Thus it was in the beginning but this was too much to be endured by S

[skyblue888]

Among Christians in truth there simply cannot be any distinctions. There never can be any such thing as either "clergy" or "laity" but simply Christians, "a royal priesthood," "kings and priests" all. 1 Peter 2:9; Rev.1:6; 5:10.

Thus it was in the beginning. All were ministers of the Word of God's grace in reconciliation to Him and in service to men through the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour. "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen." Rev.22:21. "And the grace of our Lord was exceedingly abundant with faith and love which are in Christ Jesus." 1 Tim.1:14.

From Jerusalem "they were all scattered abroad" except for the apostles, and these all "went everywhere preaching the Word." Acts 8:1,4-8.

Here, then, were the whole body of believers, all brethren; all workers together with God; all fellow-workers in and unto the kingdom of the one God; all having but the one Lord and Master; all moved by the will of their one Head; all actuated and guided by the one Spirit; and all thus busy as bees, each and together, honoring God and blessing men.

But this was too much to be endured by Satan. It meant too much against his kingdom and dominion over men. He would move everything outside of heaven to throw into this heavenly family on earth the spirit of discord and confusion. The mystery of iniquity began to work.

You don't want to miss the next posts!

Please stay tune.

sky

[skyblue888]

Through the Spirit of Pharisaism in those who had not drunk deep into the Spirit of God as had those at the first, tradionalism and the Mosaic Order were continued. This gave opportunity to make distinctions among Christians. Acts 11:2,3; 15:1,5; Gal.2:11-13.

Among the elders, who were all equally bishops, one arrogated to himself the title of bishop. This made the three orders--bishops, presbyters or elders, and deacons; with the bishop corresponding to the high-priest, the presbyters corresponding to the priests, and the deacons corresponding to the Levites, of the Mosaic order.

Then these all were distinguished as "the clergy," while the people in general, of the churches, were but "the laity."

The word "clergy" comes from the word kleros in Greek. It signifies literally "a lot"; and so, of a person, an official chosen by lot. The word kleros also signifies "a mischievous insect in bee-hives" -- clerus apiarius.

The word "laity," "laic," "lay," comes from laikos and this from laos in Greek. It signifies "the people at large"; not the people as composing a State or a political body, but merely "a mass of men" -- and these the "unlearned."

With this aristocratic spirit of the distinction of "the clergy," in the nature of the case there entered also the spirit of rivalry for the "dignity" and "offices" that pertained to "the clergy"; and of self-exaltation, arbitrary "authority" and domination by the "higher clergy" over the "lesser," and by all "the clergy" over the "laity."

The actual working out of this spirit was first manifested in the church at Ephesus. To the elders of that church, in his last talk with them, Paul said, "Of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them." Acts 20:30.

About thirty years later it had developed to the point where Diotrephes would assume the place of Christ: by asserting "the pre-eminence," by rejecting Christ's apostle, by refusing Christ's word by His apostle, and by "casting out of the church" all who would not yield to his dictation and domination. 3 John 9,10.

Then about six years later than that, the Lord Jesus, in His closing words to all, exposed and denounced all this as the hateful thing that it is. In the first of His seven letters to "the churches" -- the one to "the church of Ephesus" -- He mentions this evil thing.

That church had "left her first love," the "falling away" had begun; but this one thing she yet had for which He heartily commended her: "This thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I hate." Rev.2:6.

In the next post we will take a look at who the Nicolaitanes were.

sky

[skyblue888]

The word "Nicolaitanes" comes from the two words nikao and laos: nikao means "to conquer," to get "the upper hand," to have "the ascendency in all relations"; and laos -- "the people at large" as distinguished from "the clergy."

The word then signifies that conquering or conquest of "the people" of the churches by that mischievous insect of the kleros or "clergy" in the Christian beehive: that persistent spirit of princedom of the Gentiles that must exercise among Christians dominion and authority. (Matt.20:25)

In the Ephesus period of the churches where this thing was first manifested it was hated. But when we come only to the third period, that of Pergamos, it was actually held. "So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate." Rev.2:15.

The Pergamos period of the churches centred "where Satan's seat is," "where Satan dwelleth," and where "Antipas" was Christ's faithful martyr." Rev.2:13.

The word "Antipas," like the word "Nicolaitanes," is a symbolical word. It comes from the two words anti and pas: anti signifiying "against" or "opposed to," and pas the plural of "pa," which is the abbreviation of pa-pa, from which come the words "pa-pa-cy" and "pope".

The Pergamos period of the churches, then, was the time of the rise and formation of the system of the pa-pa-cy. Those who opposed it are symbolized in the word "Antipas." And to oppose it meant martyrdom then, as it did also in The Reformation, and as it always does.

