institutional church?

The Church
User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: institutional church?

Post by jriccitelli » Fri Jun 05, 2015 9:21 am

One of the atheists who come to our Think group, where we have open discussions on any topic, and Atheists generally attend ( http://www.meetup.com/THINK-The-Critica ... -San-Jose/ ), anyways the atheist who now confesses he was a closet atheist while he was a pastor of a church for some time, had explained that he found he could no longer believe the bible because of all the errors, yet when I said most of the errors come from interpretation, and that the church was wrong to trust only leaders and priests for instruction, he started to defend that pastors should lead the church 'because the bible says they should' :?

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: institutional church?

Post by dwight92070 » Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:05 pm

So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel. Shouldn't "the Lord's direction" end all arguments? Not MY direction, not YOUR direction, but "the Lord's direction". I get my living as a mailman. That pays for all my needs, my families needs, and even allows some left over for some of our wants and desires. How do you get your living? Why would anyone in the body of Christ begrudge a true pastor a living for his wife and kids? That is disobeying the Lord's direction.
The Bible is clear that elders, or pastors, are to be able to teach, as one of their qualifications. That's not MY idea, or YOUR idea, that's the direction of God's word. So to deny pastors their biblical role of teaching the body of Christ is to reject God's word. I have not said, nor have I read others on this forum who say, that pastor's are the only ones who we can get teaching from, in the body of Christ. Jesus is our Chief Teacher, just as He is our Chief Shepherd. Jesus also told us that the Holy Spirit would teach us.
As believers, we all have the Holy Spirit, and He may at any given time choose to speak through us to teach another in the body. But the very fact that God has given elders or pastors in the body the "ability to teach" means that, generally speaking, those who are not elders or pastors in the body do NOT have the ability to teach. Therefore, to assume that Christians can assemble together and that they can ALL teach each other, on a consistent basis, is a recipe for total confusion.
Jriccitelli, you yourself said that error often comes in interpretation. I agree. That is why we need someone who is gifted to teach to help us interpret the Bible. This does not mean that we can't learn anything on our own in our private reading. It sounds as though you "teach' a group in the body. If so, then obviously you give them your interpretation of the Bible. If everyone in your group has a different interpretation than yours, or different from each other's, then nobody learns anything. All that has happened is that there were 10 or 12 different opinions of what God's word says. Especially new believers are confused and older believers have not grown in the knowledge of the Lord. Whether you admit it or not, you are at least acting the role of a pastor and a teacher in your group.
If that is true, then you must be careful to teach and preach the Word as accurately as possible. Any interpretation of a particular section of the Word must be supported by other scriptures, even as Steve Gregg does repeatedly. He is an excellent example of a gifted teacher in the body, even though he is not a pastor. There again, the Bible does not say that a teacher must be a pastor but that a pastor must be a teacher, among other things.

User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: institutional church?

Post by jriccitelli » Sat Jun 06, 2015 6:27 pm

I have not said, nor have I read others on this forum who say, that pastor's are the only ones who we can get teaching from, in the body of Christ’
I did not say YOU trust only leaders and priests for instruction, I said the church was wrong to trust 'only' leaders and priests for instruction' (those who do so are wrong, if you don't you are not wrong). I did not even include 'pastors' in 'my' statement, the atheist pastor did, not me. I was pointing out at least two contradictions in the ex-pastors statement:
1. The atheist was justifying his belief 'from scripture', all while believing scripture was 'full of errors'.
2. He was justifying that pastors should have authority in the instruction over others, yet at the same time he himself was an atheist and did not trust the bible 'while being a pastor' over others!
Also he had already shown that 'his interpretation' of certain texts were not generally orthodox (i.e. he says the bible teaches works salvation). And I believe that his belief in his calling and authority, possibly attributed to his dissatisfaction with the Church.
So to deny pastors their biblical role of teaching the body of Christ is to reject God's word
I did 'not' say that, nor do I deny anyone their biblical role of teaching. It is defamation to say I said something I did not say, you need to read my statements more clearly. But since you put it that way, what I have said is that 'many' pastors deny others the biblical role of teaching in the body of Christ. And it is precisely the money, and fear of losing the paycheck, their dependance on the income, that can be proven to be the reason in many instances as why so many are afraid to let others teach in the body of Christ.

