Pastoral Authority Part 898,230

[Scott Hutchinson]

I don't endorse everything this fellow teaches but he does give us some food for thought,about the early church.
http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~revival/secrets-ch.html

[Scott Hutchinson]

This is interesting as well.
http://www.cosheboygan.org/The%20Early%20Church.htm

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

To me this means Elders give an account for how they instruct and nurture the flock of God.

Bro. Scott,
I can't help but believe "the flock of God" is made up of families. They
don't live together in the church but in individual homes with each man
and wife and their children. Families go to church to learn how to live
in their homes and how to guide their families. It was not for one man to
rule over everyone else's family. But as general instuction in righteousness.

These things were taught in our home first. then when Dad started the
work of God in our city, this church was a continuation of what we had
already been taught in the home. His family was a pattern to others. It
was based on the Word of God.

Each man should bear his own burden. What he and his wife sowed and
birthed was that man's responsibility. Yes, bear each other's "burdens" in
prayer support, but it was the father's/mother's responsibility to "train up
their own children in the way they SHOULD go. Not the preacher, not the
church, but the parents.

Paul made it plain to young Timothy that the elders were not to be re-
buked. The elders in this case was the older men and women. They would
be as fathers and mothers in the church. The younger men as brothers and
the young women should be treated as sisters, with all purity.

Children are God's Heritage and are not supposed to have lords over them.
God gave them parents to train up, provide and nurture them. No wonder
many children don't show reverence or respect for their parents. Many have
been taught to look to the preacher as the one to get their advice and to
tell them what they can't do or can do. I was not taught that. We were
taught to respect the office of pastor. but not as a god.

The parents in the home was to be honored as God-given. Many families to-
day are so dysfunctional, out of order, etc.and the children are SO confused,
they don't know who they are supposed to look up to, honour and respect.

There were families out of order in the OT too. We can read and see what
the problem was. Unbelief, partiality or favoritism, division between parents,
etc. But the NT (God's New Covenant brought in better promises, better
things. But we have to go by His Plan for man. TOO many parents were not
trained up themselves. At least not not in the way they should go.

Just some thoughts this morning based on what I believe the Word teaches.

Blessings,

Falla39

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

I'm not a young man, but I wrestle with youthful zeal with these questions and issues. I'm not satisfied by any position's fancy rhetoric, but it should be tested with scripture, history, and practical application. So far I find many folks on the left with more ideals than practical application, and more on the right with too much application, and not enough room for ideals/liberty.
This particular issue (pastoral authority) is often the foundation behind it all.

I did not feel you were a young man and the point is that the advice is still the same. I am most likely very close to your age myself the picture on my profile is my third grandson. Of course I don't know any thing about you other than what I feel in the spirit from your post but it seems you are much like me in that you are or have been questioning things that you accepted as gospel in times past. This is good I would ecourage you to keep at it because this is the only way the word of God can come to its full force in our own life. This is the problem with the way the pastoral, ministerial make up in most churches is found. We don't come to know God ourselves because we don't seek out our own salvation with fear and trembling. We do what most Christians do flow with the tide not questioning whether the man behind the pulpit preaching the word or not so long as it sounds right and looks right the saints are satisfied.

Matthew chapter 23 Jesus deals with authority he says he is our rabbi, master and father. Note at the beginning of the chapter he tells the people to listen to even the pharisee even to follow them in as much as they interpret the law properly in the position of judge as was Moses. Well I best be getting to work

God bless

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by Falla39

Bro. Scott,
I can't help but believe "the flock of God" is made up of families. They
don't live together in the church but in individual homes with each man
and wife and their children. Families go to church to learn how to live
in their homes and how to guide their families. It was not for one man to
rule over everyone else's family. But as general instuction in righteousness.

These things were taught in our home first. then when Dad started the
work of God in our city, this church was a continuation of what we had
already been taught in the home. His family was a pattern to others. It
was based on the Word of God.

Each man should bear his own burden. What he and his wife sowed and
birthed was that man's responsibility. Yes, bear each other's "burdens" in
prayer support, but it was the father's/mother's responsibility to "train up
their own children in the way they SHOULD go. Not the preacher, not the
church, but the parents.

Paul made it plain to young Timothy that the elders were not to be re-
buked. The elders in this case was the older men and women. They would
be as fathers and mothers in the church. The younger men as brothers and
the young women should be treated as sisters, with all purity.

Children are God's Heritage and are not supposed to have lords over them.
God gave them parents to train up, provide and nurture them. No wonder
many children don't show reverence or respect for their parents. Many have
been taught to look to the preacher as the one to get their advice and to
tell them what they can't do or can do. I was not taught that. We were
taught to respect the office of pastor. but not as a god.

The parents in the home was to be honored as God-given. Many families to-
day are so dysfunctional, out of order, etc.and the children are SO confused,
they don't know who they are supposed to look up to, honour and respect.

There were families out of order in the OT too. We can read and see what
the problem was. Unbelief, partiality or favoritism, division between parents,
etc. But the NT (God's New Covenant brought in better promises, better
things. But we have to go by His Plan for man. TOO many parents were not
trained up themselves. At least not not in the way they should go.

Just some thoughts this morning based on what I believe the Word teaches.

Blessings,

Falla39

Now who says women can't minister ? Sister Falla preaches from her keyboard,she is so annoited by the Holy Ghost,she always has some good word to share

[SeekingOne]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

The problem I have with "a" pastor leading a church is that too often it becomes a one-man show. And that can be very, very dangerous. I do see a biblical role of pastor, but I think we need much more accountability. I think the board of elders should be there for more than just financial decisions.