These two statements made by the Lord Jesus show the growth of the clerical spirit and power in its conquest of the people. In the first period, it was hated in the churches. But in only the third period that pernicious "doctrine" was held.

Yet in the first period, in the third period, and in all periods, the divine Christ sets forever His holy word: "which thing I hate." And let all people forever say, Amen.

The Church is not in the world to rule, but only to minister. The Church is not here to command anybody, but only to obey her Lord and to serve everybody.

Any comment?

sky

[Twilight]

Interesting view on the Nicolaitanes Sky.

Do you have any other sources that interprets it this way?

[skyblue888]

This is coming directly from A.T. Jones.

sky

[skyblue888]

The point of this study is to show that this same spirit of domination, this same clerical spirit, this same distinction between "clergy" and "laity" has come into our churches. This is the mystery of iniquity, the spirit of pre-eminence that began to develop in the first century in the church of Christ and which is with us again today, even among those who profess to believe present truth. 3 John 9,10.

In the book Testimonies to Ministers there is much to be read as to how this spirit of domination has entered into the church that professes to be preaching the third angel's message!

sky

[skyblue888]

Huss said, "In the last times The Church is to go about only in the form of a servant. She is to be tried by patience."

Not in vain was Christianity in its heavenly integrity put into the world. Not in vain was was it revived in The Reformation.

It was hidden by the first falling away. It has been hidden by the second falling away in a false Protestantism.

But the divine and heavenly life is in it, and again revived in its native integrity and rid forever of the mischievous insect of the spiritual Clerus apiarius, the original, revived, and ultimate, Christianity will shine forth in her native glory and beauty, and will go on gloriously unto the perfect finishing of the Mystery of God in the day and fact of the glorious Presentation. Isaiah 60:1-3; Rev.18:1.

All Christians again one; the whole Body of believers again all brethren; all working together with the one God; all fellow-workers in and unto the one kingdom of God; all having but the one Lord and Master; all moved by the will of their one Head; all receiving the word from the "one Shepherd"; all actuated and guided by the one Spirit; all again will be busy as bees, each and together honoring God and blessing men in the joyous fulfillment of the whole law in the one word; and God "will finish the work and cut it short in righteousness, because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth." Gal.5:13,14; Rom.9:28.

A.T. Jones.

[John317]

Do you know what kind of organization the Jehovah's Witnesses have? They don't really have a clergy class. Everyone is considered a minister among them. They have no paid clergy as such. Their worship services are generally led by what we would call a layman who has been designated by the congregation as an elder. They also have "overseers," who receive a small stipend, and these travel around to the various Kingdom Halls and deal with special problems the congregations may be having. The overseers don't stay in hotels but stay in the private homes of local JW families.

Despite this kind of organization, however, the Jehovah Witnesses are tightly controlled by the headquarters in Brooklyn, which has the very kind of kingly power that Ellen White was shown is wrong.

I'm not suggesting that we do what they are doing, but I'd like to understand what you believe God would have the SDA church do as far as the ministry and the organization is concerned.

[Twilight]

I'm not suggesting that we do what they are doing, but I'd like to understand what you believe God would have the SDA church do as far as the ministry and the organization is concerned.

This is a good question.

Because the idea of hierarchy is biblical.

So are we saying all hierarchy is wrong?

Or something else?

[skyblue888]

John317, your question was answered at the 1901 General Conference. You don't have the Bulletin, do you? I have already posted all this before.

Mark, in the book of Acts we find the organization of the Christian church. Where do you find "hierarchy" in the Early Church of Christ? Hierarchy is papal!

Diotrephes was the one who began "hierarchy" in the church in the first century and it developed into the papacy. See 3 John 9,10.

sky

[Twilight]

John317, your question was answered at the 1901 General Conference. You don't have the Bulletin, do you? I have already posted all this before.

Mark, in the book of Acts we find the organization of the Christian church. Where do you find "hierarchy" in the Early Church of Christ? Hierarchy is papal!

Diotrephes was the one who began "hierarchy" in the church in the first century and it developed into the papacy. See 3 John 9,10.

sky

You may be right, you have given this subject much more thought than I.

But initial questions:

Do we not have "hierarchy" in the sanctuary service?

Do we not have "hierarchy" in heaven as well Sky?

[Twilight]

3Jo 1:9 ¶ I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.

3Jo 1:10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth [them] out of the church.

[skyblue888]

Not 3 John 1:9 but 3 John 9,10.

Hieararchy was for the Mosaic order in the Old Testament but it is not found in the Christian order. In the New Testament order there is no clergy vs laity. Christ is the Head of every man and "All ye are brethren."

