Book Discussion: Pagan Christianity

[Pilgrum]

But Jesus called them to him and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mat 20:25-28)

This is a portion of scripture that just does not seem to mesh with IC church structure and practice. IC churches exalt our great ones to places of authority and rule over others just as Jesus' first statement said concerning the Gentiles.

"It shall not be so among you"

[Nitehawk013]

Most "IC" or Traditional churches embrace certain sections of Replacement Theology or Supersessionsim. In this case, they claim that the modern ministry, really though...they only grant power to a Pastor, is the continuation of the OT priesthood. So just as the priesthood was a special, and in som eways elevated, class so to are the modern ministers, especially the Pastor.

Listen to them once in a while when they start to talk abotu how they arethe priesthood. Or how God "always had one man" He spoke through. I heard a preacher just a couple weeks ago preach that when Ciphas tore his gowns while accusing Jesus, it signified the end of the Levitical priesthood and the point where Christ took over the levitical priesthood. He then said that we are now the levitical priesthood because we are the heirs of CHrist and members of the royal priesthood.

Forget crazy scriptural stuff like how CHrist was not levitical at all. He was of Judah, not levi. He was afterthe order of Melchisedec, not th elevites. And we are a royal proesthood of believers, not at all related to the Levites.

Follow it all back enough, and they always try to link it to the Levites so they can establish the hierarchy (even if it is a flawed application) and the tithing mandate.

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Amanah

So, I'm finished with Chapter 2 which can be summarized fairly well by the following quote from page 42:

"We have become victims of our past. We have been fathered by Constantine who gave us the prestigious status of owning a building. We have been blinded by the Romans and Greeks who forced upon us their hierarchically structured basilicas. We have been taken by the Goths who imposed upon us their Platonic architecture. We have been hijacked by the Egyptians and Babylonians who gave us our sacred steeples. . . The building is an architectural denial of the priesthood of all believers."

On Page 30 thru 46 Viola continues his critique with Protestant churches. He thinks that we have taken the Pagan Catholic model and changed a few things like replacing the altar table with the pulpit. We have kept the steeple, which he equates to the obelisks of Eqypt. The Pulpit and preaching is central in our contemporary churches, and he sees this as a problem because he feels that the platform, pulpit and choir server the purpose of educating, entertaining, reaching lost souls, ect, But he sees the people in the pews as non participants.

I'm having problems with the book at this point for a few reasons. Jesus came to seek and save that which was lost. If we are having revival in church, the Word is being preached, and souls are being saved, that can't be all bad right? The point of going to church is not to be non-participatory, but to bring people to church with you so they can hear the gospel and be saved.

I'm also thinking about the books that I have read about Azusa street now and wondering about the services described in those books. I've read that people met to pray and God took over the services. That people took turns bringing the message as God led them. There were testimonies, preaching, gifts in operation as the Spirit led.

Of course the central message of this book is that the early church first met in homes and that people were able to participate as God led them. And according to Viola, this is impossible due to the structure of our pagan buildings.

What you are describing sounds like something I read 30 or so years ago in a book called Mystery Babylon, written by a man by the name of Ralph Woodrow. His views (at the time) seemed nearly revolutionary.
He recent publications reflect some softening of his views.

If Viola is right then the entire protestant church must de-construct it's form, liturgy, methodology, tradition, venues and so on; only then will we become liberated from christian paganism, that is, if it is indeed pagan christianity.

But what of the good components of the way "church" is presently done? There must be some linkage of old w/the new in order to derive that which is good from it. By that I mean, if our christianity needs to dramatically change, it will not happen overnight. Any transition is hard, especially when organizational/denominational power structures and paradigms interfere. Transition is hard, and it will take patience for positive changes to occur.
Church leadership just doesn't happen like a poof of angel dust. It is intentional. So then, what mechanisms are in place for the 5 fold ministry to flourish in the type of environment Viola suggests? I can see where many more cults will develop without good leadership. Is the American church spiritual enough to rise above it?

What say you, Amanah?

[Nitehawk013]

I heard a sermon once about the five fold ministry. In it, the preacher brought out how that throughout scripture we see multiple references to elders, Apostles, etc but only one mention of Pastor. Today we only recognize Pastors and the rest do mostly nothing. The preachers stated that it appears we have our structure completely upside down today, and yet look what we have amanged to accomplish. Imagine what would happen if we got things back to the way layed out in Acts.

I think this may be the same situation. We have done well with traditional church and reached many, but imagine what would happen if we got it right and did things the way they did in Acts and the early church!

Agin, for the record, I am fine with traditional church on Sunday. I just think we should also embrace house church, cell groups, home meetings and anything else that fosters more of an intimate community or family feeling among the body. Traditional church tends to do the opposite.

[Scott Hutchinson]

There are various giftings in the body of Christ,and those who are called to oversight giftings do have great responbility,but they don't outrank other members of the body of Christ.

