Appendices and References

Appendices

Appendix A: Criticisms

The following is an attempt to address the three most common criticisms that readers may have regarding the basic content of this manifesto.

1) The premise of this manifesto is that if Christians would simply adopt the goal of ridding the Church of “religion”, then the possibility of the Church becoming a people purer, more unified, and more at peace might become a greater reality. This appears to be far too naïve and simplistic, even if Christians could ever agree upon such a goal.  Furthermore, finding any common agreement regarding what is considered to be “religion” would be impossible.

When a person derides “religion” in the Church it can often be seen as coming from someone who is quite narrow or fundamentalist in their perspective.  However, when one understands that religion is a product of a humanistic worldview, the conversation soon changes.  The discussion then becomes that of one’s definition of humanism.  As one comes to understand that a humanistic worldview stems from humanity’s efforts to set humanity, or proclamations originating from humans, as authoritative either as equal, above, or contrary to God or His proclamations; then, one discovers that this perspective is in direct opposition to a true understanding of a theistic worldview.  This conflict began in the Garden of Eden and continues today.  It is from this understanding that dialogue and critique of what has transpired within Church history can find promise.  While many may be quick to find fault and inadequacies in any proposal to help the Church become what Christ has desired His Church to be, often no better proposal is offered.

2) This manifesto contends that there are only two worldviews (Humanism and Theism) from which people live out their lives.  Holding to only a two-worldview option appears far too limited to what most people would adhere to.

No doubt most of us who have given much thought to the concept of “worldview” have been schooled to think in terms of numerous worldviews.  What is often described in the literature as a worldview would better be described as a “paradigm” or an “archetype”.  This manifesto comes out of the theistic understanding that God has revealed to us the true perspective of how we are to see the world around us.  This understanding embraces the events of what historically took place in the Garden of Eden, the beginning of human existence.  God’s Word describes Man’s basic dilemma as that which seeks: 1) Either God as God and the ultimate source of all that is true or 2) In some way, either Man as God or Man possessing the ability to act as God.  Since most people are not truly “theistic” in their thinking, they must then rely on sources other than God’s revelation found in the Scriptures as their fundamental approach to life.  They see the Scriptures as irrelevant, unreliable, or insufficient.

3) What this manifesto proposes is a “reclamation” so radical and discomforting that church leaders would never allow their people to follow such a direction.  There is too much at stake to risk changing the status quo, especially if these leaders would have to admit that any aspect of their tradition, denomination or movement might be leading their people astray.

Duly noted. Seeking such a “reclamation” is indeed daunting and not for the faint-hearted.  However, just continuing the status quo by retreating to our theological and/or ecclesiastical corner gives little hope for God’s people who are yearning for the Body of Christ to come together as His Bride in unity, peace, and purity.  The underlying question that needs to be answered is, “Who” or “What” is preventing this from happening?  As in the day of our incarnated Lord on this earth, it seems to always come back to the religious leaders.  Somehow leaders protecting their turf or clinging to power by manipulating the situation in their favor appears to be the primary means by which such leaders keep things “as is”. 

By such behavior, the “people in the pews” are being neglected at best or at worst, being abused.  Then again, perhaps such a conclusion is too harsh.  More than likely, it is simply the cowardness or laziness on the part of leaders that leaves the saints hopeless and demoralized.  As long as Christians habitually just “go through the motions” while not upsetting anyone, why should we care?  As in the C.S. Lewis classic, The Screwtape Letters, Satan seeks to deceive God’s people through fear, busyness, indifference, or by other means to tempt the saint to divest himself or herself of the most important things in living as God intends.  However, just blaming the Church leadership will not necessarily get anywhere.  We cannot just blame others.  We must stand before God individually and give an account of ourselves.  Even so, as in times past, it is often the common people who may have to wake up the leaders to act.  Quite frankly, when people start voting with their feet and with their pocketbooks, will church leaders be forced to rise to the occasion.  I, myself as a church leader, need to take heed.

