It shall not be so among you.

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

But I just can't see how anyone can say it is uscriptural for a pastor to preach a sermon on a Sunday morning.

I can't see it being wrong either. It's just as wrong/right for a meber that is not the 'pastor' to preach or bring a lesson to the flock publically. Where I see a problem with scripture coming in is when a congregation hires a person and as the main part of their job description, that person is the designated preacher.

the entire job of a pastor or elder

Here's a question that we would do well to answer: What is the scriptural duty of pastors?

Also, many pastors may choose to take on tasks that aren't specifically mentioned in the Bible for a pastor to do, but that doesn't make it wrong for the person who is a pastor to do these other things too.

Totally agree on this point. However; if said pastor, member, or whomever decides to undertake such a duty and then expects the congregation to compensate him or her for it, then that is problematic.

 

[ejected]

Obadiah..I love you to death man but listen to what you are doing. The Son of God did not say that you can have a religious title adorning your name as long as you stay humble about it. Your litany of secular job titles is not what is in question here. It's religious titles like the Pharisees and Scribes had. Human flesh is to frail to not feel pride when folks address you with your ministry title.
Reminds of a story about a guy at a factory who was voted the most humble guy in the plant. So they rewarded him with a badge reading 'Most Humble Guy in the Plant'. He wore that badge and after about an hour they had to take it away from him.

I was preaching some revivals years ago when after the service someone walked up to me and said 'Evangelist Devon, my wife and I would like to take you out for dinner tonight'. Whoa!!! I instantly felt pride well up in me like a balloon being blown up. I did not recognize it till later that night when God opened my eyes about it. I immediately repented, not just for the pride but for not arresting the situation when it happened by telling the brother to just call me brother or Devon.
About those secular jobs. You really don't address most of them by their titles anyway..like janitor Bob or plumber Jack. See what I mean?
But we are talking in the context of an assembly of believers. That's what Jesus was speaking to. Makes the one with the title arrogant, feeling more important than the other brothers and makes the other brothers feel less important than the big guy with the title. This had not ought to be. Only One is on a higher level than all of us.
One last thing. If we are all ministering one to another according to, here I go again, 1Cor.12 and14, then titles are not needed. Everyone's functions will come forth as the Spirit directs and all will know each others ministry functions. Yep.

 

[Obadiah]

You really don't address most of them by their titles anyway..like janitor Bob or plumber Jack. See what I mean?

I not only see what you mean, but you literally took the words right out of my mouth. This is exactly what I was getting at when I mentioned the pastors I know who will not use the word "reverend" when refering to themselves (they also ask others not to use it when someone inadvertently does.) I've already clearly stated "I'm not defending a person who goes around using his title as a prestige item." In the churches I've been involved with, the pastor is addressed by his first name in informal situations and maybe by his last name in formal situations, just like anyone else would be addressed. Just like I don't call a person Janitor Bob or Plumber Jack, we don't call him Pastor Jim. Just like anyone else, he's just Jim, or maybe Jim Smith or Mr. Smith, depending on the situation. The term pastor is to describe his function in the church (and, yes, there are more than one with that function). He's normally only referred to as "the pastor" in the same way you might say "This is Bob, he's the janitor." "This is Jim, he's the pastor." If giving someone's job or position a descriptive title makes them arrogant, that's something they need to deal with, it's not a reason to condemn the position. The authority he has is earned and given to him by the church members, just like anyone else who works there in any capacity. If I come in one day to help the janitor clean the church, I give him the authority to tell me what needs to be done. If I come in one day to help work on a community evangelistic outreach, I give the pastor the authority to tell me what I need to do. If he tells me to do something that I think is wrong, he has no power to force me to do it or to punish me in any way if I don't. This would be handled according to the instructions in Matthew 18. There is nothing at all wrong with this. I just can't understand why some people in some churches are so against pastors.

The Son of God did not say that you can have a religious title adorning your name as long as you stay humble about it.

And neither did I. The Son of God also never prohibited using descriptive job titles or position names either. This is no reason to claim that churches shouldn't have pastors. True, they shouldn't have prideful pastors, but none of the people with the gifts of 1 Cor 12 and 14 that you keep talking about should be prideful either, even though many clearly are. This is no reason to condemn all pastors as being unscriptural.

I spent a short time in a church that refused to use any kind of titles for people's positions on a regular basis, and allowed everyone to do "as they felt the Lord leading them." Everything from worship services to the running of the kitchen descended into chaos. This is not what God wants in his church.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

This is no reason to claim that churches shouldn't have pastors.

