A challenging piece over at A Pilgrim’s Progress today. Eric writes:
When we look in the bible, we see nothing about pastors receiving salaries. The term “pastor” is rarely used (“elder” is much more common). None of the pastors or elders were part of a separate class (the clergy), and none received salaries that exempted them from regular work. Elders were spiritually mature members of the church in a city who came from that city and worked jobs in that city.
Some professional pastors might respond to the title of this post by saying that they are certain God has called them to be a pastor. My question to them is, “How do you know that?” I’ve never heard a satisfactory answer to that question.
We know from scripture that God has gifted His children in various ways to serve His church. Some men have many pastoral gifts. God undoubtedly desires that they use these gifts to help others grow in Christian maturity. God’s plan is that older, godly men will shepherd others in the body in the process of edification (of course, God actually uses everyone in the church for this process to one degree or another).
Many men who today are professional pastors have missed the mark on what God desires that they do. While God likely wants them to be a part of His shepherding model that we see in the bible, professional pastors have instead latched onto a man-created tradition. That tradition is the common model of today: the salaried expert from outside the body who is brought in to “do ministry.”
So, are all tens of thousands of professional pastors wrong about what God wants them to be doing? The answer: Yes.
This may at first seem incredibly arrogant on my part. After all, how could they all be wrong? If I was simply using my own wisdom is coming to this conclusion, then it would be arrogant. However, that is not the case. Rather, I’m looking at what God has shown us about the life of His church in the bible. God’s plan nowhere includes professional pastors.
Are the professional pastors, then, wrong about everything? Of course not. They probably engage in various types of shepherding activities that please God.
However, are they wrong about God calling them to be professionals? Yes. There is no room for it in biblical church life.
In light of this, what should professional pastors do? They should make plans to gradually refuse their salaries and look for regular jobs. This is a process that may take a few years and involve additional vocational training. Their churches could even help with this process. Since they will be working regular jobs, the work of the ministry will have to be spread out among the church body. This will help everyone grow in maturity. Also, the money formerly used for pastoral salaries can be put straight into missions and care for the poor. In the end everyone wins.
OK… all you paid ministry staff people out there… what do you think?
Too hard line a stance?
Or right on?
I do think that money gets in the way of vocational ministry many times. I’ll write a blog post on that sometime. 
But do you agree that all paid pastors should gradually refuse their salaries and look for regular jobs?
Leave a comment.
Todd
“Some professional pastors might respond to the title of this post by saying that they are certain God has called them to be a pastor. My question to them is, “How do you know that?” I’ve never heard a satisfactory answer to that question.”
You’ve never listened hard enough, then. I’ve heard plenty of great answers to that question.
This piece isn’t challenging, it’s just silly.
Seriously, I think the pastoral office in the Bible is descriptive, rather than prescriptive.
I looked at Eric Carpenter’s blog and while he is right on certain aspects of pastoral ministry, his attitude towards it is definitely skewed. I wish him well, that God continues to move in his life and the life of his family. He is following the way that he believes God is leading him. But let us follow in the way we believe God is leading us.
Besides being arrogant he is wrong. 1 Cor. 9:14 In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel
Paul laid aside his rights but does not require others to do so. There are other verses I could point to as well.
right now, I’m a full time pastor…. I spent 20+ years as a bi-vocational pastor…. as the church grew, so did the demands and needs of the flock…. the church requested I move to a “full time paid status”…. and the church has continued to grow…. God’s hand of blessing is on our work and lives are being impacted for the kingdom…. I “work” 24/7….. being a “pastor” is not a “job” with 9-to-5 hours and set days OFF — it is a “calling” that has sacrifices built in…. sometimes like Spiderman, I wonder if it is a blessing or a curse but it came from the good Lord and not by my design…. Paul was a tentmaker — but that doesn’t establish a blueprint for every pastor in every generation and every time to be a tentmaker…. it was simply how God worked in one man’s life to accomplish His will…..
i guess my problem with this article is that it puts “the ministry” in a BOX and attempts to limit how God works in different communities….
I suspect that are a lot of pastors out there that would benefit from rubbing shoulders with the blue collar work force…. there is a very real danger in isolating ourselves from those in need of the Gospel
There is no vocation in scripture called ‘Pastor’. The title “pastor’ is one of the roles of an Elder and paying Elders to preach has a basis in I Timothy 5. “17 Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor,especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; 18 for the scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves to be paid.” The vocational clergy system is a gift from the Catholic Church that many in the Reformation did not refuse. God intended His Family (the Church) to be run tribally with the spiritually wise old Elders looking out for the young uns’. It became more organized along the lines of a business corporation as the Roman Church grew powerful. Preaching and teaching Elders should be compensated for their efforts because Paul says it is an appropriate and good thing. It is pretty evident that he is not establishing a new line of authority or supervision in the church (called ‘The Pastor’). He is just acknowledging that those who preach and teach need time to learn and prepare so they can be effective at communicating Bible truths. Good preparation is going to take time away from income pursuit so that time should be compensated. The compensation is time, not a rung in a hierarchical ladder above the other elders.
There is no basis for a clergy system or a vertical authority structure found in scripture.Denominations tend to look structurally like Catholicism in that local congregations are answerable after some fashion to the denominational head where they even contribute funding.
The Pastoral system is a disobedient system. Some have commented that there are plenty of Bible supports that they have heard for this warped system of governance. The challenge has been put out there. Dig up your bible supports.
Mark 7, 8 You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.”
9 Then he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever speaks evil of father or mother must surely die.’ 11 But you say that if anyone tells father or mother, ‘Whatever support you might have had from me is Corban’ (that is, an offering to God)— 12 then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, 13 thus making void the word of God through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this.”
If someone feels that they have the gift of prophecy then maybe they are comfortable saying that God endorses the pastoral system. Because of Jesus’s own attitude about traditions that men convince themselves are good I would be very reluctant to argue that the clergyPastor system is approved by God.
Your scriptures don’t have anything to do with your argument, and your interpretation is presented as absolute truth in a rather “non-humble” way, my friend.
I’m sorry, but I think you really are missing it here.
