The White Whole Theory

The scripture in Acts 15 is used by both catholics and protestants (which includes Pentecostals) to argue for a hierarchical structure for church government.  Catholics use this scripture to make Peter the first Pope and protestants use this scripture to make James the leader of the early church, but neither position is supported by reading the scripture.  If we examine the context surrounding the council in Jerusalem in Acts 15 and the response of the Apostles and Elders in the council there are some profound ramifications for our current church governmental structure.

The reason for the council was that some men came to antioch teaching that the believers needed to be circumcised as required by the law of Moses to be saved (Acts 15:1).  In reading this scripture there are a couple of things that we need to note:

1. Paul and Barnabus argued with them vehemently about this as they knew this was false teaching.  Some scholars believe that the letter to Galatians was written before Paul went to Jerusalem for the Council and in Galatians Paul was brutal in his dismissal of this teaching.
2. It was the church in Antioch that asked the church in Jerusalem for help with this issue.  An important consideration in why the church in Antioch doing this is that they did not have the New Testament and only Galatians and James where written before the Council.  This means that if the Antioch church was unsure of which was the correct teaching, the Jerusalem Church would have been the logical place to appeal to for help.
3. In Gal 2:11 we find out the Paul confronted Peter because he was not opposing these men who where proclaiming this teaching and started avoiding gentile Christians because of peer pressure.  It is possible and probably likely that this happened while Paul and Barnabus where in Antioch and would understandably have confused the Christians in Antioch if Peter seemed to support them by association even if he didn't actively support their teaching.

When the Council in Jerusalem is held it starts with a lot of discussion then Peter addresses the council reminding them that both Jews and Gentiles are saved by Grace.  This allows Paul and Barnabus to tell the council about there missionary Journey and all the wonderful things that God has done among the Gentiles.  After this James speaks to the council giving them his opinion, which the apostles and elders agree with in their letter.   

In examining the response of the apostles and elders we need to note the following:

1. The authority in the letter rests on the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, not the authority of either Peter or James.
2. Neither Peter or James are given any special position in this council other than that they had oppinions that where worthy of noting in scripture.  Any special positon to either of these men is given by us in our interpretation of scripture, based on our experience that church has a hierarchical structure.
3. The question the church in Antioch asked was do we need to be circumcised, yet the response from the Jerusalem Council and ultimately the Holy Spirit is a general one about the Jewish law mentioning only 4 things from the whole of the old testament law.  An important note here is that they didn't mention tithing even though this is in the law and it would have fit with the response that the council gave.
4. So as you can see this passage of scripture gives no support to our current hierarchical church structure where a Senior Pastor rules his little kingdom as he sees fit.  In fact it actively opposes it as the ruling was given by a council of apostles and elders with no mention of any single leader.  

Has Christ been divided into factions? 1 Cor 1:13a
When I have read that question in 1 Corinthians I have always read it as applying to a local community of believers, but the Body of Christ is not just a local congregation but the universal church. If we change the question to, 'Has Christ been divided into denominations?' The answer is obviously still no, yet we as the Body of Christ accept the status quo and make no effort to change it. Yet, Jesus in his prayer in John 17 asks:
²⁰ "I am praying not only for these disciples but also for all who will ever believe in me through their message. ²¹ I pray that they will all be one, just as you and I are one-as you are in me, Father, and I am in you. And may they be in us so that the world will believe you sent me. John 17:20-21
When the world looks at us I don't think they see a fulfilment of that scripture, they see many denominations and organisations that are often divided and sometimes even in conflict.
So how did we get here and what do we do about the situation? For anyone who knows even a little bit of church history how we got here is obvious. From the reformation onwards, every time God has restored a truth to his church the old has always fought the new and we have ended up with one or more new denominations. What we do about the situation is not as easy, but I think it must start with recognition that the line between human organisations created to serve the Body of Christ and the Kingdom of God has become blurred. In believers minds when you talk about the Church there is no distinction between the people, the community of believers and the human organisation that allows leaders to serve the Church.
Why is this distinction important? It's important first of all because it's the truth, but there are also a number of practical outcomes. Firstly no matter how good the organisation is and how much it has done for the Kingdom it is still a human organisation that has responsibilities that can be at odds with the work of the Kingdom. Secondly we cannot serve two masters so if the needs of the organisation come into conflict with the needs of the Kingdom then one of them will loose and we will end up hating either the organisation or the church except we see no difference between the two. Lastly and probably most important of all it means that the organisation is not submitted to the Body of Christ and can effectively do what it likes without fear of discipline because there is no one that they are responsible to. An example of this is the discussion over homosexuality that occurred in some traditional church organisations. These organisations where not submitted to the Body of Christ as a whole so the collective church leadership had no authority to tell the organisations that they were out of line.
So what practically should we do about this? Well nothing immediately except be willing to let God change our organisations when he tells us to. This is such a massive undertaking that only God can do it and when it happens you will only be able to call it a miracle. I definitely look forward to seeing God do it.

One of the things that I often think about is Church Government.  By this I mean how we structure and run our churches and the organisations that they are a part of.  One of the reasons that I often think about this is that for me when I read the bible there seems to be a disconnect between what scripture teaches us about church leadership and government and what the current reality is.  Currently no matter what denomination you are a part of the structure of the church is largely hierarchical with ultimate responsibility for the running of the church and or denomination often resting on the shoulders of one person.  There is a large differentiation between those who are in leadership and those who are not and the ultimate leader in the church is a fulltime pastor.  But the pastor is one gift among five that was given to teach the body of Christ and help it reach maturity.  And if we consider the organic nature of the body of Christ and the example given to us in scripture the current hierarchical nature of the church does not fit well with the church as a living breathing organic organisation that is the body of Christ.

In 1 Corinthians Paul addresses a problem that the church is having with divisions in the Church and different people dividing themselves into groups based on who they are following.  In considering this passage in 1 Corinthians I asked myself this question.  How is this different to the current structure of the church?  If we consider that the church is currently divided into different denominations based on the doctrines that we follow and within denominations the different churches are often defined by the senior pastor who leads them and people will church shop based on whether they like the church or not.  Then the unfortunate answer that I came up with is that it is not much different, even though the things we follow may not be physical people we still let these things divide us.