Proper and scriptural ordained church government sadly lacking!

[Yahalam]

There are a number of places or positions in the New Testament church, this essay deals with elders, bishops, ministers and deacons.

The elders are people with younger, usually family members under their authority.

The bishop is the highest authority in the church, having an awesome family, in the faith, and with wisdom to keep them noticeably under subjection. Any family may have one but only one Bishop or overseer.

The minister/deacon is the servant of these men and is under subjection to them by election and choice and not by compulsion or natural ascension. The freewill of the elector and the elected are involved. The terms “minister” and “deacon” are synonymous, and reference the greek word “deaconos” and is found in Strongs concordance at #1247

That statement is simple and easy to say and understand yet the amount of deceptive or false teaching thrown at that simple easy to see and explain thing is almost overwhelming!

There is a pressure to call the ordained men or church officials that run the religious apparatus “elders” or perhaps “trustees”, bishops or deacons, and because of that ordination there is a strongly held deceptive spiritual pressure that excludes all others when using the term. This action leaves a hole in scripture that needs filled with further deceptive means in order to appear to be right. It appears that the term “layman” is predominately used to fill this apparent lack and this deception tends to explain away why the real “elders” loss of authority and responsibility favors giving the lost authority to the ordained men who exclusively claim that title.

2Th 2:10* And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

I am not saying these men are all “lost” but I am concerned that they spend so much time touting their pet and favorite doctrine and fail on proper church government and local assembly responsibility.

It appears that almost all church systems use a similar method, of twisting a false interpretation of the foundational verses that implement scriptural authority in church:

One must ask, do we really want revival or are we wanting it not according to truth:

Tit 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:.... 7 For a bishop must be

Do they not think and teach the church is to “ordain” an unknown or mysteriously unnamed subject and by the ordination he becomes an “elder”, as opposed reading the simple to follow instruction to ordaining an already existing elder who in turn gets a title called bishop in the KJV or overseers in some other versions?

7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

Is it that hard to see that after the thing is set in order, the qualified elder becomes a bishop as opposed to the deceptive teaching that an unnamed person becomes an elder. First he was an elder by birthright or family ascension, and by authority of Titus 1:5 the elder became a bishop to fix the wanting errors in the leadership.

How the deceptive teaching gets around the obvious is by making the term “elder” (presbuterous) and “bishop” (episkopos) and “deacon” or “Deaconos”) synonymous.



You can see the book of Jude totally addresses men of his day that did the same thing, but he uses such an uncomplimentary writing that it is offensive to point it out. Does not Jude call the favored and most beloved church workers of his day “ungodly”?

 

[atpollard]

Many Baptist Churches and "Independent" Churches follow the Biblical Model for local congregational organization (and others do not). One thing to beware of is judging on the basis of SEMANTICS. The Bible defines specific roles and qualifications for those roles ... Timothys ... the Elders appointed in every town ... the Deacons selected to allow the Apostles to dedicate themselves to teaching. However the specific GREEK words have different ENGLISH equivalents in different Translations ... so one man's Bishop is another man's Pastor and still another man's Shepherd (or Chief Elder). The model is:

• one man called by God.
• a teaching/discipline group over the congregation.
• a group to care for the "widows and orphans" so the others can teach.

Denominations can get in the way of this model, but MANY local congregations follow it. Several major denominations do not (like the RCC that instituted celibacy and a Clergy/laity split in authority).

Two BAPTIST DISTINCTIVES are "Local Autonomy" and "Priesthood of the Believers", which lend themselves to the NT organizational model.

 

[Yahalam]

I am not exactly agreeing or disagreeing, but one point I wonder if you don't mind putting a little meat on is:

One thing to beware of is judging on the basis of SEMANTICS
I wasn't sure what you meant, so I looked up the word:

1. The study or science of meaning in language.
2. The competence of a speaker with regard to the interpretation of the meaning of linguistic structures.
3. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent.

(https://duckduckgo.com/?q=SEMANTICS&t=brave&ia=definition)

Are you saying it is wrong to look at the meaning of scripture as written if you look at the original meaning and the interpretation cannot be argued? If one has the interpretation right, should not the spirit filled heart say "I accept that" even if his heart wants to say "no"? Would not saying "not for me" be judging the word?


Jas 1:22* But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

 

[atpollard]

I am not exactly agreeing or disagreeing, but one point I wonder if you don't mind putting a little meat on is:

One thing to beware of is judging on the basis of SEMANTICS
I wasn't sure what you meant, so I looked up the word:

1. The study or science of meaning in language.
2. The competence of a speaker with regard to the interpretation of the meaning of linguistic structures.
3. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent.

