What should our gatherings look like?

We recently had a thread where we discussed what gatherings, meetings, call it what you like, should look like. It prompted me to go back to the Scriptures and look again. If I had to choose from Scripture, I would choose Paul speaking and correcting the Corinthians in 1 Cor 14:26-33. Obviously we see in these verses how the Apostle Paul was leading them in how to conduct their meetings. I will give the Scripture below and will include Matthew Henry's take on it which I always enjoy. My question for consideration is , does this look, in any way shape or fashion like the meetings you attend, if so, could you share, if not, can you say why you think it is not. So conservatively , if there are three messages in tongues interpreted and three messages from prophets and just one psalm, one doctrine and one revelation, then that would potentially nine people involved in any given service and all learning and being edified by that. ........

How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
(1Co 14:26-33)

Matthew Henry
1Co 14:26-33
In this passage the apostle reproves them for their disorder, and endeavours to correct and regulate their conduct for the future.
I. He blames them for the confusion they introduced into the assembly, by ostentation of their gifts (1Co_14:26): When you come together every one hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, etc.; that is, “You are apt to confound the several parts of worship; and, while one has a psalm to utter by inspiration, another has a doctrine, or revelation;” or else, “You are apt to be confused in the same branch of worship, many of you having psalms or doctrines to propose at the same time, without staying for one another. Is not this perfect uproar? Can this be edifying? And yet all religious exercises in public assemblies should have this view, Let all things be done to edifying.”
II. He corrects their faults, and lays down some regulations for their future conduct. 1. As to speaking in an unknown tongue, he orders that no more than two or three should do it at one meeting, and this not altogether, but successively, one after another. And even this was not to be done unless there were some one to interpret (1Co_14:27, 1Co_14:28), some other interpreter besides himself, who spoke; for to speak in an unknown tongue what he himself was afterwards to interpret could only be for ostentation. But, if another were present who could interpret, two miraculous gifts might be exercised at once, and thereby the church edified, and the faith of the hearers confirmed at the same time. But, if there were none to interpret, he was to be silent in the church, and only exercise his gift between God and himself (1Co_14:28), that is (as I think) in private, at home; for all who are present at public worship should join in it, and not be at their private devotions in public assemblies. Solitary devotions are out of time and place when the church has met for social worship. 2. As to prophesying he orders, (1.) That two or three only should speak at one meeting (1Co_14:20), and this successively, not all at once; and that the other should examine and judge what he delivered, that is, discern and determine concerning it, whether it were of divine inspiration or not. There might be false prophets, mere pretenders to divine inspiration; and the true prophets were to judge of these, and discern and discover who was divinely inspired, and by such inspiration interpreted scripture, and taught the church, and who was not - what was of divine inspiration and what was not. This seems to be the meaning of this rule. For where a prophet was known to be such, and under the divine afflatus, he could not be judged; for this were to subject even the Holy Spirit to the judgment of men. He who was indeed inspired, and known to be so, was above all human judgment. (2.) He orders that, if any assistant prophet had a revelation, while another was prophesying, the other should hold his peace, be silent (1Co_14:30), before the inspired assistant uttered his revelation. Indeed, it is by many understood that the former speaker should immediately hold his peace. But this seems unnatural, and not so well to agree with the context. For why must one that was speaking by inspiration be immediately silent upon another man's being inspired, and suppress what was dictated to him by the same Spirit? Indeed, he who had the new revelation might claim liberty of speech in his turn, upon producing his vouchers; but why must liberty of speech be taken from him who was speaking before, and his mouth stopped, when he was delivering the dictates of the same Spirit, and could produce the same vouchers? Would the Spirit of God move one to speak, and, before he had delivered what he had to say, move another to interrupt him, and put him to silence? This seems to me an unnatural thought. Nor is it more agreeable to the context, and the reason annexed (1Co_14:31): That all might prophesy, one by one, or one after another, which could not be where any one was interrupted and silenced before he had done prophesying; but might easily be if he who was afterwards inspired forbore to deliver his new revelation till the former prophet had finished what he had to say. And, to confirm this sense, the apostle quickly adds, The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets (1Co_14:33); that is, the spiritual gifts they have leave them still possessed of their reason, and capable of using their own judgment in the exercise of them. Divine inspirations are not, like the diabolical possessions of heathen priests, violent and ungovernable, and prompting them to act as if they were beside themselves; but are sober and calm, and capable of regular conduct. The man inspired by the Spirit of God may still act the man, and observe the rules of natural order and decency in delivering his revelations. His spiritual gift is thus far subject to his pleasure, and to be managed by his discretion.
III. The apostle gives the reasons of these regulations. As, 1. That they would be for the church's benefit, their instruction and consolation. It is that all may learn, and all may be comforted or exhorted, that the prophets were to speak in the orderly manner the apostle advises. Note, The instruction, edification, and comfort of the church, is that for which God instituted the ministry. And surely ministers should, as much as possible, fit their ministrations to these purposes. 2. He tells them, God is not the God of confusion, but of peace and good order, 1Co_14:33. Therefore divine inspiration should by no means throw Christian assemblies into confusion, and break through all rules of common decency, which yet would be unavoidable if several inspired men should all at once utter what was suggested to them by the Spirit of God, and not wait to take their turns. Note, The honour of God requires that things should be managed in Christian assemblies so as not to transgress the rules of natural decency. If they are managed in a tumultuous and confused manner, what a notion must this give of the God who is worshipped, to considerate observers! Does it look as if he were the God of peace and order, and an enemy to confusion? Things should be managed so in divine worship that no unlovely nor dishonourable notion of God should be formed in the minds of observers. 3. He adds that things were thus orderly managed in all the other churches: As in all the churches of the saints (1Co_14:33); they kept to these rules in the exercise of their spiritual gifts, which was a manifest proof that the church of Corinth might observe the same regulations. And it would be perfectly scandalous for them, who exceeded most churches in spiritual gifts, to be more disorderly than any in the exercise of them. Note, Though other churches are not to be our rule, yet the regard they pay to the rules of natural decency and order should restrain us from breaking these rules. Thus far they may be proposed as examples, and it is a shame not to follow them.

