It shall not be so among you.

[WIP]

Quest, read 1Cor.12 and 14. Is your fellowship based on those chapters. Do you see the paid executive pastor in those chapters preaching a 'sermon' while everyone sits and listens? Or is every member being allowed to minister their spiritual functions. You tell me.

You've asked this over and over throughout the thread and you've received a variety of responses, many of which I thought had good points. It's not as clear cut as you make it, IMO.
Furthermore, I'm not seeing I Cor. 12 and 14 quite the same way you are. Granted, they do speak on each member having different spiritual gifts and each using those to contribute to the church. But the context is pertaining mainly to the use of spiritual gifts, not how the church generally operates or what they do every single meeting. Many churches do in fact make use of spiritual gifts--they may not do it in quite the way you have been dictating, however. Churches generally have people who do different things according to their abilities and gifts. Scripture does seem to leave room for churches to have their own setup as to how they make use of these.
So I'm definitely not seeing how they support your case against sermons or pastors.

To answer your question, I'm not seeing anything in scripture that invalidates sermons or pastors, neither do I think that just because the first century church did it X way means all of their methods (other than those clearly mandated in scripture, and they tend to be moreso general guidelines than static, written in stone, unchanging rules) were meant to apply to or work in the modern world.
I do think that it's important to be able to sit down and have the kind of discussion on Biblical doctrine that you've been talking about. Many churches do offer this in some form, have both a traditional sermon and Bible studies or classes you can attend. Personally? God has spoken to and convicted me through sermons as well, so I can't fully discount them. In fact, sitting there listening to a sermon allows me to quietly sort out my feelings and thoughts on what is being taught, whereas--if I'm in a group, I can't do that as much. I think both methods offer some pros and cons.

Did get something out of this thread, though--now I specifically know one other aspect to look for in a church. And fortunately my church has that.

I would like to add that the Church which I believe Paul is talking about goes waaaay beyond the four walls and ceiling of the building used for worship. I believe God leads certain of us to lead when we gather for fellowship and worship.

1 Corinthians 12

12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
14 For in fact the body is not one member but many.
15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,†is it therefore not of the body?
16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body,†is it therefore not of the body?
17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling?
18 But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased.
19 And if they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now indeed there are many members, yet one body.
21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of youâ€; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.â€
22 No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary.
23 And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our unpresentable parts have greater modesty,
24 but our presentable parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it,
25 that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another.
26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.
28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues.
29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?
30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?
31 But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.

Ephesians 4

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,
12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,
13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;
14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,
15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—
16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

And then even more when we go outside those walls...
1 Peter

15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear;

 

[evenifigoalone]

Quest, read 1Cor.12 and 14. Is your fellowship based on those chapters. Do you see the paid executive pastor in those chapters preaching a 'sermon' while everyone sits and listens? Or is every member being allowed to minister their spiritual functions. You tell me.

You've asked this over and over throughout the thread and you've received a variety of responses, many of which I thought had good points. It's not as clear cut as you make it, IMO.
Furthermore, I'm not seeing I Cor. 12 and 14 quite the same way you are. Granted, they do speak on each member having different spiritual gifts and each using those to contribute to the church. But the context is pertaining mainly to the use of spiritual gifts, not how the church generally operates or what they do every single meeting. Many churches do in fact make use of spiritual gifts--they may not do it in quite the way you have been dictating, however. Churches generally have people who do different things according to their abilities and gifts. Scripture does seem to leave room for churches to have their own setup as to how they make use of these.
So I'm definitely not seeing how they support your case against sermons or pastors.

To answer your question, I'm not seeing anything in scripture that invalidates sermons or pastors, neither do I think that just because the first century church did it X way means all of their methods (other than those clearly mandated in scripture, and they tend to be moreso general guidelines than static, written in stone, unchanging rules) were meant to apply to or work in the modern world.
I do think that it's important to be able to sit down and have the kind of discussion on Biblical doctrine that you've been talking about. Many churches do offer this in some form, have both a traditional sermon and Bible studies or classes you can attend. Personally? God has spoken to and convicted me through sermons as well, so I can't fully discount them. In fact, sitting there listening to a sermon allows me to quietly sort out my feelings and thoughts on what is being taught, whereas--if I'm in a group, I can't do that as much. I think both methods offer some pros and cons.