The Early Church was not controlled by man. Christ was the head of every man until the spirit of pre-eminence was fostered by those who had not drunk deep of the Spirit. Thus began the mystery of iniquity in the Early Church which led to rise of the first beast of Rev.13. This same spirit of domination has been developed among us for many years and this apostasy will lead to the rise of the image of the beast in our very midst

Mrs. White spoke of it as "kingly power" or "the high-handed power that has been developed" in our own ranks. She was not talking about JW when she talked about those things but about us as a people. See T.M.361-369.

sky

[skyblue888]

What version did u use, Mark?

You should use the King James as it is our custom because it is purer.

"I wrote unto the church, but Diotrophes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not." 3 John 9.

sky

[Twilight]

What version did u use, Mark?

You should use the King James as it is our custom because it is purer.

"I wrote unto the church, but Diotrophes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not." 3 John 9.

sky

That was the KJV Sky. :-)

[Twilight]

Not 3 John 1:9 but 3 John 9,10.

Hieararchy was for the Mosaic order in the Old Testament but it is not found in the Christian order. In the New Testament order there is no clergy vs laity. Christ is the Head of every man and "All ye are brethren."

The Early Church was not controlled by man. Christ was the head of every man until the spirit of pre-eminence was fostered by those who had not drunk deep of the Spirit. Thus began the mystery of iniquity in the Early Church which led to rise of the first beast of Rev.13. This same spirit of domination has been developed among us for many years and this apostasy will lead to the rise of the image of the beast in our very midst

Mrs. White spoke of it as "kingly power" or "the high-handed power that has been developed" in our own ranks. She was not talking about JW when she talked about those things but about us as a people. See T.M.361-369.

sky

But if hierarchy was used in the Sanctuary Service.

And in the NT (the apostles did have authority over the church I believe - Jerusalem Council).

And in heaven where we have the covering cherubs and God Himself as Chief of all.

Then are we absolutely sure that "hierarchy" is wrong.

Or is it certain "types" of hierarchy that is the issue?

Hierarchy of a nature where one seeks to dominate through force and removing freedom of choice and freedom to question authority?

Surely Gods "hierarchy" over us, is loving and pure?

Hence not all hierarchy is wrong?

[Gail]

What version did u use, Mark?

You should use the King James as it is our custom because it is purer.

"I wrote unto the church, but Diotrophes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not." 3 John 9.

? His was the same as yours...

[Twilight]

I always use the KJV for doctrine and study, just to clarify. :-)

[skyblue888]

When I read your post the first time I did not see verse 9 there.

But I see it now.

Okay good.

sky

[skyblue888]

Mark, there was no hierarchy of any kind in the Early Church, period, and the Early Church was not a theocracy either. There won't be another theocracy, the true theoracy, until we walk through the City of God.

I suggest you both read pp.359 to 369 from Testimonies to Ministers for a start. Thank you.

sky

[Twilight]

Mark, there was no hierarchy of any kind in the Early Church, period, and the Early Church was not a theocracy either. There won't be another theocracy, the true theoracy, until we walk through the City of God.

I suggest you read pp.359 to 369 from Testimonies to Ministers for a start. Thank you.

sky

My concern Sky, is that you are taking one message about a certain type of "hierarchy" from the SOP and applying it to all "hierarchy".

I cannot see how Biblically, we could argue the point that "hierarchy" is wrong?

If it is a form of Gods government to have "hierarchy", then we have to be careful condemning all types of order and organisation where someone is appointed to lead and serve.

Do you understand my point?

[Twilight]

I suggest you both read pp.359 to 369 from Testimonies to Ministers for a start. Thank you.

sky

It sounds like you are arguing as this is the sole position of your authority Sky?

Bible first my friend, then SOP to support or shoot that down.

If you cannot show it from the bible, it is not "truth".

Because we could be in danger of "wresting" something from the SOP to suit a particular viewpoint, whilst ignoring any balancing views.

[skyblue888]

Show us from the book of Acts where there is hierarchy among the followers of Christ then.

Do you plan to read the reference I gave you before we go any further? T.M.359-369.

sky

[Twilight]

And we have to avoid any tendency to "extremism" with our views.

Extremism takes root when one looks at something with a particular pair of glasses and never tries another pair on.

It can usually be evidenced by a total unwillingness to consider another point of view and the inability to engage in a rational dialogue about that point of view.

It also usually is manifested in a blanket appeal to authority, with that authority not being permitted to be examined or viewed in a different way.

It is in itself a form of the wrong type of "hieararchy" which derives itself from spiritual pride.

A pride that will not consider what another is saying and does not take the time to explain why they disagree, but will often be manifested in accusation and aggression with those that disagree.

Because that individual has assumed the highest seat on the subject and cannot be questioned...

[Twilight]

I have had a brief scan and Ellen White is clearly talking about taking Leadership and using it in a high handed manner.

I do not see how this negates all hierarchical structures?

Do you have a specific quote that you think does remove all such organisation?

Or am I misunderstanding you?