(https://duckduckgo.com/?q=SEMANTICS&t=brave&ia=definition)

Are you saying it is wrong to look at the meaning of scripture as written if you look at the original meaning and the interpretation cannot be argued? If one has the interpretation right, should not the spirit filled heart say "I accept that" even if his heart wants to say "no"? Would not saying "not for me" be judging the word?


Jas 1:22* But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Nothing that fancy … by getting caught up in semantics, I just meant that the person in the role of “Timothy” can be called the Pastor or Reverend or Bishop or Chief Elder of the local “Church” (congregation) without fighting over the exact title being worth the effort.

A more extreme example that I encounter is in Baptist Churches vs the Bible. The name of the person that TEACHES and DISCIPLINES in the Bible is usually “Elder” (as in ‘we appointed elders in all the churches we visited’) … Baptists have historically called the people in this role “Deacons”. Most other denominations, refer to ‘Deacon’ as the title of the people that take care of day to day business like feeding widows (and paying the electric bill). Since Baptists ‘Deacons’ both teach and pay the electric bill, it makes sense … but it caused me no small confusion when I came to a Southern Baptist Church from an Evangelical Free Church and none of the titles matched up with the job descriptions that I was familiar with.

While confusing, it is not worth fighting over. So “semantics” just meant arguing over what things are called.

 

[Yahalam]

I see, thank you. I personally think the titles and names are important and are one of the main reasons there is such a dearth of spiritual life in our churches.
Timothy was actually a "minister"

1Th 3:2* And sent Timotheus, our brother, and minister of God,

Paul told Timothy:


1Ti 5:1* Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;


The same scripture teaches that an elder is an elder because of age

1Ti 5:1* Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;

When scripture teaches about an elder, does it not teach that all men with younger people under their authority such as children, they are an elder? Is there anywhere that scripture teaches one becomes an "Elder" except my natural selection and family?

 

[atpollard]

When scripture teaches about an elder, does it not teach that all men with younger people under their authority such as children, they are an elder? Is there anywhere that scripture teaches one becomes an "Elder" except my natural selection and family?

[Act 14:23 NKJV] 23 So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
[1Ti 5:17 NKJV] 17 Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.
[Tit 1:5 NKJV] 5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you--
[Rev 4:4 NKJV] 4 Around the throne [were] twenty-four thrones, and on the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white robes; and they had crowns of gold on their heads.

• Elders are specifically “appointed”
• There are ‘ Elders’ in every church
• Elders ‘rule’
• In heaven, there are Elders on THRONES with special duties and honors

It sounds like more than an “old man” club.

[1Ti 3:1-7 NKJV] 1 This [is] a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having [his] children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the [same] condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

• Paul appointed ‘elders’ in all his churches and instructed his companions (fellow ministers) to do the same.
• This is Paul’s guidelines to Timothy for choosing “overseers”. ELDERS appointed at each church to rule … sound like “overseers” to me.
• ELDER seems to be more about “mature” in their faith; which comes with time, but is not guaranteed by merely being old … there are “old fools” in the world, too.

 

[Yahalam]

[Act 14:23 NKJV] 23 So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
[1Ti 5:17 NKJV] 17 Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.
[Tit 1:5 NKJV] 5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you--
[Rev 4:4 NKJV] 4 Around the throne [were] twenty-four thrones, and on the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white robes; and they had crowns of gold on their heads.

• Elders are specifically “appointed”
• There are ‘ Elders’ in every church
• Elders ‘rule’
• In heaven, there are Elders on THRONES with special duties and honors

It sounds like more than an “old man” club.

[1Ti 3:1-7 NKJV] 1 This [is] a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having [his] children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the [same] condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

• Paul appointed ‘elders’ in all his churches and instructed his companions (fellow ministers) to do the same.
• This is Paul’s guidelines to Timothy for choosing “overseers”. ELDERS appointed at each church to rule … sound like “overseers” to me.
• ELDER seems to be more about “mature” in their faith; which comes with time, but is not guaranteed by merely being old … there are “old fools” in the world, too.

 

[Yahalam]

[Act 14:23 NKJV] 23 So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.


[1Ti 5:17 NKJV] 17 Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.


[Tit 1:5 NKJV] 5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you--


[Rev 4:4 NKJV] 4 Around the throne [were] twenty-four thrones, and on the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white robes; and they had crowns of gold on their heads.

• Elders are specifically “appointed”
• There are ‘ Elders’ in every church
• Elders ‘rule’
• In heaven, there are Elders on THRONES with special duties and honors

It sounds like more than an “old man” club.






[1Ti 3:1-7 NKJV] 1 This [is] a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having [his] children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the [same] condemnation as the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

You make some good arguments, have you thought them through though?
When they had appointed elders :
Were they elders who they appointed, or where they an unknown source or people who became elders after the appointment?