Some folks who lend thoughts to this has never made their call a sure one as paul said, sure there are God called pastors. U have to have the grace to be a pastor, because if one is not called it will sink them, the call gives the person the confidence to do the task. If a person thinks anyone can be a pastor well just try it, there is a difference between a preacher and a pastor.
I will go futher to say this type talk tries to eliminate to voice of God from a persons life, how can a person tell another that God has not called a person to be a pastor. And yes I am one for the last 16 yrs.
You can use one of the earliest models that Moses used below. But I think the best model for ministry is to attract multitudes with miracles, preach the gospel and train a dozen to do it too. And train them how to train a dozen each. …just like Jesus did. There will be more than enough money to go around. If you get low, have one of you leaders catch a fish and get money from its mouth.
Exodus 18:21-22 (Moses’ example)
21 Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.
22 And let them judge the people at all times. Then it will be that every great matter they shall bring to you, but every small matter they themselves shall judge. So it will be easier for you, for they will bear the burden with you.
Just to be sure…am I hearing that we do things that we think God likes not because He told us to in scripture but because we hear a voice/calling within us? So how do I know that the voice you hear is from God and how do you know that the voice I hear is from God? In Acts Paul and Silas go to Beroea and preach the Gospel. Acts 17, “10 That very night the believers sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea; and when they arrived, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 These Jews were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so.”The Beroeans were commended not because they accepted Paul’s teaching at face value but because they went to scripture to be sure that what he was teaching agreed with what God had expressed through the inspired writers. God’s words in scripture trump any revelation or voice in our life. Scripture is the perfect rule by which the Temple of God (us-His Church) is measured (Revelation 11:1-3).
Yikes. More pablum from an ineffective ,movement in the church heralding the plurality movement as the answer to all life’s problems when it just leads to years and years of more legalism. A laborer is worthy of his hire and people who speak or write against compensation are just flat out greedy and envious. Throughout the Bible ministers are compensated. Get a .grip. Find me ONE plurality based church which is growing substantially or reaching lost people. Anyone?
Hey Casey
You write about…
“reaching lost people”
Who are the lost?
I mean – Who are the lost in the Bible?
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
Much agreement when Eric says…
“No One Has Been Called to be a Professional Pastor”
Because – In the Bible – I can NOT find one of His Disciples
Who had the “Title/Position” pastor/leader/reverend
“Called” to be a pastor – leading a congregation. But – I cudda missed it.
In 1 Cor 14:26 – ALL believers can, and are expected to participate.
ALL can Teach – ALL can hear from Jesus and get Revelation.
1 Cor 14:26
How is it then, brethren? when ye come together,
every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue,
hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
But – In my experience…
Paid – Professional – Pastors – in Pulpits – Preaching – to People – in Pews…
Prevent – Public – Participation – and – Promote – Passive – Pew – Potatoes….
Procuring – Power – Profit – Prestige – for the Prevailing – Parsing – Pastor…
And – In my experience…
Power – Profit – Prestige – Corrupts even the best intentioned hearts.
“Titles” become “Idols” …………………. (Idols of the heart. Ezek 14:1-11)
“Pastors” become “Masters” …………. (A No, No. Mat 23:10 KJV.)
If someone says their “Title” is NOT and “Idol”
Just ask them to lay it down, walk away from the
Power – Profit – Prestige – Honor – Glory – Reputation – Recognition
that comes with that “Title.”
A “Title/Postion” – pastor/leader/reverend – NOT found in the Bible.
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall **hear MY voice;**
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
you’re right on…he is totally arrogant and wrong…perhaps HE needs to find a real job!
“Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for you soul, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.” Heb 13:17
“For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.” 1 Ti 5:18
“It is honorable for a man to stop striving, since any fool can start a quarrel.” Pro 20:3
I would point Eric to Gene Getz’s excellent treatment of spiritual leadership in the church, Elders and Leaders. Getz traces leadership in the church, in context and through its historical development….but I suspect Eric wouldn’t want to hear it.
I could point out that Pastor means Shepherd and describes a person who fulfills the 1 Peter 5:1-4 commands to “shepherd the flock of God.” But I doubt Eric wants to hear that either.
As has already been pointed out, I could note that 1 Timothy 5:17-18, in context must mean financial compensation to one (or some) elders who lead well. But Eric has already decided that it does not.
We could look at the example of the Apostles in Acts 6 who realized that with a church over 8,000 already, they didn’t have the time or capacity to do everything, so they specialized to do what the had been called to do, “prayer and the ministry of the word.”
I could go on, but there is an attitude expressed in Eric’s article that declares that all who disagree are hungry for money, power and are only pretending to do ministry for their own selfish interests…..and no biblical truth is likely to change his mind.
Tripe.
Todd,
Thanks for the link! You’ve got a good discussion going. I appreciate the thoughts folks have put into their responses. Although I obviously disagree with some of your commenters, I’m glad to see that they know where they stand.
John A,
Problem is the church is not a morphing process where the exigencies of time permit innovation. There was no special office of paid Pastor who was the final authority in the church as revealed in scripture. That role is a product of evolution. God formed an idea and we modified it. How could we be so bold and then argue that God is thrilled with it? When Paul wrote to Titus (chapter one he wrote these words-as translated out of Greek), “5 I left you behind in Crete for this reason, so that you should put in order what remained to be done, and should appoint elders in every town, as I directed you: 6 someone who is blameless, married only once, whose children are believers, not accused of debauchery and not rebellious. 7 For a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or addicted to wine or violent or greedy for gain; 8 but he must be hospitable, a lover of goodness, prudent, upright, devout, and self-controlled. 9 He must have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.”
Titus was not instructed to appoint Pastors (as we conceive them today). He was plainly told to appoint Elders who could “preach with sound doctrine and refute those who contradict it”. Sound doctrine is what the Bible teaches about how God intended His Church to work. The opinion of a person who is a professional ‘Pastor’ the way we express the term today about what they feel about their role is only useful if it is in agreement with the heart and mind of God.
I believe that God is more interested in obedience to Him more than He is to all of the good intentions that we attach to our activities that we tell others are on His behalf. When we shepherd the flock and we don’t treat God’s expressed word with awe and wonder and we let the history of the development of church leadership, written by an uninspired writer be our guiding star then we communicate that to God’s lambs who we are entrusted with and they to begin to overvalue the writing of God and undervalue God’s plainly expressed thinking on things.