Hey brother Hoohoou,

Your reply made me smile. I believe that you completely missed the point of the post, and then you go on and articulate the point of the post :) The whole point of the post was to articulate what Paul was teaching, so if you believe that Paul was teaching form then you have an issue with the Holy Spirit. I deliberately left out my opinion and merely gave the Biblical example of a church who was being corrected for their lack of order. The Welsh Revival meetings were almost an exact copy of the Scripture I laid out. A couple of woman would arise and sing, it would usher in the Holy Spirit, Evan Roberts would speak and pray, others all over the building would pray, there would be weeping as the Holy Spirit moved upon the gathering and of course, many, many souls were saved. Brother Greg and I and others had the opportunity to take part in a prayer meeting in Moriah chapel where the welsh revival took place. There was a leader of the prayer meeting, and during it he would kinda nod to a person and they would arise and pray. There was also spontaneous singing of hymns as led by the Spirit and so on. It was wonderful.

Brother, if you do not want a method, re-read the original post and see how Paul describes how meetings should take place and that with order as well. But I must suggest to you, as one who spent several months at a Nazarene church, that it would take a miracle to see this kind of meeting amongst them. The fact that I was not a " Nazarene,' and was there amongst them just puzzled them no end. Near the end of my time there, one sister, a good woman turned and said to me, with all sincerity and honesty " Who are you?" The notion that there was a Body of Christ out there that was not Nazarene was just so puzzling to her...........bro Frank

Hi MJ,

I think your thoughts on what gatherings would like like are wonderful, praise the Lord. Now sister I believe those days are coming. I believe with all my heart that Gods remnant children are being raised up all over the world. They are being separated, like the sheep from the goats, the wheat from the tares. Many of them are in a sort of desert, not of their own choosing, but by the calling of God. In that desert they are learning to depend upon Him entirely so that when the time comes, persecution and so on, that even if none go with them, still they shall follow. Yet that does not change the fact that they have a sincere and genuine desire to have genuine fellowship with those of like-mind, meaning those who burn with a passion for the Lord and are hungry and thirsty for His presence and simply just cannot do business as usual anymore. This is the process of God calling His own. This is the process of counting the cost. Certainly, when the Lord was crucified, one would have to be found outside the walls in order to be identified with Him. To be outside the walls, to be detached from the system is not an easy or a simple thing, it comes with great cost and indeed if it did not it would not be the decision that it is. This calling is only going to get more intense as we move forward, as the day of the Lord approaches. Yet the Lord has called us to gather together, and all the more as we see that day approach and that is why I believe you will begin and are beginning to see a visible representation of these called out children..............bro Frank

Hi Roadsign,

I do not deny that the Corinthians had many problems and each of their problems or all of their problems combined would make many wonderful study. My focus is on gatherings and what Paul had to say about gatherings. Please feel free to start a thread about the many problems of the Corinthian church, but the focus of this thread is what he taught them in regard to meetings and how this certainly reflected on how other gatherings were conducting their meetings. God bless you.........bro Frank

The thing to note in these passages under discussion is there was body participation. Not body passivity. The trend today is to be passive in church gatherings.

Bearmaster

Here is something I wanted to put out here into the discussion. Are there other examples of the meeting of church in the Scripture other than the one put out there? Are there meetings where prayer is pre-dominant? Are there meetings where one teacher teaches primarily? Are there meetings where the Lords supper was practiced and remembered?