For instance, I personally think that they were elders before the appointment. Why do you think otherwise?
So I do my business, and I need a plumber, so I appoint a plumber to do my plumbing, he is already a plumber, I appoint him to do my plumbing.

17 Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.

Now this is a good verse and is it not universally twisted because of unbelief?

Who do they rule?


1Ti 3:5* (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)


Are not these “elders” or men that rule their house well? Is not the man who has a saved family, his children in the faith, is not that man more worthy of double honor than any man on earth, especially if he labors….?

Do you honestly think a man “rules the church well”?

5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you--


If you look just as I said how could it be otherwise than that they are elders before the appointment and “bishops” or overseers afterward?





5* ¶ For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders ……


7* For a bishop

Do you ordain novices, or heathens? no, you ordain elders! meaning otherwise qualified men with well ruled families in the faith.


How could it not mean this?

 

[Yahalam]

There are a number of places or positions in the New Testament church, this essay deals with elders, bishops, ministers and deacons.

The elders are people with younger, usually family members under their authority.

The bishop is the highest authority in the church, having an awesome family, in the faith, and with wisdom to keep them noticeably under subjection. Any family may have one but only one Bishop or overseer.

The minister/deacon is the servant of these men and is under subjection to them by election and choice and not by compulsion or natural ascension. The freewill of the elector and the elected are involved. The terms “minister” and “deacon” are synonymous, and reference the greek word “deaconos” and is found in Strongs concordance at #1247

That statement is simple and easy to say and understand yet the amount of deceptive or false teaching thrown at that simple easy to see and explain thing is almost overwhelming!

There is a pressure to call the ordained men or church officials that run the religious apparatus “elders” or perhaps “trustees”, bishops or deacons, and because of that ordination there is a strongly held deceptive spiritual pressure that excludes all others when using the term. This action leaves a hole in scripture that needs filled with further deceptive means in order to appear to be right. It appears that the term “layman” is predominately used to fill this apparent lack and this deception tends to explain away why the real “elders” loss of authority and responsibility favors giving the lost authority to the ordained men who exclusively claim that title.

2Th 2:10* And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

I am not saying these men are all “lost” but I am concerned that they spend so much time touting their pet and favorite doctrine and fail on proper church government and local assembly responsibility.

It appears that almost all church systems use a similar method, of twisting a false interpretation of the foundational verses that implement scriptural authority in church:

One must ask, do we really want revival or are we wanting it not according to truth:

Tit 1:5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:.... 7 For a bishop must be

Do they not think and teach the church is to “ordain” an unknown or mysteriously unnamed subject and by the ordination he becomes an “elder”, as opposed reading the simple to follow instruction to ordaining an already existing elder who in turn gets a title called bishop in the KJV or overseers in some other versions?

7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

Is it that hard to see that after the thing is set in order, the qualified elder becomes a bishop as opposed to the deceptive teaching that an unnamed person becomes an elder. First he was an elder by birthright or family ascension, and by authority of Titus 1:5 the elder became a bishop to fix the wanting errors in the leadership.

How the deceptive teaching gets around the obvious is by making the term “elder” (presbuterous) and “bishop” (episkopos) and “deacon” or “Deaconos”) synonymous.



You can see the book of Jude totally addresses men of his day that did the same thing, but he uses such an uncomplimentary writing that it is offensive to point it out. Does not Jude call the favored and most beloved church workers of his day “ungodly”?

Part 2
Diakonos is the scriptural term for minister and deacon it is found is Strong's Concordance #1249.
presbuteros
Presbuteros is the scriptural term for elders it is found is Strong's Concordance #4245

The action of the leaders of the churches, be they called ministers and deacons as they should be or pastors, reverends, preachers, teachers, or any other terms they are the Diakonos. The claim that the title of authority and responsibility from the scripture to the elders who are church members with younger people in their own house or circle of authority, or the Presbuteros is actually their responsibility is patently false from a scriptural standpoint.

Since this claim excludes the real elders Presburtors from his responsibility is it not a theft? Does not this in effect replace the authority and responsibility that God gave to the real elders (presbuteros) and hand it over to the diakonos (ministers and deacons).
These false elders or Diakonos in turn appear to gain the true elders' right and obligation to exercise the authority and responsibility that God gave to the true elders.

To close the loop or reconcile the whole deception the term “layman” is inserted into the mix to describe the people that the bible calls “elders”, but are basically left as drones or merchandise in the church as we know it today. I do not know what a layman is, perhaps an elder stripped of his manhood responsibilities, kind of like a steer as opposed to a bull?

Galatians 5:12 — The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)​

I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves!​

(Paul is speaking about circumcision but the meaning is clear.)