Appendix B: Common Depictions of Christianity

            The most accurate depiction of Christianity may be described as the Christian Faith.  This is simply the understanding of Christianity as that held by the Apostles and first-century Christians.  This faith was initially called “the Way” (Acts 9:2; 19:9) following Jesus’s description of Himself as “the way, and the truth, and the life.” (John 14:6).  It held to God’s revelation of Himself in Christ and in the Scriptures.  The Scriptures were the affirmed Hebrew scriptures (the Masoretic text) and the completed first-century writings of the Apostles and those associated with them in what is called the New Testament.  The Hebrew scriptures were not based upon the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament, which included other writings often referred to as the “deuteron-canonical or duo-canonical” writings or the “Apocrypha”.  This does not mean that the writers of the New Testament did not cite passages from the Septuagint (as they did) but they did so as this text was already in the Greek language.  To those of the Christian Faith, “divine revelation” as contained in the Masoretic text and in the New Testament represented God’s propositional revelation.

            As has been mentioned in this manifesto, much of the current view of Christianity is that of the Christian Religion.  This depiction represents some of the underpinnings of the Christian Faith that have been syncretized with Man’s ideas to varying degrees throughout the past centuries.  Regretfully, some of these expressions of the Christian Religion have even gone as far as to have adopted Humanism as the basis of their expressions, resulting in a “Christianized” religious humanism.  It is this Christian Religion that depicts a counterfeit form of the true Faith that has captivated the hearts and lives of so many of those who call themselves Christian.  It is the focus of this manifesto that calls Christians to move beyond the Christian Religion and embrace the Christian Faith.

            Finally, some find themselves in what might be called the Christian Culture.  This depiction involves elements of a particular culture that have been influenced by Christianity.  These cultural expressions may be in art, music, architecture, literature, customs, etc. and may be relatively harmless unless these elements become obligatory for living the Christian life or if these elements become the focus of a Christian’s attention.  Sadly, some expressions of Christianity may embrace such cultural elements to the point of leaving one to believe that they must also embrace such elements to be a true Christian.  Such a situation leads to legalism.  Also, there is the danger of a person believing that just because they embrace these “Christianized” elements, this alone would be sufficient to make them a Christian.

Appendix C: Thinking Outside the Box

Often, we are only able to see things in a certain way. For example, draw four dots on a piece of paper in a way that connecting the dots would form a box.  If instructions are given that all the dots are to be connected without lifting a drawing utensil, such as a pencil or a pen, most of us would say that this would be impossible.  If one starts in one corner and proceeds to connect all the corners, then one would still need to connect the opposing corners.  This would require making an “X” within the box.  If one could only imagine doing this while staying within the box, then the task would look “undoable”.  However, if one was able to think “outside the box” by making a dot outside the box, then connecting the dots in the opposing corners of the box would then be possible by connecting one of the corners to the outside dot and then continuing to connect this outside dot to the corner horizontal to the original corner and then to the final opposing corner, making an “X”.

The reason for demonstrating the “box problem” is to remind us that often we see problems only in a certain way, such as seeing possible solutions only within the “box” by how we have normally seen things.  Often by seeing problems only by staying within the box, we may find ourselves limited in seeing possible solutions.  However, by being able to see possible solutions by going “outside” the box, solutions can more readily be discovered.

When trying to solve theological differences, we sometimes find ourselves at an impasse because we are only able to see things in a certain way.  Sometimes perceived theological differences appear to be impossible to reconcile.  As a result of not being able to see “outside” the box of our thinking, these differences may continue, even for centuries.

The challenge of this manifesto is to ask all of God’s people to become more able to see our theological differences beyond the “boxes” that have limited our thinking in the past and strive to see a possible “third way” forward that would better reconcile what we have previously perceived as “impossible” to reconcile.  For example, when attempting to reconcile parties in conflict who seemingly can only think of solutions as either “A” or “B”; one of the tasks of a mediator is to get the parties to come up with a possible “C” or “D” solution that they have not yet been able to imagine.  Only by doing so, can any resolution find a possible way forward.

