A Baptist weakness?

You seem to be confusing issues here. Ordination is not about "doing ministry." All believers should do ministry. You don't have to be ordained for that. It is about verifying a man's fitness for the office of elder in the local church. A church has a duty to examine a man.

Why?

You able to find any who were not? Of course not. But the Bible clearly testifies to the need for a church to determine a man's fitness for ministry.

By the time a church puts a man forward for ordination, they should already know this. Man, you must hang around some awfully deficient churches.

So? Your belief is irrelevant. Ordination has long been practiced as a biblical examination and confirmation of a man's fitness for ministry.

 

Priests

Glad to hear that the council asked the person about how they made disciples and that they took a look at their proven ministry. When I was ordained that was never among the questions and I have not heard those questions asked to anyone else. I have only been asked once about the disciples I made and it was in a missions examination for planting churches.

I agree, but good preparation does help a lot. What is proven in the past is a good indicator of what lies ahead in the future.

 

A man is not fit to lead a church until he has proven himself in smaller things such as proven leadership in making disciples. Leading is much more than just intellectual doctrine but practical leadership in application of that doctrine. It is the use of wisdom and knowledge not just knowledge only.

Deacons are to be tested. So why should prospective pastors not be tested first. In the early church didn't the pastors and deacons come from the church body. If so then they were already proven in terms of leadership. Imagine what it would be like if every pastors came from the church body they are pastoring. I know one church that has had that practice since it began and it has always had great leadership. Men are constantly being trained in ministry. The older teach the younger. It is a way of life for them.

Compare the ordained, against Spurgeon who was not. Ordination did absolutely nothing. What can man do that God has not already done? I would much rather be ordained by God rather than men. I am sure you have seen men who were ordained by men but not God.

That should be done in advance of the consideration as a pastor.

2/3 of the churches in America are dead or dying. So the likelihood of one being deficient is great. I do hang around some great friends who are making disciples.

I do not believe for one second that a group of men can thoroughly examine a man in a few minutes of intellectual examination. Proof takes time and is not easily done in one or two years. Seminaries are turning out men who have never discipled anyone leading the men to believe they are trained to start doing ministry. Pastoring is leading a church in ministry. That ius far more extensive then leading one or a few in making disciples.

Just because someone stands and gives a good sermon with great passion does not mean he is fit to lead a church. I have seen high schol students lead people to Christ and make disciples but not prepared to lead a chruch.

"If Henry Ford were living today would he be happier with one good running Ford or a thousand in the junk yard."

Pastors of churches have a task that is far more extensive and requires more preparation than just making disciples in a community or at work. They are leading a church not just a small group people. If a pastor has not made disciples then how can he lead a chruch to make disciples? If he has not made any disciples then he is not equipped to lead a church.

 

Is anyone here disputing that?

Again, is anyone here disputing that?

Exactly my point. That’s what ordination is … the testing of a man to see if he is qualified for ministry.

You are the second person here to suggest that. I already did.

Yes, but look at the number of men who are false teachers. They should have been examined by qualified men, and told to stay out of the ministry.

Confirm to the church body that a man has character and doctrinal knowledge to lead the body. How else will you know if you won’t examine him?

I have never seen God ordain anyone. He appointed the local church to examine a man.

Um, that’s what’s ordination is.

Who has suggested such? Ordination takes much longer than a few minutes. An adequate doctrinal examination takes three to four hours.

And what do you think is needed to start doing ministry? I think salvation and learning are. You seem to think more is. Again, you are confusing doing ministry with pasturing. They are not the same.

Again, utterly irrelevant. No one here has suggested such.

Given Ford’s mentality, probably 1000 in a junk yard because that is how he made money. You can’t make money selling one car no matter how long it runs. You need to sell lots, and you need them to stop running so you can sell more.

You don’t think very theologically and biblically with stuff like that. How in the world can you compare pasturing a church to a car manufacturer?

Again, I don’t think anyone here has suggested otherwise.

As often, your comments are directed at inane nuances that miss the actual point of the Bible and the discussion,.

Let me ask you: Do you believe a man should be examined for fitness for ministry in areas of character, doctrine, and ministry competence?

If you do, then you agree with the idea of ordination. If you don’t, then you are unbiblical.

 

I would also contend that the reverse is true in that qualified men should be told to avoid certain churches until they are humbled by God and are ready to grow spiritually. The question is: "Who is qualified?" I would contend that who are qualified are only those who have observed the person's life over a period of years and knows the person has demonstrated godly leadership in making disciples. If he has not demonstrated leadership in making disciples then how can he train others to do the same? A group of men just asking doctrinal questions cannot attest to that part of a person's life.

He can be a good liar and tell you what you want to hear but a man who has been doing ministry for at least a few years and making disciples will have disciples who speak for themselves. Too many I knew in seminary pushed to get "ordained" because churches saw it as favorable.

Many a man has been approved by men but not by God. God humbles and lifts up people. A man's ministry will be confirmed in the disciples he makes. If he is a false teacher then he will makes disciples who follow him and not Christ.

A true examination takes a few years at least.

That is my point. Men must be proven in their leadership by the disciples they make before leading a church. Many a man has gotten good grades in seminary and never made disciples but pastors a church today. Many professors have never made disciples but have just done church.They may have taught Sunday School and led Bible studies but have never made disciples.

Toyota did not become a major car manufacturer by making junk at a time when people wanted value. The church has had the same mentality you suggest for too long by implementing the latest fad program started by the latest guru that comes along each year. The program includes a conference, a book, and video making great claims of working. Then in another year comes along another "great" program. Jesus taught how leaders are recognized and that does not happen with a group of men just asking questions. Proven leadership is not demonstarted through answering questions.