You read a verse like “rebuke not an elder” or “elders that rule well …double honor” and you have men in your group if properly named would be deacon or minister (diakonos) as opposed to elder and you think you are not to rebuke them and must honor them double even if they tend to not be in their place!

How should it be?

A good place to start is to understand who an elder is and who or what they rule,

1Ti 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
What are some of the presumed but erroneous meanings? The elder is the pastor and the pastor deserves pay…..which is “double honor” Look at that verse where do you get that? Also there is a presumption that the pastor is the ruler and if he rules the church well he gets double honor. (or as many a paid preacher confesses “double pay”) perhaps because twice as many come to the church than if he doesn’t rule well. Read that verse and think about it, it does not say that! The truth is that the double honor goes to the man that rules his own house well .


1Ti 5:17* Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

1Ti 3:5 For if a man know not how to rule his own house.

An elder that rules well! Have you ever gone to church or a restaurant, or any public event and seen a family that was large, courteous, and disciplined, coupled with happy and obedient children? That Momma and Poppa are worthy of double honor! Have you ever seen a man and woman that raised their children right and the children became upright honorable productive adults? Yep, those parents are worthy of double honor.

False “elders” tend to bastardize these “rule well” verses not realizing that the elder that “rules well” rules his home well, not the church. You don’t rule the church, you are the church!

Do they not use a “fake” systematic teaching that moves the term “elder” from a scriptural age and family relationship term, like the bible intends to a specialized term held only for the appointed or elected “ordained”? Is it not like an elephant in the room, a taboo subject not to be spoken of or written about? Hopefully they are innocent in intention. Is it not they that the bible calls the “false apostles”?

2 co 11:
9* And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man:

13* For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.


Fallacious arguments are used to transform the term “elder” into “minister” and thereby miraculously transform themselves into possessing a non-existent hybrid office that is elected to somehow bear rule and blame it on scripture, and “poof”, they benefit from the sophistry involved!
Does not this false teaching effectively say the office of “elder” was elected (ordination) and that election made the man an “elder” in the new fake meaning sense? The elected servant gets the authority that the scripture gives to the senior and older members of each of the families and the elected minister effectively gets the reward to sit, hold, or otherwise exercise the authority of the congregation!

In order to make this false doctrine work they (or the spirit that inspired this deception) invented the term “layman”. The layman to them is men that God intended to mean as the elders, but since the elected ministers and deacons need power to rule “well”, they take to themselves and their office the scriptures intended to describe the true elders and call everyone else a layman. Thus the clergy is built out of a counterfeit, deceptive understanding of scripture that will bear no scrutiny, and by doing so enter into the same sin that Satan performed to cause his expulsion from God’s presence.

Isa 14:13 (part) I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation.

Paul told Timothy (a minister) very clearly who is the authority and warned him to act like it:

1Ti 5:1 Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;

 

[atpollard]

I think Paul's churches were a lot more like our churches than different ... Paul was probably just better at his job than what passes for LEADERSHIP today.

I think Paul started a lot of churches in a lot of towns. Like every pastor that ever planted a church, he probably used whoever God sent. In some towns, Paul probably got lucky and found people like "Lydia" who were already "God's man", so Paul had a foundation to build upon. I think some towns had synagogues and Jewish populations which provided a ready source of 'elders' in the traditions of Jewish Elders whom God could claim. I think that God probably raised up some exceptional individuals (like Priscilla and Aquila) who served locally. I think some towns probably had Pagan Elders that were converted and studied under Paul in towns where he stayed for extended periods.

I think some churches had inexperienced or less qualified leadership and quickly got into trouble ... needing Titus to come and set things right.

All in all, not too different from the Church Plantings that I have been involved with.

With an average life expecancy of 35 years, how old does one have to be to be a grandfather meeting the requirements of an "overseer"? 28? 32? 36?

 

[Yahalam]

atpollard, A church or assembly, may not have a qualified "elder" that could be an overseer, in which case the presbytery or "laymen" as they call them now, but scripture calls them elders, they would care for oversight until a man arises that is qualified and willing

Tit 1:6* If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
Faithful children
faithful is plural, meaning more than one but he need not be a grandfather.
It appears that all his children should be faithful, meaning if one is out of he faith he is not qualified to be an overseer.

I have 26 grandchildren, I spoke with the oldest (22) the other day about this stuff, and he said "so grandpa, do you think if I go haywire or any of my siblings or cousins then you would not be "qualified"? I acknowledged that I considered him to be part of my house and responsibility, even though he lives elsewhere. He said that is cool! Any kid that goes haywire pulls the parent out of leadership!

1Ti 3:5* (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

 

[Yahalam]

I guess I consider the whole theme of scripture is reconciliation of the nuclear family.


MA 4:6* And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.