As God’s people, it is our future hope that we will be able to better see through God’s eyes rather than our own eyes, and possibly find solutions “outside” the box of our imaginations so that unity, peace, and purity can have a chance.  On the other hand, regretfully, some people seriously believe that it is their life’s mandate to try to “figure everything out” or to be able to answer every question.  Some Christians, often described as apologists, even fall into this trap.  It is important to understand that God is simply too big and His ways too unknowable to ever be fully explained (Isaiah 55:8-9).  We are reminded that the “making of many books there is no end” (Ecclesiastes 12:12) and we are warned that there will be those who are “always learning and never able to arrive at the knowledge of the truth” (II Timothy 3:25).  This is not an accusation against gaining knowledge but the simple reminder that Man’s knowledge has limitations.

Appendix D: The Concept of a “Multiverse”

Very often when one envisions concepts such as Heaven or Hell there may tend to be some notion of a physical place existing at some particular time.  From a child’s perspective, there is a common understanding of Heaven as a place beyond the clouds or Hell as abiding deep within the earth’s core.  The idea of an existence, a world, or a universe beyond our understanding of time and space is, without a doubt, a difficult reality that seems beyond comprehension.  However, the Scriptures tend to indicate that such a reality indeed exists. An eternal “other universe” outside time and space where God and created beings such as angels and demons reside is plainly stated within the biblical narrative.  The question is, “How does such a universe relate to the present created universe in which we live?”

In the New Testament, we find that, as believers, we are told that “even when we were dead in our trespasses, (God) made us alive together with Christ – by grace you have been saved – and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:5-6).  In Colossians 1:1-3 we are again reminded that: “If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God.  Set your mind on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.”  Verses such as these indicate that the life of the Christian is essentially beyond this present universe.  It has sometimes been said by theologians that, “one must first leave this world to live in this world” or it may be quipped that “a man of God must have his head in the heavens and his feet on the ground … and there is a lot of stretching in between!”

In today’s world of scientific investigation, the notion of parallel universes or a “multiverse” has now become a daily discourse. Early in the 20^th century, Einstein rejected Newton’s commonly held notion of absolute time.  For Einstein, time was somewhat like a fluid going everywhere rather than being chronologically linear with a sense of past, present and future.  Furthermore, space and time were seen to be inextricably connected. Even as early as Plato and Aristotle, philosophical thinking debated reality as being either of this world or of a world beyond.  Much later in history, even stories such as The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia tell of fantasy worlds such as those of Middle Earth and Narnia that have entertained the minds of both children and adults alike with the concept of a realm beyond the one in which we live. Theoretical notions such as the “God Particle” and popular movies entitled Tomorrowland, Interstellar and The Theory of Everything play into this idea.

In the Scriptures, we find glimpses into God’s realm.  Early in Genesis, God is set apart from His Creation.  As He creates, reference is made to “days” of creation possibly leading one to interpret that God was creating chronologically according to our notion of days within our universe and the order in which we exist.  Sadly, this understanding has led philosophers, theologians and scientists to endlessly contend throughout history over the issue of how “old” the universe is. A more helpful understanding is that God created the universe from within His realm, without time or space, which is then translated into our realm.  Thus, “days” are simply “God days” that no philosopher, theologian or scientist will ever be able to measure.  So, the six days of creation are “God days” which are without measure, whether being 24 of “our” hours or 24 of “our” seconds or 24 billion of “our” years.  Trying to ever calculate “God days” is only an exercise in futility.  We must remember that no one was around to observe the phenomenon of creation; only God was there.  Furthermore, to talk in terms of “was”, “is” or “will be” is nonsense talk in a realm where time does not exist and there is no cause and effect. While a sense of chronology is obviously present in the creation story where earth needed to previously exist before humanity could be formed, how this chronological story is translated from God’s creational decrees will always remain a mystery.