If you are a Pastor in the modern sense and you feel a bit pinched by this discussion queue you might be inclined to label Eric’s comments as ‘tripe’. That would not be a biblical counterargument. It would be the same words that a cardinal in the Catholic Church would use if someone was to declare that the Papacy is fraud against God. If the only argument that can be mustered is that the discussion smacks of legalism then my response would be, Does this mean that there are some things that God has revealed that we shouldn’t take that seriously.
In our (growing) congregation based on some of the scripture I have articulated our “pastor’ person is one of the Elders now and we have other Elders who preach. The Elder who bears the greatest load of preaching and administrative responsibilities is paid accordingly. But if you preach you are paid something because God said to pay those who labor in preaching and teaching.
(Meant overvalue the writings of man and undervalue the writings of God.)
Steve – your comment: “based on some of the scripture I have articulated our “pastor’ person is one of the Elders now and we have other Elders who preach. The Elder who bears the greatest load of preaching and administrative responsibilities is paid accordingly.”
I think you’ve described one of the many ways to fulfill the biblical mandate to “pastor” the flock of God. In a biblical church, several people ought to be qualified as Elders using the 1 Tim 3, Titus 1 and 1 Peter 5 descriptions. I think Scripture instructs the church to ensure that they are able to devote adequate time to the task of serious preparation for teaching, disciple-making, prayer and spiritual guidance. Whether any of the Elders are called Pastor or Elder or Overseer, or (fill in the blank) is virtually a non-issue.
In every group, someone leads. In the family of God, He clearly describes the character and spiritual maturity of those He intends to lead. If their responsibility is large enough to require full-time effort, the church body owes it to themselves to financially support that leader so he can devote his time to leading the church under the direction of God’s Spirit, with a view to giving a full account to Christ (1 Peter 5:4).
It seems to me that this thread began with a reaction against an unbiblical abuse of authority and self-interested leaders. I believe that Eric’s critique and recommendations miss a significant part of what Scripture declares to be trans-cultural and non-optional.
I think we have a good deal of agreement John. I would be curious if you see the role of pastor as part of the ‘elder salad’ or as a distinct office or authority. I do not see it as distinct so if someone in a local body was to consistently refer to one person as pastor and another as elder therein lie the seeds of a bad weed. Pastoral scenes are in the fields where the shepherds tend the flocks. All Elders are pastoral. So reciprocally all pastors should be eldoral.. is that even a word? That is not what you see in practice. In many congregations the elder-ship exists as distinct from the clergyman/pastor. Some congregations ignore the scriptural mandate and qualifications for elders and run an eclectic mix of members called a board. ‘Board’ is a legal term, not a spiritual term.
A second problem arises when a preaching elder asserts that they are first among equals, which is another way of saying ‘equals’ is a noun and not a verb. It is a name for a situation but it is not an active truth. What has happened in this case is that one has asserted that God speaks through them more than the other elders even though the others have the same title. Todd’s tidbits on fallen Pastors reveals this to be either patently untrue or that along with that extra special giftedness is the gift of tone-deafness to God’s word.
When Titus was directed to appoint Elders in the congregations on Crete he was instructed to do that in the plural, “appoint elders….”. There is some significance to this . A congregation can rebound from an elder gone wild with more resilience than one whose eggs are all packed in the ‘pastor basket.’
The common view of the word pastor looks very much like what John complained about in 3 John as he asked that congregation why they had allowed one man (Diotrephes) to become the arbiter/decision maker. I appreciate the tone of your response and would be inclined to hear more about your perspective.
Steve and others,
As I mentioned in my first post – Gene Getz’ thorough explanation is a treasure of biblical wisdom on the topic.
The church I serve has six elders, three of them are paid and are occasionally also called pastor. We make a distinction in this way, Elder is the role you called to fill, pastor (as a verb) is what elders do. Our responsibility is the spiritual health and direction of the church body. We function as a team in ministry to the Body and in decision making. The three elders who are paid meet more frequently than all six of us meet together, but we communicate several time each week on a broad array of issues.
I do the bulk of the Sunday teaching for the church, but all of our Elders teach in various formats. I and 2 other elders do more than half of our pastoral care, but that is because we are serving the church full-time.
In practice I have more influence, but that is based on experience, education and trust developed over nearly a decade of working with these men in this church. Each of these men know that we are responsible to keep each other on track as we serve the Lord. That means both encouragement and correction as needed.
I love them and the love me, and they would be first in line to keep me from running over a cliff morally or spiritually.
I don’t believe that the title “pastor” is at the root of any failure, but lone-rangerism and pride certainly are. The man who has been ladder climbing to get to a position he sees as “the top” will feel threatened by other leaders and either distance himself from them or push them out…and avoiding a title won’t fix these kinds of problem.
Howard Hendricks surveyed men in minstry who had failed morally – three commonalities. 1. It could never happen to me, 2. Little personal spiritual growth and 3. No one in their life who had the moral authority to call their actions or motives into question.
I am certain that the title doesn’t matter, but many other things that can be associated with structure do!
John A – Steve Long
You both mention qualifcations for elder/overseers.
John A said @ February 20, 2013 at 11:17 pm…
“In a biblical church, several people ought to be qualified as Elders using the 1 Tim 3, Titus 1 and 1 Peter 5 descriptions.
Steve Long @ February 21, 2013 at 12:47 am…
“Some congregations ignore the scriptural mandate and qualifications for elders “
It sounds like you have some folks who love Jesus and are working hard.
But – How do you accuratly apply these qualifications to those in your fellowship you call elders? Do All the Elders meet All the qualifications?
What do you do if they do NOT meet ALL the qualifications?
You see, I’ve noticed, most who desire to be an elder/overseer “Ignore” or “Twist” the “Qualifications” in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9, so they could obtain for themselves this “Position” of elder/overseer.