Did get something out of this thread, though--now I specifically know one other aspect to look for in a church. And fortunately my church has that.

I would like to add that the Church which I believe Paul is talking about goes waaaay beyond the four walls and ceiling of the building used for worship.

That would make the most sense.

 

[ejected]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see. If the lead single go to guy with a title, pastor, (which Christ forbids,) really is biblical, where is he at in scripture. Functions have been mentioned, but a worldly hiearchy that today's church functions with, has been soundly condemned by the word of which scriptures I have pointed out clearly that no one has answered. You all say the new covenant is smack full of examples of hiearchy and preeminence. I give you the Greek that contradicts that. Also sound verses where your Jesus said 'it shall not be so among you'. No one says a word about these clear cut scriptures that refute the world's system of 'overlording. It's about power and control from a higher unscriptural rank that is in question.
Diotrephes made himself executive pastor and then rejected John for fear of being exposed by him. What does that say to you?

 

[jasoncran]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see. If the lead single go to guy with a title, pastor, (which Christ forbids,) really is biblical, where is he at in scripture. Functions have been mentioned, but a worldly hiearchy that today's church functions with, has been soundly condemned by the word of which scriptures I have pointed out clearly that no one has answered. You all say the new covenant is smack full of examples of hiearchy and preeminence. I give you the Greek that contradicts that. Also sound verses where your Jesus said 'it shall not be so among you'. No one says a word about these clear cut scriptures that refute the world's system of 'overlording. It's about power and control from a higher unscriptural rank that is question.
Diotrephes made himself executive pastor and then rejected John for fear of being exposed by him. What does that say to you?

the bible was put together by a hierarchy. the tanach and its translation was NOT done by a bunch of home templing levites but men who were appointed by God and sought the lord in their placements to translate the tanach to greek and also put it together. the first sandhedrin was conviened by david on this matter but It was around as a supreme court on legal matters. moses started that.no where is the rabbinical method of teaching the word mentioned. only a few verses on whom was to teach. and that was for a testimony.

in fact, genesis was orally passed to moses from his parents. he merely penned it.

 

[evenifigoalone]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see. If the lead single go to guy with a title, pastor, (which Christ forbids,) really is biblical, where is he at in scripture. Functions have been mentioned, but a worldly hiearchy that today's church functions with, has been soundly condemned by the word of which scriptures I have pointed out clearly that no one has answered. You all say the new covenant is smack full of examples of hiearchy and preeminence. I give you the Greek that contradicts that. Also sound verses where your Jesus said 'it shall not be so among you'. No one says a word about these clear cut scriptures that refute the world's system of 'overlording. It's about power and control from a higher unscriptural rank that is question.
Diotrephes made himself executive pastor and then rejected John for fear of being exposed by him. What does that say to you?

I do not follow this logic of "if it isn't in the Bible it's unBiblical". Lots of folks use that argument, but I can't follow the logic. Methinks if the Bible were against something it would actually say so? I mean, if it's that important, then the Bible would come out and say something akin to "hey, no pastors". Y'know?

I am fairly familiar with the story of that guy in 3rd John. They talked about it at my church, and I re-read the scripture for myself several days ago. It did say he was trying to pretend he had authority that he didn't, and it did say that he was trying to cause division. But how exactly does this prove your point that all pastors are wrong? It doesn't. It's not quite that simple. I've seen others come to different conclusions on this story--that he was trying to take over the church from the authority that was already there.
And examples were clearly provided, by both myself and a couple others, where according to scripture, there DOES indeed need to be some form of leadership in a local church.

And we DID address those verses--some churches do have those problems. Not all. This doesn't make the idea of having someone, or someones, to teach every week and to help with the ministering to and edifying the flock somehow wrong or invalid. This has been explained more than once.
You have convinced me, however, that there needs to be more than just sermons for teaching and edifying.


And I'm done with this conversation. I'm leaving in like 7 hours, I need to go pack (I only went on here in the first place to charge my iPod and transfer my files to it, ended up going online while I was waiting), and I don't feel like coming back to a debate.
We're at an impasse--neither of us accepts or agrees with the other's best arguments, and repeating them over and over will not change that. I've sorted this issue out for myself and I've come to what I feel is the right conclusion. I have no reason to continue.