I can't speak for the others that you'd describe as anti-pastor, but as for me, I do not feel churches should NOT have pastors. In fact, a multiplicity of pastors is what we see from scripture as the example for churches. My issue is what the modern position of pastor is when compared to how the scriptures define the position. The employed pulpit preacher, name on the door reverend or evangelist whose picture is on the church's marketing material is what I find to be unscriptural.
Instead of the pastor being a person that is paid to come in and lead the congregation, be the face of the church, and deliver what he or she claims is God's message to the church members each week; what would be better to have in place is a multiplicity of people from among the congregation that meet pastorial qualifications as indicated in passages like 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 2:1-8 that together work to lead the congregation by being excellent examples of faith who are able to teach the younger members to fear and obey the Lord.

 

[ejected]

Obadiah, you say you can't understand why somebody would be against the priest cast or pastor in the assembly. If your not getting it by now bro.. I don't know what else to say. One more time. The single pastor cannot be found in God's instructions, the n.t.,
Let me try this. We believe that a true church must have an elephant in their church basement or it cannot be a true church!!
Tell me what's wrong with that picture Obadiah. I'll wait for your answer.
About the chaos thing. It might get a little sloppy at first but it's like learning how to ride a bicycle. Gonna take some sound teaching and a some patience. No sense in throwing out God's plan just because we need to unlearn a ton of nonsense.
About a pastors authority...he has no authority over someone else. Therein lies the problem.
Only Christ has been given all authority. We submit one unto another in The Lord.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

About a pastors authority...he has no authority over someone else. Therein lies the problem.
Only Christ has been given all authority. We submit one unto another in The Lord.

"17 Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account." (Hebrews 13:17 NIV)

 

[iLOVE]

This is no reason to claim that churches shouldn't have pastors.

I can't speak for the others that you'd describe as anti-pastor, but as for me, I do not feel churches should have pastors. In fact, a multiplicity of pastors is what we see from scripture as the example for churches. My issue is what the modern position of pastor is when compared to how the scriptures define the position. The employed pulpit preacher, name on the door reverend or evangelist whose picture is on the church's marketing material is what I find to be unscriptural.
Instead of the pastor being a person that is paid to come in and lead the congregation, be the face of the church, and deliver what he or she claims is God's message to the church members each week; what would be better to have in place is a multiplicity of people from among the congregation that meet pastorial qualifications as indicated in passages like 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 2:1-8 that together work to lead the congregation by being excellent examples of faith who are able to teach the younger members to fear and obey the Lord.

14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!â€[g] Romans 10:14-15 NIV

Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ. Romans 10:17 NIV, So faith comes from hearing, that is, hearing the Good News about Christ. Romans 10:17 NLT

 

[ejected]

Jethro, how r u my friend. There r other verses as well that, in the English, say the elders have a special kind of authority over other believers. The words submit, rule, obey, etc.. Look past the English unto the Greek and you'll get a totally different take. The verse you quoted ' obey them that have the rule over you and submit yourselves..'.And the Greek: 'be persuaded by them that lead/guide you.' All the combined verses that speak the same issue are quite different in the Greek. Why?..you may ask. Google 'king James bible translators and the kings rules for translation. Quite a horror story. I cannot mention the religious system that the early English translators drew from, even Bishops bible so you'll have to do your own studying. They did not utilize the Greek and Hebrew sources as we have been told. King James wanted to control the people through the hierarchy of the church of england, so they deliberately twisted the scriptures in order to force the people to submit to their religious leaders. Gr:be persuaded by their example. English: obey. Get the picture? I encourage you to do that study on the King James Version translators and the King's rules of Translation. God bless.

 

[ejected]

Hello I Love. Bless your heart. The verses you posted are talking about missionaries, not the elders in the assembly. Take care.

 

[ejected]

Bless you Edward. When the first believers gathered in homes, they brought all their questions to the table. Your thinking that only one or two in the gathering have the authority or responsibility to do all the teaching/preaching/instructing, and ministering. This is nothing but Barnum and bunkum. Titles are forbidden by Christ in Matt.23. Yes Paul used the word 'father' in father of your faith'. This denoted his function toward those he led to Jesus. He did not place Father in front of his name, nor Rev., nor Evangelist, nor Apostle, nor Pastor. You cannot find any one in the n.t. with a religious, honorific title before his name...so why do we do it when Jesus commanded us not to?