Titus 1:6-8 KJV
6 If any be *blameless,* the husband of one wife,
having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
7 For a bishop “must be” *blameless,* as the steward of God; not self willed,
not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;
8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, *just,* *holy,* temperate;
1 – For a bishop (overseer) “must be” *blameless.*
That *must be* is the same Greek as – You *must be* born again. John 3:7.
*Must Be* – Strongs #1163, die. – It is necessary (as binding).
*Must Be* – Thayer’s – necessity established by the counsel and decree of God.
Seems to be a small word but very important. Yes? Is – Blameless – important?
1 – Blameless – Strongs #410 anegkletos – unaccused, irreproachable, blameless.
Thayers – that cannot be called into account, unreproveable, unaccused.
Dictionary – Without fault, innocent, guiltless, not meriting censure.
1 Tim 3:2 ASV – The bishop therefore must be without reproach…
1 Tim 3:2 NIV – Now the overseer must be above reproach…
1 Tim 3:2 NLT – an elder must be a man whose life cannot be spoken against.
I’ve NOT met any “Elder/Overseers,” who honestly examine themselves,
seriously considering this one **qualification,** (*Must Be* **Blameless,**)
who can see themselves as **Blameless,** without fault, above reproach,
and thus qualify to be an “elder/overseer.”
And if you can see yourself as **blameless:** Is that pride?
And no longer without fault? Oy Vey!
Aren’t ALL the qualifications important? Which one’s can we ignore?
John A – Steve Long
Here’s two more qualifications from Titus for “Elder/Overseer” that most who want to be an “Elder/Overseer” today tend to *Ignore* or “Twist.”
Titus 1:6-8 KJV
If any be *blameless,* the husband of one wife,
having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
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;
But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, *just,* *holy,* temperate;
2 – Just
Strongs #1342 – dikaios {dik’-ah-yos} from 1349;
Thayers – 1) righteous, observing divine laws
1a) upright, righteous, virtuous, keeping the commands of God
1a1) of those who seem to themselves to be righteous,
who pride themselves to be righteous, whether real or imagined
1a2) innocent, faultless, guiltless
1a3) used of him whose way of thinking, feeling, and acting
is wholly conformed to the will of God,
and who therefore needs no rectification in the heart or life
3 – Holy
Strongs #3741 – hosios {hos’-ee-os}
Thayers – 1) undefiled by sin, free from wickedness,
religiously observing every moral obligation, pure holy, pious.
Now that’s three tough qualifications for “Elder/Overseers.”
1 – Must Be Blameless. 2 – Just. 3 – Holy. — Yes?
Makes an interesting study – checking out ALL these tough qualifications for “Elder/Overseers” – Then checking out those who say they are “Elder/Overseers” compared to the qualifications.
1 Thess 5:12 KJV
And we beseech you, brethren,
to *know them (*know = to perceive, notice, discern,)
which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;
I was ordained. I was in “Leadership.” Folks flattered me.
Said I had this so-called “Gift of Teaching” – “Gift of Leadership.”
And I “Ignored” these qualifications for elder/overseer.
Pro 29:5 KJV
A man that flattereth his neighbour spreadeth a net for his feet.
Pro 20:17 KJV
Bread of deceit is sweet to a man;
but afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel.
I believed the flattery – I was special – I was needed.
I enjoyed the bread of deceit…
and wound up eating a lot of gravel.
When you believe the lie you start to die…
A. Amos Love –
You asked, “But – How do you accurately apply these qualifications to those in your fellowship you call elders? Do All the Elders meet All the qualifications?”
Historically, the first elders in most churches were Jewish men who recognized Jesus as their Messiah. Their lives had already been shaped by biblical truth.
If the qualifications meant find men of absolute perfection….then only Jesus would qualify, so they must apply to someone. They did appoint elders in the early church, but even then, some men like Demas disqualified themselves. (See Col 4:14 and 2 Tim 4:10)
In practice, we periodically review the qualifications for Elders and for Deacons recorded in Scripture. They are the goals that godly people will want to grow toward. Before appointing an elder (or deacon), the current elders spend time in prayer and discussion about why we think they should be considered to serve in that role. Then we ask that person if they are willing to be considered and evaluated for that position. One or more elders interview them and then we tell the church publicly that they are being considered and invite anyone who thinks they know them well to assist in evaluating their qualifications. We focus on character at each of 22 points (as noted in Scripture) on a 1-10 scale that is returned confidentially to one elder. The reviews must be signed so they aren’t “sniping from the bushes,” and if there is a real concern, an elder can privately contact the reviewer and discern how much weight to give that evaluation. The results of all the assessments are shared with the current elders, and we pray over the decision before appointing or passing over that person.
Not one of us thinks we have all those character qualities perfectly expressed! We are all still growing spiritually (and if we were not that would be disastrous). Blameless doesn’t mean perfect, it means that you’ve reached a level of maturity by the work of God’s Spirit where your character substantially aligns with Christ’s. (See Philippians 1:10–11 (NLT) For I want you to understand what really matters, so that you may live pure and blameless lives until the day of Christ’s return. May you always be filled with the fruit of your salvation—the righteous character produced in your life by Jesus Christ—for this will bring much glory and praise to God.)
We know that our system isn’t perfect, or the only way to identify godly leaders….but it is character based, intentional and prayerful…..and it has worked well for the last 8 years as we have been using it. Honestly, I have yet to hear of a better system, but I’m open to good ideas.
John A
Thanks for your explanation about elders.
And it does sound like a conscientious, thorough, and rigorous process.
And I’m glad it’s working for you.
But, it seems to me, and I could be wrong, you seem to know that these folks, who are now called “Pastor/Elder/Overseers” – Do NOT meet ALL the Qualifications. Even though you first said… “In a biblical church, several people ought to be qualified as Elders using the 1 Tim 3, Titus 1 and 1 Peter 5 descriptions.”
And now, when confronted with these difficult qualifications in 1 Tim 3, Titus 1, you seem to be making excusses for these pastor/elder/overseers who do NOT meet ALL the Qualifcations.
And it’s probably because – You, like many today, believe you “Must Have” elder/overseers even “IF” they do NOT qualify. So you, like many others, “Ignore” or “Twist” the “Qualifications” in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9, so they could obtain for themselves this “Position” of pastor/elder/overseer.