I agree with this, and I disagree with this.

Someone mentioned how Paul came and "meddled" (sp?) in the different congregations, and I think that churches need that for balance. Otherwise you can still have a church lead by a plurality of elders that is way off base.

In my opinion, the individual church bodies need outside checks and balances. And those "outside" checks and balances need to have some kind of relationship with the members of those individual bodies. Just like Paul traveled and stayed with people and got to know them, so it would be good for there to be some Paul and Barnabas' going around and helping churches today.

This is all pie in the sky, I know. But I wanted to add that just having a bunch of elders and boards of such does not mean that there would not be overbearing leadership that is WAY off base. That is how some churches become like cults in disguise.

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by SeekingOne

I agree with this, and I disagree with this.

Someone mentioned how Paul came and "meddled" (sp?) in the different congregations, and I think that churches need that for balance. Otherwise you can still have a church lead by a plurality of elders that is way off base.

In my opinion, the individual church bodies need outside checks and balances. And those "outside" checks and balances need to have some kind of relationship with the members of those individual bodies. Just like Paul traveled and stayed with people and got to know them, so it would be good for there to be some Paul and Barnabas' going around and helping churches today.

This is all pie in the sky, I know. But I wanted to add that just having a bunch of elders and boards of such does not mean that there would not be overbearing leadership that is WAY off base. That is how some churches become like cults in disguise.

NOPE! Not pie in the sky! That's why God gave the church apostles. Their role is to plant and oversee several churches and assure the unity of the faith.

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

Thanks for taking the time here.

I was trying to get us to a common agreement, before there are any contentious beliefs. And that is, if God has appointed undershepherds who are to nourish, feed, shield off danger, did he also do that without authority? Keep in mind, I'm excluding from the argument, cases of pastoral abuse.

Right. I thought I had already stated, maybe on another thread though, that the shepherd would have whatever authority would be granted to a shepherd charged with the care of SOMEONE ELSE'S SHEEP. The saints do not "belong to" a pastor. I cringe every time I hear someone talk about "Bro So&So's church" or that guy is "one of Bro. So&So's saints." And while we pay lip service to the FACT that we belong to God, in our practice, in many very real ways, we act like we belong to the pastor. Protection and leadership are the primary roles of a shepherd.

I've also been looking at the plural leadership that seems to be prevalent in the Bible. How we create this in a 21st Century is beyond me. While neither of us believe in anarchy, that's what would happen. I've worked on enough boards and committees to see what happens when no one assumes the role of the leader. This doesn't take away from the others, but really serves as a help to us.

Really? What sorts of boards and committees? Were these business-related or were they in the church? So what happens when a group of people of like faith and experience get together (with no visible human leader) and determine to seek the Face of God through prayer and His Word? Still confusion? Still those that would contend for their position to the disunity of the body?

So you don't believe Titus or Timothy were pastors? Were they then just one of the elders who were privileged to get a note from Paul? Were they also apostles? If we choose to call them only apostles, then what would their role be?

I didn't say I don't believe they were pastors. I just said that it's a substantial leap to assume that they were. Maybe they were. Maybe they were teachers. Maybe they were more like apostles. I don't think that's as important as what was written in the letters. Again, you're taking your 21st century understanding of what a pastor is (the king of the local church, the guy in charge, the ruler of the congregation, the "man of God") and pasting it onto these two guys. The ministry of the pastor has more to do with what he DOES (he pastors, shepherds, cares for... the saints) than the title. I don't believe any of these men considered their callings to be offices or titles. It's what they DID that made them apostles (or pastors, or whatever)... not what they called themselves.

I understand we have great frustration with the RCC. But could it be that they didn't get it all wrong -- could some things be correct?

YES!!! They got it wrong. They abandoned the structure of apostolic ministry that allowed the church to grow tremendously. They took what was once intimate meetings where all shared a personal testimony/interpretation/prophecy/psalm or spiritual song, and they replaced it with a one-man lecture to a mainly passive crowd. The original model focused on mutual ministry within the body. The current model focuses on a single office ministering to a large crowd of immature christians who often don't know how to feed themselves much less feed each other.

Who attended the General Council in Acts 15? Should all saints attend?

My Bible says the Apostles and elders met with Paul and Barnabas. It says nothing about the entire body being present.

Heb 13 -- Obey them... we both know the rebuttal to this is because the letter was a circular letter, and also because there is more than one person in the church "over us" (covering). Some deduce that we don't have any, when in reality, this is saying there's more than one. It could mean more than one each person, or a plural form to apply to all the leaders and saints in the churches.

Thank you for your kind words. I truly do want truth. There are so that are so flippant on here without any thought, not realizing decisions people make with some of our words could cost them their families, their loved ones, etc... these are enormous questions... but I'm thankful for a forum where we can question (although I'd hate for it to be so set on the questioning than what the actual questions are).

Let me reiterate. I don't believe that the church does not have leaders. We just view it differently. Where you see a one-man show with the pastor being the focal point, I see several cooperative, coordinated ministerial operations all gifted in unique and specific ways that lead the church toward God as the focal point and encourage "one-another" ministry within the body.

[Withdrawn]

Bump!

Are we done here?

[SeekingOne]

I don't know, but I have enjoyed this thread more than most threads on this forum! I have done more "copy and paste" than ever before, so that others I know could read what you wrote and your responses to others. Thanks Jim!