Other well-known examples from the Scriptures noting a heavenly realm are described in the narrative of Job and his dialogue with God; the apostle Paul’s vision of a “third heaven”; and of Heaven recorded by the apostle John in Revelation.  The timelessness of Christ is noted in declarations such as “ Before Abraham was, I AM (John 8:58) and “I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end” (Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13).  The apostle Peter states that, “With the Lord, one day as a thousand years” (2 Peter 3:8).  The more one is able to grasp the perspective of God acting in a realm that is without time or space, many issues debated by theologians become muted. 

For instance, the debate over “free will” versus “predestination” addressing one’s salvation depends upon arguments that infer time and thus, causation.  The Calvinist says that “one believes because one is saved” while the Arminian says “one is saved because one believes”.  Molinists have even speculated of a “middle knowledge” of God in order to try to reconcile these notions.  However, when causation is removed, all that remains is “those who believe are saved” and “those who are saved believe”.  End of story.  There is no need of one “cooperating” with God in one’s salvation and there is no “Ordo Salutis” (order of salvation).  For example, when one reads Romans 8:29-30 “ontologically” rather than “chronologically” concepts such as predestination, calling, justification and glorification simply co-exist rather than depend upon one another. Because “salvation” resides alone with the purposes of God, who exists beyond time, believing and being saved essentially are not casual in God’s realm (although in our realm, time and thus, causality occupy our minds).  Holding that God is sovereign in all things does not mean that people do not truly matter, or that a person’s will is immaterial.  One must come to the place in understanding that many things will always remain a “mystery” when contemplating who God is and how He acts. Thus, while one may infer causation when reading the Scriptures, it is important to gain God’s perspective as we read.  To grasp that God can deal with World War II simultaneously with events in the year 2050 is quite far-reaching to our imaginations.  Thus, understanding the importance of a “multiverse” as we read the Scriptures is one concept that is tremendously helpful in discussing many theological differences. God dwells and acts in a realm (universe) that is not our realm.

Furthermore, from a “heavenly” perspective, matters that we often see as “either/or” may actually be “both/and”. A prime example of a “both/and” understanding is in the soteriological perceptions of Roman Catholics and Protestants over “infused” righteousness versus the “imputed” righteousness of the believer.  As a result, when one has a limited, “earthly” perspective, one can easily stumble over the concepts of “justification” and “sanctification”.  A theological contention throughout much of Christian history is in the understanding of “justification” by the apostle Paul in his letter to the Roman believers and that of the apostle James in his letter.  Paul seems to state that one is justified by faith without works (Romans 3:20-28) whereas James indicates that without works faith is dead (James 2:17,24).  However, the Scriptures teach that a true saving faith leading to a believer’s justification is a faith leading to a transformed/transforming life. Justification, therefore, has both a positional as well a progressive element.  It is the same with sanctification.  The author of the letter to the Hebrew believers speaks of saints who “have been sanctified” (a positional state) as well as those who are “being sanctified” (a progressive state) (Hebrews 10:10-14).  Our position in Christ leads to a full assurance of our salvation because the righteous works of His life, death and resurrection fulfil all the requirements necessary for our salvation.  We as believers have the righteousness of God (II Corinthians 5:21; Ephesians 4;23-24; Philippines 3:9) although we must still work out this salvation as God works within us (Philippines 2:12-13).  Assurance of the believer’s salvation lies in Christ’s finished work rather than in the efforts of the believer.  This, in essence, is the Gospel, which is indeed Good News! 

Appendix E: Community Fellowships of Christ’s Church

Over much of the past two thousand years, it is of little question that God’s people seem relentless in creating their special “niche” in the Christian world leading to division after division to the delight of Satan.  Maybe it is high time that each local congregation or parish begin to ask themselves challenging questions such as: “How much time and effort is our church giving to promote Christian unity, peace, and purity in our community?  Is just coming together with other denominations for some local common cause once per year investing seriously to responding to our Lord’s prayer to be unified and not divided as His people?  How are we mending our theological differences?