It’s very hard to admit you have pastor/elder/overseers who do NOT qualify.
I know I did NOT qualify when I was ordained. I “Ignored” the qualifications.
You write… “They are the goals that godly people will want to grow toward.”
I question that – Because Paul said – “An Overseer “Must Be” “Blameless”
That is NOT a goal to grow toward. “Must Be” leaves NO wiggle room.
You also write…
“If the qualifications meant find men of absolute perfection….
then only Jesus would qualify,” “so they must apply to someone.”
Paul did NOT say ordain – “men of absolute perfection”
What Paul said was – an overseer 1 – Must Be Blameless. 2 – Just. 3 – Holy.
And Paul did NOT say – “these are goals to grow toward.”
And you write… “so they must apply to someone.”
Well, maybe NOT.
I’ve noticed that Paul leaves Titus “a way out.” A way where Titus does NOT have to ordain anyone as a pastor/elder/overseer if they do NOT qualify according to this tough list.
I’ll explain what I’m seeing in the next comment.
Here is an interesting question…
Did Timothy or Titus ever ordain or appoint anyone as elder/overseer?
After Paul gives them these very tough qualifications?
A. Amos Love,
You’ve chosen to assume that blameless and the following qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression for a man to be appointed elder…and I assert that is beyond the meaning of the passages
You suggest that Titus was not expected to appoint elders “if” they failed to match the qualifications. But grammatically the “if” is not that kind of escape clause in Greek and the previous verse makes this clear – 5 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you.(ESV) If Paul meant – If you ever manage to find someone qualified, then verse 5 completely contradicts his purpose.
You even hint that you don’t think anyone qualifies…or that it is unnecessary to have elders in a church. But that’s not what the New Testament records.
Acts 14:23, “Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church…”
Acts 15:2 we find that there are elders in the Jerusalem church in addition to the Apostles still alive there.
Acts 20:17 ff. Paul meets with the elders of the church in Ephesus and gives them stern instructions, even predicting that some who are qualified as elders now will disqualify themselves and attack the church of Christ.
James 5:14 assumes that the church he is addressing there are elders to call for prayer when you are sick, and treats their availability as a normal occurrence.
1 Peter 5:1 is written to multiple elders in multiple churches.
I believe you have imagined a first century church that is very different from the historical reality, and failed to account for the many churches where the New Testament records there were elders.
So let me ask you the flip-side question. If no one is qualified, who leads? Because I assure you, in a group of two or more, someone is leading, someone is influencing, someone is teaching.
If we look at the qualifications, find no one qualified (by your most rigorous reading) what then?
John A
Here is where Paul gives Titus a way out.
A way where Titus doe NOT have to ordain anyone who does NOT qualify.
Titus 1:5-7 KJV
5… and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:
6 “IF” any be *blameless,* the husband of one wife,
having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
7 For a bishop “must be” *blameless,* as the steward of God; not self willed,
not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;
8 a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, *just,* *holy,* temperate;
Don’t know if you have noticed this – But…
In Titus 1:5, Paul tells Titus, …ordain elders in every city.
BUT – In verse 6, Paul “Introduces a Condition”
“Before” Titus ordains anyone – by saying…
5… and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:
6 – *IF* any “be blameless.”
This is a very large, little, word: *IF.*
This *IF* is found many times in scripture. Yes?
Gen 18:26, Gen 18:28, Gen 18:30, Psalm 66:18, Psalm 130:3, Isa 1:19, Isa 1:20, Jer 18:8, Jer 18:10, Jer 22:5, Eze 3:19, Eze 18:21, Eze 33:9, Eze 33:13, John 5:31, John 8:31, John 8:54, John 12:26, etc., etc,…
This “IF” in Titus sounds like…
“IF” someone is NOT blameless then do NOT ordain them.
Because – In verse 7, Paul explains why he “Introduces this Conditional” *IF*
7 – For a bishop “must be” “Blameless.”
Paul seems serious about this one qualification.
Using “Blameless” twice in Titus and once in 1 Tim 3.
Must Be – Thayer’s – necessity established by the counsel and decree of God.
Blameless – Thayers – cannot be called into account, unreproveable, unaccused.
Just – Thayers – observing divine laws, innocent, faultless, guiltless,
………. wholly conformed to the will of God.
Holy – Thayers – undefiled by sin, free from wickedness,
………observing every moral obligation, pure holy.
Titus 1:5… and ordain elders…
Titus 1:6 **IF** any be blameless…
Titus 1:7 For a bishop *must be* blameless…
Titus 1:8 …Just, Holy…
It’s very hard for congregations, and pastor/elder/overseers, to admit…
We have pastor/elder/overseers who do NOT qualify according to the Bible.
A. Amos Love,
You’ve chosen to assume that blameless and the following qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression for a man to be appointed elder…and I assert that is beyond the meaning of the passages
You suggest that Titus was not expected to appoint elders “if” they failed to match the qualifications. But grammatically the “if” is not that kind of escape clause in Greek and the previous verse makes this clear – 5 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you.(ESV) If Paul meant – If you ever manage to find someone qualified, then verse 5 completely contradicts his purpose.
You even hint that you don’t think anyone qualifies…or that it is unnecessary to have elders in a church. But that’s not what the New Testament records.
Acts 14:23, “Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church…”
Acts 15:2 we find that there are elders in the Jerusalem church in addition to the Apostles still alive there.
Acts 20:17 ff. Paul meets with the elders of the church in Ephesus and gives them stern instructions, even predicting that some who are qualified as elders now will disqualify themselves and attack the church of Christ.
James 5:14 assumes that the church he is addressing there are elders to call for prayer when you are sick, and treats their availability as a normal occurrence.
1 Peter 5:1 is written to multiple elders in multiple churches.
I believe you have imagined a first century church that is very different from the historical reality, and failed to account for the many churches where the New Testament records there were elders.
So let me ask you the flip-side question. If no one is qualified, who leads? Because I assure you, in a group of two or more, someone is leading, someone is influencing, someone is teaching.
If we look at the qualifications, find no one qualified (by your most rigorous reading) what then?