I said they 'should' be able to teach, teachers should be paid, 'if' they want to assume that. I am 'questioning' the role we have 'turned it into' / the 'power' it has been given / the 'singularity' the position is given / and the central 'authority' and 'focus' the role becomes in most every church. And expecting purity, expecting purity of doctrine, expecting honesty, expecting pure motives, expecting pay, and expecting to make a living and career out of pastoring 'because' you went to seminary, is without a doubt problematic. It is interesting that you keep citing Gods word as the authority, so then you are making my case that Gods word is 'the' authority, for that is truly what the Word teaches. That is what a bible teachers job is: to teach that Gods Word is the authority, not my interpretation, not my words, but His Word. That is what I teach. And as a teacher I should be able to keep out un-biblical authorities and discern when Gods Word is not being held to as accurate, enough, and our sure foundation. If someone wants to disagree over the interpretation, then let the class discuss it, I trust as long as we hold the Bible as the true foundation, all of it, then we can agree to disagree on the interpretation. It does become evident who believes and who doesn't. When I impose 'my interpretation' on the rest of my group as unquestionable, and the final word, I have stepped into the abyss.
... that they can ALL teach each other, on a consistent basis, is a recipe for total confusion... If everyone in your group has a different interpretation than yours, or different from each other's, then nobody learns anything. All that has happened is that there were 10 or 12 different opinions of what God's word says.
That is what 'some' leaders say, I believe to maintain their control and position. All I can say is these types don't seem to be able to reason very well, lead, or know 'how to teach' people to 'trust God' and 'trust the word' and study 'Him'. What you describe, I have never seen happen. I have been in, and or lead many beginners groups, and the same for intellectual groups, i have not experienced what you described. Our 9am Sunday group is about 30 very intellectual and biblically well versed individuals, with some younger believers also, the leadership consists of about 8 original members. The lead teaching position rotates every week between 6 or 9 different members, we often counter argument each other, we all hold scripture as central, and because we do, it works out fine, and everyone loves this awesome group. Last week one leader demanded that Ezekiel 28 spoke exclusively of Lucifer, I countered that there may be another way to look at it, and we looked, yes, and we moved on. No problem. We have learned to trust Gods Word as the authority, not our roles, or our ideas.

If we hold that only leadership, priests and such in authority are the only ones we can trust as correct, well that would have excluded Jesus wouldn't it. That is the Point, Jesus, er The Word of God questioned 'the authorities'. So did the religious authorities hold to Gods Word, or did hold to their 'positions' and 'interpretations'?

As a teacher, I 'lead' the group to trust and study God and His WORD. A leader must 'model' this, that is what teaching is, modeling: how to discuss, examine, compare, share, converse, politely, in humility, in love. Don't trust me, or my position, or my charm, look for yourself at His Word. And look out for your own self and your family, read and study, then learn to teach others. Question those who 'presume' they have all the truth, be a Berean.

If you find a good teacher like this, support him or her, praise God! I love Steve's style, we don't always agree, but he teaches we should 'trust' Gods word, study, and put our faith in scripture. Steve's radio show does, and models, just what we should 'all' strive to do, talk, communicate, 'be there' for those who have questions, and have answers. I wish i could give more to Steve's ministry, when my current financial whoa passes I plan to give very generously to this treasure of a ministry and knowledge. I encourage others to do the same if they can.

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: institutional church?

Post by dwight92070 » Sun Jun 07, 2015 10:27 am

Thanks for clarifying that. I see much more about where you are coming from and it does sound like an edifying and satisfying group. Obviously, our "model" is different, but I think it works well too. We are a homechurch and the pastor brings a message from the word each week. We are free throughout his teaching to raise our hand and add something or ask a question, which has led into some discussion. But we are careful to allow the pastor to finish what God has put on his heart. Any time that another brother in the body feels he has a message to present to the church, he simply runs that through the pastor, and inevitably, he is allowed to share that the next week. You apparently have a plurality of leadership. We see the pastor as the "manager" of what takes place, according to 1 Timothy 3:4-5. Even as a father manages his family, and God does not allow another father in each family, so the pastor is like a spiritual father in the church. He keeps order, teaches, provides, feeds and protects as a shepherd does for his sheep.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: institutional church?

