A Baptist weakness?

Maybe I mistyped, Jim, but there are plenty of pastors in WV that don't have degrees... "recognizing" is merely a formality in which the State convention can say it stands behind the pastor. I don't have a BS or BA.. but I have graduated from our convention's School of Christian Studies.. (A 3 yr program)... and I have had my profile circulated throughout the state before I graduated. So While it is preferred, it is not mandatory.

 

Maybe it is just me, but I always thought that 1 Timothy 3 pretty much covered the qualifications. While I am not against ordination, one must remember it is a designation made by men for men.

 

1 Tim 3 was fine for those local churches in that culture. We are in the 21st century. Whilst the personal standards do not change, there are certain aspects of ministry that have changed to meet the times......In my opinion anyway.

Cheers.

Jim

 

This is the way most of the Free Will and General Baptists operate in the US and Canada as well. To the extent that churches defer to the Association, they have a form of connectional polity. I am one of those who, having experienced that system, will take the local autonomy system despite it's potential failings. But that's not to say there aren't benefits. It's just been my personal experience that the Association can become just as much a center of abuse as can the local church -- perhaps more so.

Blessings,

JDale

 

Read Rev. 2 & 3. To assume that a church got a bad pastor because they did not wait on God is to assume that it a church's fault. Even Jesus' disciples did not know who the traitor was among them.

 

Talking to their neighbors and friends tells a lot about the person in real life and the testimony the person has with them.

Talking with former employers tells a lot about their attitude at work.

 

You can get a good picture of someone by talking to their coworkers and friends. People usually act as they really are at work and around friends. The worst place to get an idea of someone's character would be from those that only see them at church once or twice a week.

 

Isn't this a strength? Baptists don't have to take someone else's word for it. Each church should examine a man before they call them. Don't take another church's word for it.

One of the problems is that churches are not raising up their own pastors. They go to other churches to get them. So they haven't seen their lives, their doctrine and their practice, their family, their ministry. All they know is what someone else says.

Ideally, the next pastor should already be a part of the church.

 

Very good point.

 

How many times does that happen?

 

Ordination is the way that a church carries out the examination of a man to see if he is qualified. It is not extra-biblical. It is a part of the process.

 

I see nothing to indicate that an ordination ever enhanced any ministry. I see no evidence in scripture of how it is practiced today.

 

Of course, ordination doesn't guarantee or enhance ministry. But ordination is a process by which a church can examine a person's life, beliefs and idea of ministry.

Acts 13 talks about the believers fasting and praying and then laying hands on Paul and Barnabas. 1 Timothy talks about not laying hands on a person suddenly. The Bible gives standards for elders and deacons. So there is obviously an investigation of a person's life before they are ordained to ministry.

 

It would probably happen more if Churches were operating Biblically...

 

Agreed Tom...

 

So? That's probably more of an issue with you than it is with the practice of ordination. Baptists have historically practiced this.

The bottom line is that a man is to be examined for his fitness for ministry, and that is called ordination. A church ordains a man, having tested his doctrine and his character. The Bible is clear about this. Call it what you want; the practice is biblical.

 

Not all Baptists did. Spurgeon was not ordained and nothing prevented him from doing ministry. I wonder how many of the liberals he stood against were ordained?

The Bible says that the man is to be tested but I am unable to find any pastor or preacher who was "ordained" in the NT. I do see a lot of it among priests in the OT. When was the last time you attended an ordination and the person was asked about the disciples he made? Isn't that the proof of his leadership in ministry?

I believe that the practice of ordination in America stems from a RCC background not because the practice is a proof of one's ministry.

 

Shouldn't that be proven ministry and not just an idea? Making disciples is proven leadership not just an idea. Why should a man who has never made any disciples be called upon to lead a church in making disciples?

 

So if ordination was in the OT, how can it stem from the RCC?

I have been on ordination councils that ask precisely those kinds of questions. We examine what someone believes and his practice. We ordain people we have seen "in action" so their lives are a known quantity.

Obviously, ordination doesn't guarantee anyone's future ministry or faithfulness any more than a marriage ceremony guarantees future faithfulness.

Maybe you don't see it in the Bible. I do and have quoted some passages.