John A
You write…
“You’ve chosen to assume that blameless and the following qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression for a man to be appointed elder…and I assert that is beyond the meaning of the passages”
Well, let’s see if that is so…
You dismiss – 1 – Must Be Blameless. 2 – Just. 3 – Holy. As three qualifications that do NOT have to be recognized in “their maximum possible expression.” (Can we really do that?)
You write – “for a man to be appointed elder.” Was wondering…
Have you appointed “a woman” to be an elder? If NOT? – Why NOT?
I suspect “qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression”
for this qualification. NO women need apply. Even spiritual ones. Yes?
How about – “husband of one wife?” – and this candidate has three wives. But used to have six wives. But his “goal… to grow towards” is to have only one wife. And he is working on it. Would you “Ignore” this qualification? And ordain him as an elder?
I suspect “qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression”
for this qualification – “husband of one wife” – NOT two wives – Yes?
How about “One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
Seems elders are to have children, in subjection, so we can see if they can
“Manage Well” his own house so he can – “take care of the church of God.”
I suspect “qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression”
for this qualification. NO kids on drugs, running away from home etc… Yes?
This seems to be an important qualification – having their kids in order. Yes?
How about – “NOT a drunkard?” Would you “Ignore” this qualification?
What if he only gets drunk at a party? Or, only gets drunk once in awhile?
What if he is a happy drunk? And makes lots of friends when drunk?
I suspect “qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression”
for this qualification. NO drunkards need apply. Yes?
How about – “not greedy of filthy lucre?” Where is the line here?
I suspect “qualifications must be at their maximum possible expression”
for this qualification. NO greedy people need apply. Yes?
Well, you get the drift…
Seems to me – “You’ve chosen to assume” those qualifications that can be “Ignored” and “Twisted” – And those qualifications that -”must be at their maximum possible expression.”
All I’m doing is reading and reporting.
Titus 1:5… and ordain elders…
Titus 1:6 **IF** any be blameless… Husband of one wife…
Titus 1:7 For a bishop *must be* Blameless…
Titus 1:8 …Just, Holy…
It’s very hard for congregations, and pastor/elder/overseers, to admit…
We have pastor/elder/overseers who do NOT qualify according to the Bible.
John A
You ask…
“If we look at the qualifications, find no one qualified
(by your most rigorous reading) what then?”
A reasonable question – But – Here is a question for you – personally…
Do you qualify? Do you, John A, meet ALL the qualifications?
And if “you” do NOT meet ALL the qualifications – “What Then?”
A Amos Love,
To be completely honest, before the Lord, I and the other 5 elders of our church do meet the qualifications. We have not attained sinless perfection, but as Scripture repeatedly declares, it is the Spirit’s work that justifies and sanctifies. Each elder has been walking with God between 4 and 6 decades, with significant growth evident to those who are able to candidly evaluate.
I have been careful not to state that so directly to this point because, the more spiritually mature one becomes, the more aware we are of the need for continued maturity. Our distance from measuring up the the full standard of Christ becomes clearer to us, if not to others.
So, none of us are perfect but all qualify by the biblical standards. And we know that we will give an account to the Lord.
I believe I am done discussing this thread though. I thought this was a dialogue, not an argument. I can make time for the former, but I have better things to do than the latter.
John A
Thanks for the conversation.
Mal 3:16
Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another:
and the LORD hearkened, and heard it,
and a book of remembrance was written before him
for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.
Be blessed and be a blessing…
John A,
Sorry for the delay in responding to your comments. I would like to first comment to A. Amos Love’s posts referencing the exhanges that you and he have had. He seems to be concerned about the same thing that I am- that somewhere in the mix the‘leaders’ becomes ‘LEADER’. The leader then is given the title of Pastor and so now we have a leader called ‘the Pastor’ and a group of rubberstampers called an Eldership or a Board. Most of the denominational systems that I am aware of maintain this type of system.
Our own eldership operates very much like you have described with the additional balancing element being that our decisions are by full consensus. This means that one person can hold a decision on an issue. This is drawn from the picture of a fully functioning leadership that is pictured in Acts 15 where conclusions are drawn and decisions are made with the consent and agreement of the body of Apostles and Elders (see 15:6 and 22). On the way to their decision Peter made his own decision known –vs 19- and communicated it to the body. Verse 22 reveals consent of the whole church along with the leaders which indicates that the congregation at Jerusalem were participants in a watershed decision that preserved the unity of the Gospel between the Jews and the Gentiles. It is important to note that the final decision was not Peters. That might benefit the claims of the modern Roman Church. The word ‘Pastor’ is absent from this passage which for me and you might seem contextually appropriate but for those who regard THE PASTOR (in the singular) as the leader of the church it is a point to ponder and a warning.
If Elders have been selected by carefully observing God’s clear instructions in the local congregation consensus becomes a blessing. If we do not observe God’s instructions and we lay hands on a man prematurely then consensus can be a source of suffering. I suspect because of historic disobedience in the realm of Elder selection by common assent (but not God’s assent) people have accepted one man rule as a way to break the logjam of a contrary elder- so one form of disobedience i.e. the improper selection of Elders leads to another form of disobedience, the modern conception of a Pastor as one man who superintends the whole operation.
In the New Testament the word ‘leaders’ is used but always in the plural form. In first Corinthians 12 part of the giftedness of the Church are various forms of leadership- I Cor 12:27, 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers; then deeds of power, then gifts of healing, forms of assistance, forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues. One does not have to think too hard to understand why God patiently uses the title ‘Elder’ (Titus 1:5, Elders)and the role ‘Leader’ (Hebrews 13:17) in the plural form. Jesus is the Chief Shepherd. There is only one leader in the Church and He is in the head position.
Selection of leaders (plural) in God’s Church always focuses on those who are ‘full of Faith and of the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:5). God seems not to have wanted leadership to be concentrated into the hands of an individual since there are various forms of leadership. Bringing these various forms together into an eldership then looks very much like a marriage where incompletes are brought together to make a complete.
When an Eldership is composed from heaven it is far superior to any form of governance because no man has complete knowledge of the mind of God except for Jesus.