While there may be larger movements among leadership such as the Gospel Coalition among evangelicals or global organizations such as the World Reformed Fellowship, what can be done on the local level among the common folk?  What is being proposed is the establishment of community fellowships of Christ’s Church.  These fellowships would not be a local church nor compete with the local church.  Rather, these fellowships would be “ecumenical extensions” of local churches seeking to bring unity, peace, and purity among fellow believers representing the various churches.  These communities would not promote particular theological persuasions nor engage in the administration of ordinances or sacraments.  Rather these fellowships would target their focus on the study of the Scriptures in gaining a better understanding of the Christian faith.  Governance of fellowships would be overseen by those who would meet the Biblical qualifications of leaders and ideally represent existing local churches. To ensure orthodoxy, these fellowships would utilize approved resources not representing any particular tradition, denomination, or movement and facilitators would be trained in the use of such resources.  All attempts would be made to provide instruction basic to all who would hold to a truly orthodox, evangelical, and catholic faith.  However, as to be expected, churches whose primary focus is to prevent their congregants from being exposed to teachings other than that of their particular persuasion would most certainly oppose such ecumenical gatherings.  Regretfully, such churches would most likely be more committed to religion rather than to the Christian Faith.  Yet, it is precisely the ridding of God’s people from the propaganda of religion as being the way forward to bringing His Church to unity, peace, and purity.  If the existing local churches fail to respond to the call to reconcile the people of God in the Christian Faith, these fellowships may then be left with no other option than to establish their own local churches.

Ideally, fellowships would meet at least a couple of times per month in a casual and intimate environment such as in homes or small rented venues. Meetings would involve a time of fellowship, prayer and study and would normally consist of under 30 people. These community fellowships would focus on the core teachings of the Christian faith rather than on teachings and practices particular to a religious tradition, denomination or movement which might typically be found in a local church setting.  It is hoped that local churches would not see these fellowships as a threat to their existence but rather as an attempt to further the cause of Christian unity, peace, and purity that has been historically elusive and difficult to achieve when dealing with large institutional bodies so often entrenched in maintaining the status quo.

Appendix F: Example of a Statement

of Faith ¹²

1.     We believe in the Triune God, eternal in three distinct persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth.

2.     We believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as originally given are the only inspired and infallible record of the revelation of God to humanity and are the supreme authority in all matters of life and faith.

3.     We believe in the sovereignty of God in creation, providence, and redemption.

4.     We believe God's acts of creation are responsible for the origin of all things seen and unseen, and that creation according to the biblical record is a historical event.

5.     We believe that gender is a function of God's created order and that there are only two genders; male and female, as determined biologically. Men and women are equally made in the image of God for distinct roles within the family and the church.

6.     Marriage is a mutually exclusive relationship between a man and a woman.

7.     We believe in the providence of God whereby he upholds the universe, governs the world, supplies the needs of his creatures, brings his people to salvation and his will to pass.

8.    We believe that humanity, from the moment of conception, was created in the image and likeness of God to have dominion over the earth and to do all things to the glory of God.

9.     We believe in humanity’s universal fall into sin through Adam's transgression and in humanity’s subsequent guilt, depravity, judgment, and condemnation.

10.  We believe in Jesus Christ, the only begotten son of the Father; that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of a virgin, crucified as a ransom for many, died and was buried, was bodily resurrected from the dead and ascended into heaven; that He is presently at the right hand of God the Father and will personally return to earth in power and glory to judge the living and the dead.

11.   We believe in the free offer of salvation to all humanity and the necessity of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved.

12.  We believe that God declares those who trust Christ for salvation to be justified not on account of their own merit but solely because of God’s grace.