 

[Deborah13]

Bless you Edward. When the first believers gathered in homes, they brought all their questions to the table. Your thinking that only one or two in the gathering have the authority or responsibility to do all the teaching/preaching/instructing, and ministering. This is nothing but Barnum and bunkum. Titles are forbidden by Christ in Matt.23. Yes Paul used the word 'father' in father of your faith'. This denoted his function toward those he led to Jesus. He did not place Father in front of his name, nor Rev., nor Evangelist, nor Apostle, nor Pastor. You cannot find any one in the n.t. with a religious, honorific title before his name...so why do we do it when Jesus commanded us not to?

I've always like the idea of house churches. And most of the time, enjoyed Bible Study groups with pastors, teachers, and lay people altogether, more than just listening to one person preach. But I like worship service in church, in a larger space. You can kind of be alone even though there are others there.
When Witness Lee, came to this country he started house churches.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Romans 10:14-15

Romans 10:17

The Roman texts you referenced say nothing, absolutely nothing that would endorse churches having an employed localized pulpit preacher. What they are talking about is the desire Paul had relating to the need of his countrymen, the Jews, to come to an acceptance of and belief in Jesus as the Christ.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

But I like worship service in church, in a larger space. You can kind of be alone even though there are others there.

You revealed something very profound and it is that very fact that illustrates one of the issues with 'going to church'. The way church services are set up, they tend to isolate people in a way that can make them feel alone despite the fact that they are in a room full of supposedly likeminded individuals in the faith. The fellowing and interconnectedness of the members in such settings suffers and instead of being a connected family of believers, church members tend to be a gathering of strangers that know but a handful of their fellow members. With that being the case, how are members going to be able to bear one anothers burdens, offer the love and encouragement needed to one another, or even be in a position to admonish each other? The pulpit pastor-centic church we've come to accept HURTS the brotherhood, empowers a select few, and fosters a setting where only the 'staff' is expected to be learned Bible students that feeds the unlearned flock who can come 'to church' once a week to make sure their place at the table is maintained.

 

[WIP]

But I like worship service in church, in a larger space. You can kind of be alone even though there are others there.

You revealed something very profound and it is that very fact that illustrates one of the issues with 'going to church'. The way church services are set up, they tend to isolate people in a way that can make them feel alone despite the fact that they are in a room full of supposedly likeminded individuals in the faith. The fellowing and interconnectedness of the members in such settings suffers and instead of being a connected family of believers, church members tend to be a gathering of strangers that know but a handful of their fellow members. With that being the case, how are members going to be able to bear one anothers burdens, offer the love and encouragement needed to one another, or even be in a position to admonish each other? The pulpit pastor-centic church we've come to accept HURTS the brotherhood, empowers a select few, and fosters a setting where only the 'staff' is expected to be learned Bible students that feeds the unlearned flock who can come 'to church' once a week to make sure their place at the table is maintained.

Wow! I don't know where you've been attending services in your life but what you describe is not quite what I experience where I attend. I once felt the way you do but what I have learned over the years is that what you describe was more the result of my unwillingness than a failure on the part of the church. When I sat on my hands and waited to get something from the church I found that it rarely came but when I finally decided to get off my butt, get involved, and actually be a part of the congregation I found what came back was many times what I put in. I've made this comment before on this site. Like a marriage, the more we put in, the more we get out.

 

[ejected]

Hey Edward. By virtue of the modern pastor being special on an upper level(think podium), the one all eyes are on, who does most of the ministry, who gets a benefit package, who is almost recognized as the mediator between God and man as that other top leader of another religion, automatically makes him lord over the folks...can't be helped. Special title, special reverence, special position, special class, special authority, special recognition, special statis, special prominance,special everything.
All are conversing, the prominent one steps up behind the pulpit and everyone comes to silence, the master is about to unfold the oricles of God. Some churches a little less on the drama I just portrayed but the same reverence toward upper chamber hiearchy none the less. He may not be thinking 'lord it over His heritage,' but the aroma is there, the flavor is impossible not to notice.

 

[ejected]

See Deborah, you just mentioned a piece that is of the doctrine of the Nico-Laitans which your Jesus hates. The whole word meant control over the laity.....a 2 tier construct....clerical/ laity.....pastor/congregation..a special elevated office above the lower folks.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

When I sat on my hands and waited to get something from the church I found that it rarely came but when I finally decided to get off my butt, get involved, and actually be a part of the congregation I found what came back was many times what I put in. I've made this comment before on this site. Like a marriage, the more we put in, the more we get out.

There's a lot of truth in this comment WIP. One will typically reap what they sow in terms of being rewarded for effort and such.