A Amos Love has raised the issue of blamelessness and I think your response to it spoke honestly and fairly to the true circumstance that we find ourselves in, in today’s church. The word blameless has a history in the Bible that traverses from Noah(Gen. 6:9) through Abraham Gen 17:1) up to the selection of elders in the modern church. Blameless is not sinless. The loving Apostle declares that if we say we do not sin we are liars. In Genesis 20 Abraham lies to King Abimelech about his wife Sarah. Abraham was not sinless yet he is called the Father of those who are saved by faith in Jesus and not in the law.
Achish, king of the Philistines praised David as blameless yet this same David marreid many wives, and had a hard time managing his family because of it, and later commited adultry and conspired to murder. I am not saying that these are acceptable qualities for an Elder but these cases illustrate that blameless seems to describle a person that others do not have something against. Nathan advised David that he was no longer blameless and David suffered for it and aceepted his suffering with a repentant heart. God said of David that he was a man after His own heart. Blameless people are those who immediately recognize their own wrong and are unreservedly urgent about making things right. When a person finds that someone has something against them they go immediately to rectify the breach. That is blameless. Blamelessness preserves Jesus’s reputation because it admits that when there is a breech it is my fault, not Jesus’s. Elders lives and conduct should not be the reason why any unbeleiver is not interested in looking into the Way the Truth and The Life. Blameless.
Steve Long
I appreiate your taking the time and your extensive explanation of Blameless. And I agree when you and John say, “Blameless is not sinless.” And “Blameless is NOT perfection.” “Blameless” means “Blameless.”
1 – Blameless – Strongs #410 anegkletos – unaccused, irreproachable, blameless.
Thayers – that cannot be called into account, unreproveable, unaccused.
Dictionary – Without fault, innocent, guiltless, not meriting censure.
1 – Blameless – Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament …
[ B-6,Adjective,G410, anenkletos ]
signifies “that which cannot be called to account” (from a, negative, n, euphonic, and enkaleo, “to call in”), i.e., with nothing laid to one’s charge (as the result of public investigation), in 1 Corinthians 1:8, RV, “unreproveable,” AV, “blameless;” in Colossians 1:22, AV and RV, “unreproveable;” in 1 Timothy 3:10; Titus 1:6-Titus 1:7, AV and RV, “blameless.” It implies not merely acquittal, but the absence of even a charge or accusation against a person. This is to be the case with elders.
And – I still have many questions about pastor/elder/overseers who do NOT qualify according to the rest of the qualifications in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9.
How do you explain away: 2 – Just? 3 – Holy? Very close to “Blameless.”
2 – Just
Strongs #1342 – dikaios {dik’-ah-yos} from 1349;
Thayers – 1) righteous, observing divine laws
1a) upright, righteous, virtuous, keeping the commands of God
1a1) of those who seem to themselves to be righteous,
who pride themselves to be righteous, whether real or imagined
1a2) innocent, faultless, guiltless
1a3) used of him whose way of thinking, feeling, and acting
is wholly conformed to the will of God…
3 – Holy
Strongs #3741 – hosios {hos’-ee-os}
Thayers – 1) undefiled by sin, free from wickedness,
religiously observing every moral obligation, pure holy, pious.
Now that’s three tough qualifications for “Elder/Overseers.”
1 – Must Be Blameless. 2 – Just. 3 – Holy. — Yes?
Isaiah 3:12
…O my people, *they which lead thee* cause thee to err,
and destroy the way of thy paths.
Isaiah 9:16
For *the leaders of this people* cause thee to err;
and they that are led of them are destroyed.
Here is a condensed list of qualificatios from 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9.
1 – “Must Be” **blameless** — unrebukeable, without fault, innocent.
2 – husband of one wife — married, male.
….. Most are very sure and accurate when it comes to gender – Yes?
….. Don’t most refer to this one when NOT qualifying female/elders?
….. Why does blameless, just and holy have to be re-defined?
3 – rules well his own house — have a family, children in subjection.
….. For if a man know not how to rule his own house,
….. how shall he take care of the church of God? 1 Tim 3:4-5.
……80% of spouses wish pastor/elders would choose a different profession.
……80% of pastors say pastoral ministry has negatively affected their family.
….. 77% of “Pastor/Elders” say – They do NOT have a good marriage.
….. Wow – 77% of “Pastor/Elders” – Do NOT manage well their own house.
….. Doesn’t this one qualification dis-qualify 77% of Pastor/Elder/Overseers?
….. “IF” they are honest?
4 – not greedy of filthy lucre — Not greedy for money.
5 – vigilant — NO excessive wine, calm in spirit.
6 – sober — of a sound mind, self controlled.
7 – of good behavior — modest, unassuming, reserved.
….. How many pastor/elder/overseers are modest, unassuming, reserved?
8 – no striker — NOT quarrelsome, contentious.
9 – not a brawler — abstaining from fighting.
10 – not self willed — NOT self pleasing, NOT arrogant.
11 – not soon angry — NOT prone to anger.
12 – temperate — having power over, restraining.
….. Well, Here’s five more – I do NOT qualify for.
….. There can’t be many pastor/elder/overseers left after these five. Yes?
13 – **holy — undefiled by sin, free from wickedness.
14 – **just — righteous, virtuous, innocent, faultless.
….. And their children must qualify also…
….. “having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly” Titus 1:6
15 – faithful children— believing, one who trusts in God’s promises.
16 – not accused of *riot — Strongs – *asotia — unsavedness.
….. an abandoned dissolute life, lost to principle.
17 – unruly — disobedient.
….. Do we know any Pastor/Elders – who have teenagers?
….. Do we know any teenagers – NOT accused of being “disobediant?”
….. These three have to dis-qualify a bunch of pastor/elder/overseers. Yes?
Now, that’s a tough list qualifications. Yes?
Seems to me the potential pool for pastor/elder/overseers
is becoming quite small…. Yes?
Amos, I think you have hit on something there. The pool is quite small. That is the point of careful selection. If God through the Apostle Paul tells Titus to appoint Elders in the congregations on Crete then God must know of a few good men that He expects Titus to locate and put into place. I am pretty sure God would not send him on a fools errand. When these fellows are identified (and they should be easy to identify because of the quality of their lives) appoint them as Elders (plural). If they are appointed in the singular we end up with Bishops and Cardinals and..well… modern day Pastors. Rare is not nonexistent. It is rare. What makes these men even more rare is that many do not insist on Elder oversight. They prefer a ‘Pastor’ or a Board, so men are not mentored and nurtured to grow toward the qualities that circumscribe the Office of Elder.