I don't want to leave this on a sour note--this thread HAS provided some food for thought. I merely do not agree with everything.

 

[reba]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see. If the lead single go to guy with a title, pastor, (which Christ forbids,) really is biblical, where is he at in scripture. Functions have been mentioned, but a worldly hiearchy that today's church functions with, has been soundly condemned by the word of which scriptures I have pointed out clearly that no one has answered. You all say the new covenant is smack full of examples of hiearchy and preeminence. I give you the Greek that contradicts that. Also sound verses where your Jesus said 'it shall not be so among you'. No one says a word about these clear cut scriptures that refute the world's system of 'overlording. It's about power and control from a higher unscriptural rank that is question.

In what passage does Christ forbid pastors?

 

[ejected]

Jason, come out of the old into the new covenant. Christ brought in a whole new order. Instead of men as high priests, Jesus is High Priest. In stead of men lording it over His heritage, Jesus only has that right and position.
Reba, he does not forbid pastors, plural in an assembly. I have already documented the functions within the body. I have already pointed out the scriptures that refute upper rank mentality. I have already pointed to the word concerning hirelings, and those that desire the preeminence, and that love titles and the desire to be above God's people. Some well meaning but the 2 class system foisted upon the believers nonetheless. The one verse that is the title of this thread is not getting through. But I'm gonna keep at it till I drop. Someone's going to hear me.
Quest you said just because it isn't in the word doesn't mean we can't 'go with it' anyhow. But listen here. The words 'Executive Pastor' isn't in the word....but there is plenty of scriptures that condemns the very idea. I have already catalogued them. For some reason no one is grasping on to it.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

What I am seeing is that the idea of a pastor is scriptural--and, yes, there should be elders in the church that are helping him and having responsibilities of their own, if nothing else. He wasn't meant to carry all that responsibility on his own.

And where in scripture is this 'idea' endorsed, sanctioned, or even mentioned? What is most commonly seen in churches is a pastoral position that is something ENTIRELY different from the elders and the leadership position of pastoring the church the appointed elders were commissioned to have. There's not a single or Sr. pastor model for the church that can be found. In scripture the elders were the pastors, congregations had multiple pastors, and no mention is made of a ranking (sr., jr., head, etc) system among the elders.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Not everyone is going to agree with you. This is true whether of matters involving scripture or what have you. I've seen the evidence you've brought forward, and I find no reason to come to your conclusion. And hey, I could be wrong--none of us can be right 100% of the time, and it'd be pretty darn arrogant to think otherwise.

 

[evenifigoalone]

What I am seeing is that the idea of a pastor is scriptural--and, yes, there should be elders in the church that are helping him and having responsibilities of their own, if nothing else. He wasn't meant to carry all that responsibility on his own.

And where in scripture is this 'idea' endorsed, sanctioned, or even mentioned? What is most commonly seen in churches is a pastoral position that is something ENTIRELY different from the elders and the leadership position of pastoring the church the appointed elders were commissioned to have. There's not a single or Sr. pastor model for the church that can be found. In scripture the elders were the pastors, congregations had multiple pastors, and no mention is made of a ranking (sr., jr., head, etc) system among the elders.

That's not what I'm seeing. I don't see what's so unscriptural about it. I studied it for myself and I just don't see it. I give up trying to explain why. I read through this thread and looked up scripture to answer the questions raised up in this thread for myself, not convince people that I'm right.
Anyway, I was already asked these questions and I already provided the best answers I could. If you don't agree with my answers, that's cool.

 

[reba]

where does He forbid a pastor? what passage?

 

[Eugene]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see. If the lead single go to guy with a title, pastor, (which Christ forbids,) really is biblical, where is he at in scripture. Functions have been mentioned, but a worldly hiearchy that today's church functions with, has been soundly condemned by the word of which scriptures I have pointed out clearly that no one has answered. You all say the new covenant is smack full of examples of hiearchy and preeminence. I give you the Greek that contradicts that. Also sound verses where your Jesus said 'it shall not be so among you'. No one says a word about these clear cut scriptures that refute the world's system of 'overlording. It's about power and control from a higher unscriptural rank that is question.
Diotrephes made himself executive pastor and then rejected John for fear of being exposed by him. What does that say to you?