Could it be possible there were 4 types of meetings in the early church?

1. A teaching meeting where a brother who was a gifted teacher taught. (Acts 18:11)

2. A sharing meeting where many saints shared and prophesied. (1 cor 14:26-28).

3. A prayer meeting (Acts 4:23-24)

4. A meeting where the Lord's supper is remembered. (Acts 20:7)

I could have added many more references and put even better one's for each meeting. It can be considered that some of these meetings where joined together but I thought it would be worth noting this possibility.

Brother Zac Poonen believers there are 3 meetings ie the first 1-3 and the Lords supper is part of one of the other one's.

HI hoohoou, I think if you read the OP there is no method laid down nor one argued for. I was looking for comments on 1 Cor 14 and asking what people thought about how Paul was instructing the folks on how meetings should take place. After all, we all have our opinions but Scripture is of course our final authority upon which all of our opinions should be based. Yes indeed brother, you are in for a fight but one must always be where one is led by the Lord so may the Lord bless you..............bro Frank

Hi dear brother. I do not believe that one can argue from Scripture that there was different kinds of meetings ( not to say that there was not, but much of the argument would have to come from silence or supposition)

Lets take the Scriptural examples you gave. In Acts 18:11 it is stated that he continued there for a year and a half, the " there" being Corinth. Now we know well from 1 Cor 14 how they Corinthians were meeting and how Paul said they should be meeting. If you read the rest of Acts 18 for context, I think one would find that the teaching was taking place in the synagogue, in fact seven times this is mentioned so there is no doubt. Paul teaching in the synagogue should not be confused with what was going on in the meetings of believers in Corinth.

And of course the next Scripture mentioned, 1 Cor 14:26-28 is in fact what was going on amongst believers in Corinth when they met as opposed to what was taking place in the Synagogue.

In Acts 4:23-24 a plain reading of those Scriptures is simply the Apostles reporting back what had happened and then a spontaneous rejoicing to God taking place.

In Acts 20 it is spoken of them breaking bread, yet in Acts 2 it is reported that they broke bread daily. And again in Acts 5:42 we see that they not only broke bread daily their meetings in homes, they also " ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." So, according to the Scriptural account, in these meetings they were breaking bread, teaching and preaching. There seems to be a clear delineation between what was going on in the synagogue where they were not in charge, and in their homes where they were in charge. And since much of this is based in Corinth ( Acts 18:11, 1 Cor 14:26-28) and Paul spoke clearly how the services should take place, there is nothing to suggest that in a single meeting, there was breaking of bread, preaching, teaching and the gifts of the Holy Spirit in operation.............bro Frank

Brother Gregg, I know that you know these things but I thought good to share them for all readers. Thank you for pointing out the possibility, and even likelihood of various kinds of meetings. My explanation seems a bit simplistic, but it is sufficient nonetheless. While there should be regular meetings where all are invited to freely participate, there may very well be meetings when the Holy Spirit is working a particular work among God's people that may be characterized another way. Thus, meetings may vary from time to time according to the Spirit's direction. That's the short answer, and that is entirely Biblical.

Here again we must remember that the Lord builds His work by His Spirit, and who can know what the Spirit might call for in an assembly that He calls together? And to assume that no other kind of meeting than those few illustrated through the early church Biblical record can be held, would be to assume too much. With that narrow approach, there is the great danger of religious form.

Here we have the opportunity once again to realize that God did not leave us with only a book (as precious and priceless as the Bible is), but He also left us His Spirit. Regarding His Spirit's role for us now, the Bible makes abundantly clear that we are to be at His every beck and call.

It tells us that we are first convicted by His Spirit when we are lost, then born again by His Spirit, endued with power by His Spirit, made partakers of His divine nature by His Spirit, supernaturally gifted of His Spirit, seated in heavenly places by His Spirit, that Christ is in us by His Spirit, we are to be guided and taught by His Spirit, given divine revelation by His Spirit, assembled together by His Spirit, fitted together as living stones by His Spirit, and on, and on, by His Spirit.

In our home, we have had meetings that lasted all weekend. I cannot remember having a meeting for fewer than five hours once a week and approximately two hours at least once or twice the same week. We did not get it all exactly right, I'm sure; but I'm also sure that for the most part those meetings were led by the Spirit.

During our extended weekend meetings the Spirit led some to teach, some to pray, some to exhort through testimony, some to sing and to lead others in singing, etc... but in these various meetings held throughout a three day period, all were edified by the Spirit and God was glorified. There was rest in between. He was glorified not only in the meetings, but afterward when each member of the body went back out into the world where he or she lived!

