Spiritual Gifts and Sociological Aspects

Part 1A: Outline some of the points in Gary Best’s and Peter David’s discussion of spiritual gifts in your notes that interest you most. Add in your own comments and thoughts on these points

Gary Best and Peter Davids, in “Theology for Spiritual Gifts”, produced sound points of the workings of spiritual gifts. The first important point in this message is the relevance of the message to the Corinth Church, one that is “largely Gentile with strong, recent pagan practice and ethics”; in 1 Corinthians Paul attempts to perform “radical surgery without killing the patient” to the Behaviour and attitudes of the Corinth community.

The first point that catches my attention, in “Theology for Spiritual Gifts”, is Gary Best and Peter Davids writings on the body metaphor that Paul talks about to the Corinthians. One point that I found significant in this is that Paul used a medium that was powerful to anyone hearing it: The Human Body. Paul uses the Body metaphor to impose the idea of “Diversity within Unity”, that all gifts are different but are “perfectly united” in the cause of Jesus Christ and extending the kingdom of God. Paul related this to the church by saying “A manifestation of the Spirit is given to each person to produce what is beneficial”[1]. This can be seen very easily in my own Youth group. For the past two years we have had interns that are great leaders within the church, however this year the intern is a great server for the church and has no will to lead. This shows that variety of gifts that God gives to the church. Paul also speaks of the necessity of diversity, for if all parts were identical there would be no body at all, this can be brought back to our intern; If the entire work force were leaders then there would be nobody to serve and the goal would not be achieved. The final point in chapter II “Diversity within Unity”, which grabs my attention, is point E which addresses the need of the Corinthians to “desire the greater gifts”[2] and that diversity should not discourage you to eagerly seek to gifts of God. This is very important within vibrant youth through which I work with; they desire new and more powerful experiences with God.

Another point that catches my attention is how the people of Corinth receive the spiritual gifts. Because there is two different views on receiving spiritual gifts: a) one member one gift, and b) gifts given in gatherings, the distribution of these gifts can range from manifestations of the holy spirit in a group (to assign different ‘roles’ in the group by sovereign choice of God), situation individual anointing (One-time gifts for the individual), and gifts resulting from ministries (gifts discovered and developed through ministry), this last one can be seen in my own life, as I discovered my gift for public speaking I developed it with God, through ministry, and have taken several sermons for our youth and communion at our Sunday evening congregation. It is important to note for each of these distributions there are three common factors that Gary Best and Peter Davids point out: Grace, “We have different gifts, according to the grace given to us”[3], Faith, “If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith”[4], and Co-operation, our hearts should be set toward loving and serving God and others though our giftedness.

In Conclusion, Paul relates the workings of spiritual gifts to the human body, an easy relatable comparison. Diversity within unity is necessary to make sure the body runs as efficiently as possible, and although there are different views and actions that the Holy Spirit takes to deliver these spiritual gifts, they all hold three things in common: Grace, Faith, and Co-operation.

Part 1B: Describe various sociological models of the local church

Sociological models aim to describe the group dynamics of a community and how an individual would see him/herself within that group. These models, hopefully, give us a clear indication on the different aspects on church life and the functions surrounding it.

The first model is the “Fuzzy Set”. This model is a free-for-all environment, completely “laid back” and at it’s worst some-what anarchic and out of control. In these models the people each do their own thing, and pull in their own direction, leaving no defined goal for the group. In church life, this model can be reflected on a congregation that has no, or very weak, leadership. Therefore there is no direction, no cohesion and no structure. It can be associated with the description of Israel in the book of Judges: “in those days Israel had no king and everyone did what was right in their own eyes”[5]. These sorts of groups are often a reaction to an extremely autocratic church and while they might be appealing in comparison, they do not usually achieve much due to the lack of unity around a specific purpose.

The second model is the “Bounded Set”. This model represents the opposite of the “Fuzzy-Set”, it is strongly ordered, structured and control driven view of society, and because this model represents the way many churches are ‘run’, characteristics can be easily described. The leadership is centred on one leader, the pastors, whose style and ideas are usually dominant and often leads the congregation praising, and in extreme, idolising the pastor. Boundaries create an exclusivist policy, and everything is seen forma right and wrong perspective with low tolerance. This leads to a we/they and in/out mentality, inducing guilt and praising performance within the congregation. The Pastor and leaders of the church in this model have a parent child relationship where the children are to achieve the pastor’s vision. The people of the congregation (children) are identified from being in and right, the sense of wroth and value is from being a good member and hard worker within the church. This model places high value on numbers and statistics and not necessarily on the well being of the people within the church.

The final model is the “Centred Set”. This model is completely different form the previous two and is not a compromise in anyway, but a frame of reference that is responsibly liberating to the people. This model has no boundaries, rather a moving centre that people are either moving towards or away from. In a healthy church, the centre would be Jesus Christ. People are either drawn in by the values of the church or being repelled from them. The vision and value that is in the centre is lived out and not just spoken about. The leadership is a team effort not an individual approach, as

each leader leads by example, at the front lines, instilling the basic values into the church by modelling them. Relationships are adult to adult as the people are treated as individuals, whose identity comes from within, from his relationship with the Lord. This creates a relational environment from which evangelism can occur through friendship and relationship. This model is motivated by the love of the Lord, the acceptance of the people and nurturing the congregation in the Lord.

These three models each portray three different sociological models of community. The Vineyard Church takes pride in following the “Centred Set”, as we align Jesus Christ into the centre and are attracted by his values. We grow in the Lord as we take responsibility for ourselves, advancing as a church through simple acts of obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ.

---

[1] 1 Corinthians 12:7

[2] 1 Corinthians 12:31

[3] Romans 12:6a

[4] Romans 12:6b

[5] Judges 17:6