What I described was what the typical Sunday service presents, and that is a mostly passive experience where each member is virtually an island unto themselves as the collective gives its attention to the speaker of the hour and the entertainment that stands in front of the group. What was done in scripture and what I believe to be a much better model is a much less formal setting where brethren actively interacted with one another, shared insights, life experiences, and reasoned together to help each other grow in understanding. The formalized church service setting that is so pervasive again empowers a few while subjecting the masses to having to hang on the words of the select empowered. There should be more to the relationships of brothers than the "on the surface cordial smile and handshake once or twice a week really brief pleasantry as we exit the building" connection that the formalized church structure tends to foster.
It has gotten really absurd in recent times as the advent of the megachurch has become the norm as opposed to the exception. Nieghborhood churches are a rarety now as it has become commonplace for churches with 500 members to be considered as small to medium congregations and even in these rather modest number it is uncommon for the members to have many meaningful connections and relationships within the number. That's sad. Because of that reality I again say and ask:

The fellowship and interconnectedness of the members in such settings suffers and instead of being a connected family of believers, church members tend to be a gathering of strangers that know but a handful of their fellow members. With that being the case, how are members going to be able to bear one anothers burdens, offer the love and encouragement needed to one another, or even be in a position to admonish each other?

 

[WIP]

I guess my experiences are much more sheltered. I belong to a country church with a 70 member congregation. We are all neighbors and close friends and a typical Sunday service is hardly as you described. This past Sunday I attended another service at a neighboring church of about the same size and they too are all neighbors and friends. The fellowship that follows our worship services are always stimulating, refreshing, and friendly. It's not uncommon for us to interact for an hour or two after our Sunday service, more if we have something going on like a potluck, picnic, or something.

 

[ejected]

Hey Wip, God bless you. I wish you would describe your assembly some more. If they are acting on 1Cor.12 and 14, then I envy you...in the right way.(smile). However if you are in a place where a 'pastor' says 'you are dismissed...shake hands with someone before you go', then how can that be the n.t. gathering where we are to minister one to another, 'edifying one another in love'? Did you know there are 58 'one to another' scriptures in the n.t.? Now tell me, out side of being Houdini, how can you minister the spiritual functions God deposited in you when staring at the back of someone's head for 40 minutes, the duration of the dynamic pastor's sermon(sermon in the gathering is not in the Corinthian chapters in question).
I wish everyone on this site would go and read 1Cor. 12 and 14. It looks to me no one has bothered yet. That folks is how we stay bogged down in the traditions of men which nullify and make void the word of God and stay blind by the doctrines of men and of devils.
Did not Paul say 'if any man bring to you any other gospel other than the one once delivered unto the saints, avoid him'.
All I am hearing, and I love all of you to death, is the pastor this and the pastor that..pastor, pastor, pastor, pastor, but not one person has shown me book, chapter, and verse, that sunstaciates any kind of inkling of ground that supports the idea that a man can quit his job, have a card printed reading Pastor so an so, get a building, and start telling everyone that he,s the leader over them and that they better start paying him 10 percent of their gross income, no matter how poor that widow
is, because the bible say so...somewhere. Are we not suppose to stick with God's word? All the churches claim they hold to the bible, yet there is a ton of doctrine (sacred cows) that cannot be found in it. Just want the best for you and for Pete's sake, along with everyone else's sake, I want Jesus to hold first and foremost place in our gatherings....not pastor wonderful!

 

[Obadiah]

Hey Edward. By virtue of the modern pastor being special on an upper level(think podium), the one all eyes are on, who does most of the ministry, who gets a benefit package, who is almost recognized as the mediator between God and man as that other top leader of another religion, automatically makes him lord over the folks...can't be helped. Special title, special reverence, special position, special class, special authority, special recognition, special statis, special prominance,special everything.
All are conversing, the prominent one steps up behind the pulpit and everyone comes to silence, the master is about to unfold the oricles of God. Some churches a little less on the drama I just portrayed but the same reverence toward upper chamber hiearchy none the less. He may not be thinking 'lord it over His heritage,' but the aroma is there, the flavor is impossible not to notice.

Do you attend or are you a member of a church? If so, in light of your distaste for pastors and other leaders by whatever name, I wonder how is your church organized and run? How long has it been in existence running this way? (I mean the actual church you attend, not the church in general or anything like that.) What are your services like? What else does your congregation do other than Sunday morning worship services (assuming you have those)? And I guess really anything else you can tell us about it. I, like probably a lot of other people, have never been in a church with no recognized leadership so I'm curious how it's working out and how you do things there.