We must realize that the place of meeting, the length of time of meeting, the kind of meeting, the outcome of the meeting, the time of day or night of the meeting, the number of believers in the meeting, and a host of other factors that could set the stage for a meeting can all vary. All is based upon the Spirit's lead, whether this group meets at this time, and for how long, and whether the Spirit leads them to intercede for two hours before they worship in song, or not to worship in song at all, or whatever - all this is by the Spirit. The leadership that the Spirit appoints, assuming that they are of pure heart and are led of the Spirit will know how to begin and the Spirit will confirm and move from there.

I would make clear that the general working of the Spirit will be relatively consistent since meetings are opportunities for the various members of the body to manifest their measures of Christ's gift. Here again, God's objective is more important than our form; but we know that God has designed that we should assemble together, preferably with leaders that He provides, and with the "jump start" of that leadership (or from another member of the body but with consensus of the leader, or the other members if there is no leader), the Spirit continues to lead.

Just today I had a dear brother ask me why I did not give a more definitive answer to one of his particular curiosities. He shrugged off the fact that I simply put that his need was to seek the mind and will of the Spirit. Many times our answers to Biblical / spiritual questions can be 1, 2, 3 factual, but sometimes they must be "by the Spirit." That doesn't seem sufficient to some, and others complain that it is a cop-out to answer in that fashion, but it is solidly illustrated all the way through the Bible and is the bull's eye of the New Covenant.

When believers learn to hear the Spirit, walk in the Spirit, trust the Spirit, and learn from Him together... WOW! That's when we really get edified and then God will really be glorified!

Please excuse my longwindedness again, brother. You are a blessing indeed, and what a blessing it is to participate from time to time.

Brother Appolus, I just now noticed that we might not agree on the issue of various kinds of meetings, but that's ok. (You'll come around. :)

I sure look forward to being in a meeting with you and others the Lord brings together again. Won't it be great when we get together without a short time constraint as we had in our last on in Atlanta (last year)? If (when) that happens again, I believe you would be a fantastic leader. I have read some of your posts along the way and as far as I am concerned, I think you are a Spirit-led man. I would gladly sit on the back row and enjoy your Spirit-led leadership!

blessings and love in Christ to you brother!

I think all the replies in this thread are awesome. And I truly appreciate the input. I really do not believe that there is any real dis-agreement at all. It was more academic for me to see what the Scriptures strictly said about meetings and by the same token, what it did not say. Here is the one place and it may be more semantical than obvious , that I think is important to me ( and it may not be important to anyone else:) Proclaimit writes ...........

"While there should be regular meetings where all are invited to freely participate, there may very well be meetings when the Holy Spirit is working a particular work among God's people that may be characterized another way. Thus, meetings may vary from time to time according to the Spirit's direction. That's the short answer, and that is entirely Biblical."

Now I entirely agree with that. I think the key phrase is " according to the Spirit's direction." And for me that is the key point. If we trust that the Lord will lead and guide us, I believe that there is less of a need to put a title on a meeting. The very act of putting a title on a meeting could possibly be constraining to the Spirit's work. Now, this is not a large point for me, I am just expressing what is in my heart. It would never be a point of contention. If brothers want to call a meeting a " prayer meeting," or a " communion service," or whatever, I really do not have a problem with that. As long as our " prayer meetings," or " communion services," or any other is under the authority of the Holy Spirit and He is always preeminent and able to lead. God bless you both and I so look forward to being in meetings with both my dear brothers. There are exciting things ahead no doubt and the Lord is doing a new thing I believe.............bro Frank

I was thinking on this a bit more and I was thinking about those early believers meeting together. I was thinking how their entire lives revolved around and in submission to CHRIST and other believers. Their days seemed to be filled with caring for each other and furthering HIS KINGDOM. As such when they came together it wasn't a meeting it was brothers and sisters sharing, listening, caring for, and loving one another in HIM. It wasn't any kind of function, it was natural and organic, it was family...it was living life daily one to another in HIM! They weren't "doing" Church, they were Church :)

Well said sister.

I would also add another thought to this conversation that a church body will look and act different at different levels of formation. The goal is not to get to where everyone can share something but rather the maturity of the body of Christ. This can come through a brother Paul or other elder brothers who are given a heart to encourage the maturing of the body of Christ.

Though there is an abuse of the one pastor idea in Churches in the New Testament there are strong brothers that are looked to in different assemblies for the encouraging of the body. This is not wrong for a season if it is encouraging the raising up of other leaders in the body of Christ. But when that strong brother demands to be the head of the meeting and control everyone and have everyone dependent on him then it has gone wrong.

a true leader wants people to be dependent on the true head Jesus Christ. and lead people into their callings and giftings so they can be fruitful to God Himself. Thus in a sense all leaders in the body of Christ are temporary or transient as the body grows.