You may want to read of instructions to bishops, letters sent to angels of the churches, and what of the Shepherd and Bishop of your soul; did He work all through His ministry as a carpenter?

Can we imagine a scenario with you in a meeting? Where would it be, what would be your gift exhibited, and would there any in authority? Who would be the one choosing that authority?

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

I am seeing guidelines as to how the leadership should function and what standards they should be held to--and, yes, that is a problem in some churches today.

What I am not seeing is scripture condemning church buildings or necessary leadership function as to what is necessary for specific times and cultures. And yes, there is to be some form of leadership that has some form of authority in churches, because there are scriptures on how to deal with sin in the church--which requires some form of leadership, I'm pretty sure.

The problem lies not with there being a need for leadership, but rather in the unscriptural format that ignores what the Bible lays out as the pattern.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I am seeing guidelines as to how the leadership should function and what standards they should be held to--and, yes, that is a problem in some churches today.

What I am not seeing is scripture condemning church buildings or necessary leadership function as to what is necessary for specific times and cultures. And yes, there is to be some form of leadership that has some form of authority in churches, because there are scriptures on how to deal with sin in the church--which requires some form of leadership, I'm pretty sure.

The problem lies not with there being a need for leadership, but rather in the unscriptural format that ignores what the Bible lays out as the pattern.

Please respect that I'm just done with this conversation. I'm not coming back to it. There's no reason to continue when the same arguments are being presented again and again.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Oh my bad, you quoted a post where I did present an argument. ^^;

I've come to a different conclusion and I have my own thoughts on this, but I'm done debating here. That is all.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

We would do well to make sure our understanding and how we define 'pastor' is one and the same with the biblical description. I believe we have a disconnect in relation to how this is defined and what the term actually means.

 

[Eugene]

I'm done debating here. That is all.

Is this somewhat akin to a third curtain call? 2​

 

[Obadiah]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see.

This is not true. The truth is you have been given many answers by many of us until we are blue in our faces. The truth is that you simply reject those answers if they don't fit your own personal tastes and preferences, not that you have not been given answers. You are not God any more than any of the rest of us are. The fact that you disagree with an answer, especially one backed by scripture as many of them have been, does not negate the fact that you have indeed been given answers.

There are many areas of the Bible that people disagree on. You might need to work on getting used to this so you can get over it and concentrate more on uplifting and edifying the body of Christ despite it's imperfections rather than constantly tearing it down. The idea of just repeating the same old questions over and over and acting like no one has answered you isn't even good debate. The fact that each time you repeat a question, you are not given multiple answers by everyone in this forum may stem from the fact that many of us now simply feel you are wrong and we are tired of beating our heads against your brick wall.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

where does He forbid a pastor? what passage?

Nowhere is pastoring forbidden, the fact of the matter is that it is endorsed and the duty is detailed. The Bible defines the qualifications and duties of pastors in texts in Acts 20:17-35, 1 Timothy 3:1-7, 1 Timothy 5:17, 1 Peter 5:1-4, Hebrews 13:17, and Titus 1:5-9. The biblical description of pastor is not what we see exemplified in most churches, however. Pastors, instead of being selected from elders in a congregation that volunteer their services to lead the flock, set an excellent example, and watch out of the safety of the congregation are instead hired to fulfill a role or roles that we do do find in the scriptures. It is this unscripturally created role of pastor that differs from the scriptural description of pastors that is problematic.

So the question that we should ask is that of why would the church reinvent the position of pastor and transform it into something different than what it is in the Bible?

 

[reba]

No one has answered it squarely that I can see. If the lead single go to guy with a title, pastor, (which Christ forbids,) really is biblical, where is he at in scripture. Functions have been mentioned, but a worldly hiearchy that today's church functions with, has been soundly condemned by the word of which scriptures I have pointed out clearly that no one has answered. You all say the new covenant is smack full of examples of hiearchy and preeminence. I give you the Greek that contradicts that. Also sound verses where your Jesus said 'it shall not be so among you'. No one says a word about these clear cut scriptures that refute the world's system of 'overlording. It's about power and control from a higher unscriptural rank that is question.

In what passage does Christ forbid a group to have a pastor?