Post by TheEditor » Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:31 pm

Elsewise known as a "pastoral epistle", Paul counsels Timothy on how to lead. He also says to him in 1 Timothy 4:14-5:2

"Do not be neglecting the gift in you that was given you through a prediction and when the body of older men laid their hands upon you. Ponder over these things; be absorbed in them, that your advancement may be manifest to all persons. Pay constant attention to yourself and to your teaching. Stay by these things, for by doing this you will save both yourself and those who listen to you. Do not severely criticize an older man. To the contrary, entreat him as a father, younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters with all chasteness."

Seems if we are going to use this as a "church template" the "pastor" is to knuckle-under to the "elders", not the other way round.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: institutional church?

Post by Paidion » Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:38 pm

In the early church, the terms "pastor" and "elder" and "overseer" were three different terms for the same office. Each of these terms describe the roles of these leading brethren. They were pastors or shepherds, leading their flock. They were elders—seasoned, experienced men. They were overseers, seeing that everything was orderly, preventing excesses.

These leading brethren didn't do everything. There was a body ministry.

What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. (1 Corinthians 14:26 ESV)
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
TheEditor
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: institutional church?

Post by TheEditor » Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:46 pm

In the early church, the terms "pastor" and "elder" and "overseer" were three different terms for the same office. Each of these terms describe the roles of these leading brethren. They were pastors or shepherds, leading their flock. They were elders—seasoned, experienced men. They were overseers, seeing that everything was orderly, preventing excesses.

These leading brethren didn't do everything. There was a body ministry.


Hi Paidion,

I agree. I highlighted "if" in my comments to indicate that "if" there was some kind of controlling leadership, as it were, the so-called "pastor" would have received his "authentication" from the "older men". The one sent is not greater than the one being sent. My frequent use of quotation marks indicates my discomfort with the way most of these terms are interpreted and used these days.

Regards, Brenden.
[color=#0000FF][b]"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery."[/b][/color]

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: institutional church?

Post by dwight92070 » Sun Jun 07, 2015 8:22 pm

Just a note here: Timothy was given instructions by Paul in 1 Timothy 3 about qualifications for "the office of overseer" (Verse 1). Apparently, Timothy, then, was also an apostle, since he, like Titus, could appoint overseers. (Titus 1:5) But remember that Paul told Timothy to "Let no one look down on your youthfulness ..." So Timothy was quite young, as I would assume the original 12 apostles were. 1 Timothy 4:14 does tell us that "the presbytery" had laid their hands on Timothy and through "prophetic utterance" had bestowed on him a "spiritual gift". I am sure that Timothy was in submission to these men, who likely were other apostles and elders, even as we are all called to submit to each other. They were simply recognizing the grace of God that was given to Timothy to be an apostle. But I am sure that the time came when Timothy and Titus had to "take on" their authority and calling as apostles and do what God had called them to do. Undoubtedly this meant that they had spiritual leadership over men in the church who were much older than they were. They were instructed to treat them "as fathers", but this did not necessarily mean that they had to follow the older men's advice. Just because a Christian man is older, that does not mean that he automatically has spiritual leadership conferred on him.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: institutional church?

Post by Homer » Sun Jun 07, 2015 8:39 pm

Are you saying Timothy and Titus were Apostles or apostles? If the former where do we find their signs of an Apostle?

2 Corinthians 12:12 (NASB)

12. The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles.

User avatar
dwight92070
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: institutional church?

Post by dwight92070 » Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:01 am

If You mean that an Apostle (with the capital "A") refers to the original 12, then of course Timothy and Titus were not part of that group. I'm not sure what you mean by an apostle (with a small "a"),but if that refers to all other apostles after the 12, then, yes, I believe they were. Paul and Barnabas were BOTH called apostles in Acts 14:4 and verse 14. We have no record of Barnabas performing a miracle, but that does not mean that he didn't. The same could be said of Timothy and Titus. It is also possible that Andronicus and Junias were apostles, looking at Romans 16:7. However, I can see where that verse could be understood differently.

Who was it that appointed elders in the churches that Paul and Barnabas started? Since they started these churches and they were apostles, they did. Acts 14:23 Since Paul instructs Timothy on the qualifications for elders (pastors, overseers, they are all the same) and he tells Titus to appoint elders (Titus 1:5), then both Timothy and Titus must have also been apostles. I think that it is possible that Silas and Luke and many others were apostles. Remember, even Paul was not part of the original 12 apostles. Also, in Ephesians 4:11, Jesus gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers to the body of Christ "until we all attain to the unity of the faith", which means until He returns.

Post Reply

Return to “Ecclesiology”