine. But not just with words. He exampled everything He taught in front of them. They saw Him do the very things He spoke about. Next came empowerment/authority to take what they had learned and seen, and do it themselves. Then they were sent. It was all on the 12 to apply everything they had experienced. Following the sending of the 12, there was a time of rest, with feedback and additional instruction, after which came deeper revelation.

So, let's say a saint came to me, asking me to teach him how to evangelize (the following will be a bit generic, just to get your question answered).

I would first do a thorough job explaining the Biblical doctrines surrounding the topic, while at the same time taking the person out into the community to show practical application, by doing the very things I had already explained (probably 4-5 times). Next, I would pray with and for the saint in question, giving encouragement, letting them know they are empowered by God to evangelize the world. Then, I would offer an opportunity for the saint to go and do what he had heard and seen me do (a community event, for example). I would not go with. We would reconvene and talk about how it went, what doors God opened, challenges, etc. I would give some feedback with some additional teaching, then talk about the deeper aspects of evangelism (e.g. the real meaning of the Gospel, it's power and purpose, why it's so important, how it saves, and etc.)

If it all went well, in about a month, there would be a fairly well trained and ready evangelist chomping at the bit to hit the streets.

This sounds like what I was talking about in regards to the one on one discipleship process. But what about the congregation as a whole? Individual discipleship certainly is important, but so is congregational instruction in the Word of God, is it not?

Christ did not need to teach his disciples the Bible, because as Jews they grew up memorizing more scripture than most Christians ever forget in a lifetime. But with Paul and his gentile converts, does he not install or put in place some method of 'reading and teaching' the scriptures?

1Ti_4:13 Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.

My question at the moment is largely on how to put that into practice in a practical, workable, efficient manner.

(I'm gonna come back to the individual discipleship question later...)

[votivesoul]

With an audience, one must remember the lowest common denominator. If you have a thirteen year old sitting in with the adults, or someone with barely a high school education, then chances are he or she isn't going to learn much if you're teaching at the seminary level.

The old adage "if they haven't learned, you haven't taught" applies. So, before the how-to is discussed, I would think the teacher would need to be instructed somewhat in educational philosophy, group dynamics, and etc.

A room full of auditory learners will love a teaching, even if it's two hours long, as long as it's interesting. A room full of visual learners will try to listen, but lose the ability to focus, and a room full of kinesthetic learners will likely begin to fidget, get up, get some water, start playing with a cellphone, and etc., and just about completely cause the teaching to come to a halt.

What this means is that it is incumbent upon the teacher to know his audience. What can they handle? Who's easily offended? Who enjoys a good revelation? Who wants to keep it simple? When to bypass someone's comfort level in order to reach another member? Who has ADD?

All of this and more comes with walking in the Spirit. A true sensitivity to the Holy Spirit will help any teacher know. And again, that goes back to the cultivation process, which comes with one on one training/equipping.

I personally don't think an overly systematic, formulaic approach is best. Why? Because life isn't systematic or formulaic. It seems to me, whenever I've taught in a structured format, that the students ends up dictating the need. I've had to choose between sticking with a program or going with the flow. I usually go with the flow. The teacher has less need of teaching than the student does of learning.

It might be really great to teach a particular subject, but if the audience isn't on board, you're just going to drone on. This doesn't mean the teacher hasn't a say. It just means that we need to be careful not to limit what God has in mind for any gathering. God seems intent on ruining many a man's best laid plans especially when we merely schedule Him in.

So, I appreciate an open format, all questions welcome approach. Let's just see what God wants to do! We can still give attendance to reading, to exhortation, and to doctrine, but not because we brought a Bible flip chart, or three pages of notes. Know what I mean?

[votivesoul]

Having said all that, I do believe one systematic approach is particularly necessary.

I believe doctrine should be taught in the following order:

Orthodoxy, or right belief
Orthopraxy, or right practice
Orthopathy, or right experience

Each item is an outgrowth of the one which comes before. I've seen a lot of teachers attempt to teach people how to live a Christian life, only to see consistent moral failure in their students. Why? Because their students don't have an anchor of orthodoxy to explain to them why it's needful for them to live a certain way.

God is holy is a statement of orthodoxy. It has to come first. Living holy lives is a matter of orthopraxy. It comes second, dependent upon the first. Having right beliefs about God, and practicing the Christian life correctly allows us to have orthopathy, or right experiences (i.e. God is holy, we live holy, we experience holiness, always in that order).