13.  We believe in the necessity of the work of the Holy Spirit to apply the benefits of Christ's redemptive work to individual sinners, working in them regeneration, faith, repentance, sanctification, and glorification.

14.  We believe the Holy Spirit's indwelling of the believer begins at regeneration and enables the believer to increasingly die to sin and to live for righteousness.

15.  We believe in the bodily resurrection of all humanity, the unjust being raised to everlasting punishment, and the just being raised to everlasting life and being conformed to Christ's glorious body.

16.  We believe in one holy universal church, the body of Christ, to which all God's redeemed people belong and in which they are united through the Spirit, and that the Church is commissioned to proclaim the gospel of God’s salvation in Jesus Christ to all the world.

17.   We believe all Christians are to be identified with Christ and his church through water baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit and regularly come together around the Lord’s Table to proclaim his death until his return. These sacraments (or ordinances) are outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace that proclaim the gospel alongside preaching the Word of God.

Appendix G: Example of a Post-denominational Church

Imagine a geo-political district or county called York.  In this district there are several churches, some affiliated with a denomination or tradition as well as well as churches who are independent and non-denominational.  In the midst of this setting are a group of Christians in the district who seek to gather together under the conviction of establishing an ecumenical and post-denominational church in the hope of providing a more consistent witness of Christ’s prayer for a more united, pure and peaceful body of believers.  They choose to call this church Trinity Church.

Trinity Church encourages other churches in the district to join them under a common statement of faith in a local district fellowship called York District Christian Faith Churches. This fellowship allows independent non-denominational churches to not exist in isolation without any fellowship, support or accountability from other local Christian congregations of similar faith while encouraging local churches of traditional or denominational affiliation to find a local ecumenical identity and support beyond the confines of their particular persuasion.  Congregants of these churches would join together to support cohort group activities within their congregations such as men, women, single adults, seniors, youth and children. In addition, congregants may also find common local community involvement such as in education, business, local government, recreation and outreach opportunities.

Many of the congregants of Trinity Church have come out of various denominations or traditions and bring their diverse experiences found in each expression.  Other members have very little, if any, church background.  Trinity Church is established under the leadership 3-5 elders along with 3-5 deacons.  Under this leadership, Trinity Church seeks to incorporate some aspects of former denominations and traditions while holding the historical creeds of the early Church in accordance with the Scriptures. In keeping with the goal of promoting intimate community and discipleship, the ideal congregational size would consist of between 75-125 congregants. It is hoped that at least one of the elders will have a sense of a particular call to be more vocationally involved in the local church and will have demonstrated abilities in congregational oversight as well as having giftings in the understanding and public communication of God’s Word.  Such a one would seek to gain ongoing biblical and theological development for pastoral ministry.  While all of the elders are adequately equipped for teaching and leading the church, the church will recognize this particular elder as their pastor. 

In the attempt to maintain an organic family community of believers and not become highly “institutional”, Trinity Church is established upon the concept of concentrating on small gatherings rather than large mass events.  There is little emphasis on “clergy” and “laity”.  All members are involved in spiritual formation at every age level though on-going developmental opportunities.  These opportunities may include a set curriculum as well as practical application in real-world encounters.  All those in teaching/leadership positions undertake biblical and theological training and all church officers are vetted at an acceptable level of biblical and theological knowledge.

In order to promote an intimate church family culture as well as inter-church worship and fellowship, Trinity Church meets publicly in Congregational Worship on the 1^st and 3^rd Sundays of the month and in House Church Assemblies on the 2^nd and 4^th Sundays of each month. Quarterly, on the 5^th Sunday, Trinity congregants worship at other Christian Faith Churches of the York District or in a combined church worship.  The prayer of Trinity Church is to portray itself as a witness in encouraging all believers in the district to strive to fulfill Christ’s prayer of unity, peace and purity of His people.