Not every congregation will have Elders early on but God is able to provide them if we are willing to obey Him by making use of them when He does provide them. Paul’s instruction to Titus encourages me that God does intend that oversight of a mature congregation is the responsibility of Elders.
I appreciate your effort to attach Greek definitions to words that we only see in English. They should cause us to have more respect and awe for what our Heavenly Father knows we are capable of, and He must believe that we are fully capable of attaining to these definitions. Sometimes in ‘churchiness’ we settle for goodness and not Holiness, likable and not sober. God is looking for a certain type of man to shepherd His flock.
I am curious because you missed one issue though. Do you think that ‘husband of one wife’ means just one, or one at a time (divorce), and if an Elder’s wife dies so he is no longer a husband what then? Could an Elder remarry if his wife died?
The reason why I suggest these things is that there may be a point at which our scrutiny becomes a legal standard and not a spiritually derived standard. With the aid of the Holy Spirit of God do you think that one might qualify as an Elder and yet have spiritual room to grow?
Steve Long
“God must know of a few good men that He expects Titus to locate and put into place. I am pretty sure God would not send him on a fools errand.”
You’re “pretty sure” – But NOT certain?
And it’s NOT a fools errand *IF* none qualify. Titus 1:6 *IF* any be blameless.
Did Timothy or Titus ever appoint elder/overseers?
After this list of tuff qualifications are given by Paul?
I see another possibility.
Seems God test’s and proves “His People” in the scriptures – A Lot – Yes?
Could the list of qualifications be *a Test* of someone’s “Integrity?”
Why would someone assume the role of “Pastor/Elder/Overseer?”
If they know they do NOT qualify to be a “ Pastor/Elder/Overseer?”
Wouldn’t that be a lack of “Integrity?”
And – You have to admit – yesterday and today – Most do NOT qualify. Yes?
P/E/O’s – Exercising Authority like the Gentiles. A No, No. Mk 10:42.
P/E/O’s – Lording it over God’s heritage. A No, No. 1 Pet 5:3.
What would you call someone, who called them self an “Pastor/Overseer”
and knew they did NOT qualify to be a “Pastor/Overseer?”
What would you call a medical Doctor, who said they were a Doctor,
and who knew they did NOT qualify to be a Doctor?
What would you call a Lawyer, who said they were a Lawyer
and who knew they did NOT qualify to be a Lawyer?
Would you recommend a Doctor or a Lawyer to a friend
If you knew they did NOT qualify to be a Doctor or a Lawyer?
Wouldn’t it be dangerous and expensive to trust and depend on
a Doctor and a Lawyer who does NOT qualify?
In my experience…
It is dangerous and expensive to trust and depend on
“Pastor/Overseers” who do NOT qualify.
Maybe that’s why “The Religious System” of today
is in such a mess – “Pastor/Overseers” – who do NOT qualify
“Spiritually Abusing” God’s ekklesia, God’s sheep.
The Bible warns us, a lot…
About False apostles, many False prophets,
False teachers, False Christ’s’, False anointed one’s, etc..
To trust No man. To not trust in princes.
Let no man deceive you. And the list goes on…
And lot’s of scriptures about trusting Jesus.
No thanks – Never met a “Pastor/Overseer” who meets the qualifications.
Steve Long
I’ve also had the privilege of ministering, and working with, those who have been – Burnt – Burntout – Kicked out – and – Crawled out – of Todays “Abusive Religious System.” Both those who thought they were “Leaders” – Ex-Pastors – and those who thought they were being “Led” – Pew sitters – by qualified elder/overseers.
When they’re looking for a place to fellowship I recommend they take their time and check out the elder/overseers according to 1 Tim 3 and Titus. I also recommend the folks to ask about this list of 7 every-day qualifications.
Observe and ask the Pastor/Elder/Overseers…
Are they living examples of…
1 – NOT lording it over “God’s heritage?” 1 Pet 5:3 KJV
2 – Lowliness of mind? Phil 2:3 KJV
3 – Esteeming others “better” than themselves? Phil 2:3 KJV
4 – Submitting “One to Another?” Eph 5:21 KJV, 1 Pet 5:5 KJV
5 – Prefering others before themselves? Rom 12:10 KJV
6 – Being clothed with humility? 1 Pet 5:5 KJV
7 – NOT “exercising authority” like the Gentiles?” Mark 10:42-43.
Could you imagine mentioning these verses to a pastor/elder/overseer today. And saying to them….
If it’s okay with you? I’d like to get to “Know You” a little better to see *IF* you qualify as pastor/elder/overseer according to 1 Tim 3 and Titus as it says in 1 Thess 5:12 KJV.
If it’s okay with you? I’d like to see if you are actually “watching over my soul,” in good times and in bad times.
Before I “Obey” and “Submit” – to you? As it says your supposed to be doing in Heb 13:17? That might take some time – I’m NOT sure how long – I want to see how you react if I ever dis-agree with you. And – Can we “Admonish one another?” – Or do you get the last word?
If it’s okay with you? I’ll also need some time to see if you match up with this list of 7 every-day qualifications I have for who I’m to consider a qualified pastor/elder/overseer. Seminaries today do NOT seem to prepare candidates along this line. Submitting one to another. Lowliness of mind.
You see, God has asked me to “Follow Jesus” and to “Trust Him.” And, I am warned in the Bible, again and again, NOT to “Trust” in man. Because the Bible says, if I trust in a “Mere Fallible Human” I will most likely be cursed.
Jer 17:5
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man,
and maketh flesh his arm,
Ps 118:8-19
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.
Psalm 40:4
Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust,
and respecteth not “the proud,” nor such as “turn aside to lies.”
Yeah – If you want to have some fun – And over-turn a few tables…
Try talking this way to a few “elder/leader/overseers” and see what happens.
And – If – these so-called Pastor/Elders do NOT like you asking questions…
Run, Run for your life.