Most have forgotten about the ministry of the saints.
Noah is called a preacher of righteousness in the bible but I never read about him standing behind a pulpit,his life was a witness to his generation.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Pilgrum

But Jesus called them to him and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mat 20:25-28)

This is a portion of scripture that just does not seem to mesh with IC church structure and practice. IC churches exalt our great ones to places of authority and rule over others just as Jesus' first statement said concerning the Gentiles.

"It shall not be so among you"

Sadly, all too often... they become "little Popes".

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

I heard a sermon once about the five fold ministry. In it, the preacher brought out how that throughout scripture we see multiple references to elders, Apostles, etc but only one mention of Pastor. Today we only recognize Pastors and the rest do mostly nothing. The preachers stated that it appears we have our structure completely upside down today, and yet look what we have amanged to accomplish. Imagine what would happen if we got things back to the way layed out in Acts.
I think this may be the same situation. We have done well with traditional church and reached many, but imagine what would happen if we got it right and did things the way they did in Acts and the early church!

Agin, for the record, I am fine with traditional church on Sunday. I just think we should also embrace house church, cell groups, home meetings and anything else that fosters more of an intimate community or family feeling among the body. Traditional church tends to do the opposite.

To the bolded above...

An honest question.... What have we managed to accomplish?

We have the nicest buildings and most bloated organizations and denominations ever... yet society as a whole is largely going to Hades in a hand basket. Are we "playing church" and providing a "Sunday Show" without truly "discipling" believers to REACH their world and make more disciples? We NEVER see a church in the NT seeking to establish "members". The Apostles were always seeking to reach people with the Gospel, disciple them, train them, and send them out to disciple others. In a way... if in 10 years a church see the same families on the same pew doing what they've always done, plus others doing the same that were won during that time... the church has failed. They've only pewed "tithe cows" to keep the money coming in. Sometimes a bone of "ministry" is tossed to them and they teach Sunday School or something largely controlled and quiet. Honestly... Christianity spread through Rome like wildfire because the Apostles discipled people to disciple. Win, train, send. Win, train, send. Win, train send. And they turned one of the greatest empires on earth upside down. And it started with... 120 gathered in an upper room in the South West quarter of Jerusalem. I'd say we haven't truly accomplished anything accept making our ministers the best paid ministers in all of human history.

If the Apostles had church like we do... Christianity wouldn't have lasted a single generation.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

There are various giftings in the body of Christ,and those who are called to oversight giftings do have great responbility,but they don't outrank other members of the body of Christ.

Most have forgotten about the ministry of the saints.
Noah is called a preacher of righteousness in the bible but I never read about him standing behind a pulpit,his life was a witness to his generation.

Most of the prophets preached in the gates... the establishment couldn't stand them. They were... trouble makers. hehehe

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Sabby

What you are describing sounds like something I read 30 or so years ago in a book called Mystery Babylon, written by a man by the name of Ralph Woodrow. His views (at the time) seemed nearly revolutionary.
He recent publications reflect some softening of his views.

If Viola is right then the entire protestant church must de-construct it's form, liturgy, methodology, tradition, venues and so on; only then will we become liberated from christian paganism, that is, if it is indeed pagan christianity.

But what of the good components of the way "church" is presently done? There must be some linkage of old w/the new in order to derive that which is good from it. By that I mean, if our christianity needs to dramatically change, it will not happen overnight. Any transition is hard, especially when organizational/denominational power structures and paradigms interfere. Transition is hard, and it will take patience for positive changes to occur.
Church leadership just doesn't happen like a poof of angel dust. It is intentional. So then, what mechanisms are in place for the 5 fold ministry to flourish in the type of environment Viola suggests? I can see where many more cults will develop without good leadership. Is the American church spiritual enough to rise above it?

What say you, Amanah?

I think the church is changing and adjusting.
The Pastors on this forum are the proof of it.
Younger Pastors are less authoritarian.
They see the fallout of the mistakes of their Fathers.
There is a movement towards including home church meetings,
there is a softening in the approach of preaching.
And a movement away from preaching unbiblical standards.

Viola vehemently opposes an attack on the precious men and women of God who are Pastoring our churches and doing the best they know how with what was handed to them when they began. When I get home I'm going to find the statement that he made to that effect and post it.

It's not a light thing to transform the way you minister. It's done very cautiously so as to preserve like precious faith.

And it's easy to critique, but let's give credit for the prayers and fasting and hours of blood sweat and tears that have been poured out by concerned precious men and women who are doing their dead level best to lead the Church. I have made it a point to tread very softly in my review of this book out of love and concern for those who are giving their life for the gospel.

The countless men and women who will have received the Spirit and been baptised in the Name will rise up and call many on this forum blessed for their work and service to the Lord.

And if this post turns into a bash fest then I will request that it be locked.

[Amanah]

"At this moment, all the rebellious hearts are applauding and are plotting to wield the above paragraphs to wreak havoc in their churches. If that is you dear rebellious heart, you have missed our point by a considerable distance. We do not stand with you. Our advice: Either leave your church quietly, refusing to cause division, or be at peace with it. There is a vast gulf between rebellion and taking a stand for what is true" (Viola 5)