Sample of Sunday Public Worship at Trinity Church

Public Congregational Worship: 10:00-10:45 AM

Announcements: (Pre-worship)

Call to Worship & Psalm

Song

OT Reading

Song

NT Reading

Song

Gospel Reading

Children’s moment

Pastoral & Offertory Prayer

Creed/Confession

Thanksgiving & Congregational Prayer/Lord’s Prayer

Homily (5-7 minutes)

Communion

Closing Song

Benediction

Fellowship/Bible Study: 10:45-11:30 AM

  Fellowship groups with refreshments in classrooms

——————————

Notice for Sunday Worship:

1st/3rd Sundays:

Public Congregational Worship: 10:00-10:45 AM

Fellowship & Bible Study: 10:45-11:30 AM

2nd/4th Sundays:

Local House Assemblies: 10:00-11:30 AM

Quarterly 5th Sundays:

Public Worship at other local churches or Combined Worship

Establishing a Post-denominational Church

·     Pray - pray how you might be involved in trying to fulfill our Lord’s prayer stated in John

17. Pray that others will grasp this vision.

·     Share - this vision with other local believers, especially with the leadership in your

church.

·     Assess - how supportive your church leadership is regarding this vision.

o   Would the leadership consider your church becoming a post-denominational church?

If so, how would this occur?

o   Would your church be supportive of the establishment of a local post-denominational

church?  If so, reassure the church leadership that such a church would intend being

in an association with other like-minded churches which would provide mutual

fellowship, support and accountability.

·  Propose - a post-denominational church that would adopt:

o   A priority of promoting doctrinal purity as well as peace and unity among Christ’s

Church.

o   A priority of small over large gatherings in a local community

§  Local church total of between 75-125 adherents

§  House groups between 12-25 adherents

§  Small groups between 6-12 adherents

o   Leadership without clericalism

§  Between 3-5 elders

§  Between 3-5 deacons

o   Formal and informal gatherings

§  More formal public gatherings

§  More informal house and small group gatherings

o   Fellowship, support and accountability with other local churches

§  Encourage regular visitation of other local churches

§  Encourage joint-church gatherings

§  Encourage joint-church outreach and missions

§  Encourage joint-church discipleship opportunities

§  Encourage joint-cohort groups with other local churches: men, women, children,

youth, young adult singles, seniors, etc.

References

¹ Cottret, Bernard. Calvin, A Biography. A & C Black: 2003. p. 239. 

² Revelation. Merriam-Webster Dictionary, accessed May 25, 2020.

https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/revelation

³ Philosophy. Cambridge English Dictionary, accessed May 25, 2020.

 https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/philosophy

⁴ Religion. Merriam-Webster Dictionary, accessed May 25, 2020.  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

⁵ Religion. Encyclopaedia Britannica, accessed May 25, 2020.

 https://www.britannica.com/topic/religion

⁶ See Karl Barth, On Religion: The Revelation of God as the Sublimation of Religion, trans. Garrett Green (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2006). This is a new translation of §17 in Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol. I/2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1956), 280–361.

⁷ Tarico, Valerie. 20 Vile Quotes Against Women By Religious Leaders From St. Augustine to Pat Robertson. AlterNet. June 30, 2013. https://www.alternet.org/2013/06/20-vile-quotes-against-religious-leaders-st-augustine-pat-robertson/

⁸ Why Do Many Early Church Fathers Talk Negatively About Sex and Marriage?https://whychurchfatherswerenegativeaboutsex.blogspot.com/

⁹ Ibid.

¹⁰  Beltz, Bob. Real Christianity (revised and updated of William Wilberforce A Practical View of the Prevailing Religious System of Professed Christians in the Higher and Middle Classes in This Country, Contrasted with Real Christianity pp. 19-20; 1797). Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 2006.  

¹¹ Robin Dunbar 2012 TEDx Talk: Dunbar TED Talk

¹² “Statement of Faith”. Adaptation. Island-to-Island Gospel Fellowship, 2023.