A few years ago a police officer came by my home to ask me about one of my neighbors because my neighbor had applied to the police department. Years ago the FBI called me about a former roommate opf mine. He had not put me down as a reference. The FBI asked me if I knew others who knew the same person.

The point is not just quantity in an assembly but the quality of discipleship. Quality cars last and junk does not. New Christians who are discipled tend to make beter church members and are capable of leading others. It teaches them that following Christ is much more than just another Bible study.

Yes, but I would go further than that because so much is a stake. It is a work that must honor God. A man must be proven in terms of all those areas and that cannot happen in a 3 or 4 hour meeting.

Man's standard of ordination has not come close and never will come close to the standard that God has on my own life.

 

What do you mean? Shouldn't a man called to the pastorate already be humbled and ready to grow?

Typically, the ordination council is there to examine his doctrine. The church body is to examine his life.

But never has a man been approved by God who was not also approved by a godly congregation.

Again, you seem totally unfamiliar with the process. A local body, having observed a man's life and ministry for a period of time, decides to have the man examined doctrinally for ordination. The ordination council should take 3-4 hours, and their job is to examine his doctrine to make sure he is orthodox. The ordination council does not ordain. The church does.

No one said they did.

Where did I suggest any fad program?

But being qualified to pastor is not less than being able to defend sound doctrine and refute those who contradict (Titus 1). Who cares how many disciples a man can make if he is not grounded in the word?

So?

No one disputes that. But you, for some strange reason, asked about Henry Ford's desire. I can assure you he was fine with cars in the junkyard because that was money in his pocket by the time they got there, and more money in his pocket to replace them. You asked a bad question.

Quote:
Let me ask you: Do you believe a man should be examined for fitness for ministry in areas of character, doctrine, and ministry competence?

More is at stake than assuring that a man is fit in areas of character, doctrine, and competence? What else in there?

No one suggest that they can.

I don't even know what that means but honestly it sounds pretty arrogant. Too bad God didn't bring you into the world until the 20th century. He sure could have used you to prevent the bad practice of all those who came before who thought that a man's qualifications for ministry should be examined by a local church.

But at least you are here now.

 

Much more than that. He should have already demonstrated competent leadership in making disciples in addition to doctrinal stability. Godly people can be doctrinally stable and unable to lead a church. Look at the early elders that Paul mentored. They had already met certain qualifications which allowed them to lead among the local congregation. They came out of those congregations not shipped in. So the people would have known and trusted them.

While that sounds great the majority of church members cannot answer simple doctrinal questions, few share their faith, and most have never made disciples. So how are they qualified?

Where does that place Paul and Jesus disciples?

When most church members are not and have ever made disciples, how are they qualified? Most people go by what they are taught and know, not by what they do not know. Most do not have a clue how Jesus made disciples and they themselves have never made disciples. Many current pastors have not made disciples. Many seminary professors have not made disciples. Leading a Bible study does not make disciples. Preaching does not make disciples.

Who cares if a prospective pastor is sound in doctrine and cannot or has not ever made disciples? I would actually contend that he is not doctrinally sound if he has not made disciples. He does not know things God reveals to the obedient and often replaces making disciples with another Bible study.

John stated it clearly that a man has no greater joy than to know his children walk in the truth. A man can preach, lead Bible studies, and do many things but that does not compare to the joy of spiritual reproduction. If a man does not know that joy then how can he talk about something he knows nothing about.

You think it is arrogant to think that God has a higher standard on one's life than man? Think about the work of the Holy Spirit in ones life. Man can look good before other men but not God. God really knows. He sees everything.

 

Then you agree with me. What are you arguing about?

You deny that God the Spirit works through the body? I think that a key factor in NT polity. A church body should be able to tell when a man is qualified.

Isn't it obvious that we are talking about pastors in the local church and not the apostles? Why the foolish questions?

They observe the life of a man under the leadership of a pastor who teaches them. Furthermore, they are indwelled by the Spirit.

I am beginning to think that you have no idea what it means to make a disciple. You talk big but it is all pretty empty, given the stuff that you say alongside of it.

I do. Did you notice that in the NT qualification passages, "made lots of disciples" is not there? That doesn't mean he shouldn't have. It is assumed that he would. But the NT raises the bar higher than you do.,

Um, those are the tools of spiritual reproduction.

No, I think your comments sounded arrogant. I think God communicated his standard in the Scriptures and expects his church to uphold them. I don't think you get to establish a higher standard than God does. God doesn't bypass the local church when he calls a man to ministry.

 

Should is a big word. Should is rather ambiguous. God is not ambiguous in His direction and guidance.

Explain that in terms of Rev. 2 & 3.

Why present gossip and opinion like you have done here? I see nothing in scripture that says we are to engage in any such activity. In fact scripture is against that.

If you have facts then have some boldness to state it, otherwise stick to the facts, engage in the debate in an honorable manner with grace and avoid gossip.

Your statement reminds me of some of the comments I heard about a master furniture maker. He was very confident and had studied under one of the finest furniture makers in the world. Some woodworkers accused him of being arrogant. For the past 20 years he has taught students who have turned out to be some of the best in the world. Students come from around the world to study there. When I studied there I found him to be quite confident but at the same time quite humble. What I learned is that often woodworkers who were ignorant and unskilled had mistaken his confidence and boldness for arrogance.

God has been bypassing local churches for years in getting His work done.

Read Rev. 2 & 3. God is higher than any local church. You forgot that I pastored a church that had a regular practice of inviting the local Mormon bishop to come and teach. Tell me how that church was filled with the Holy Spirit and it was one that God uses?

A reading of early church history will reveal many different things among churches and church members too.

Support of a local church is quite nice but when God calls he provides. A local church may be godly and it may be pagan. No church is perfect, but God is. God may use the local church and he may not. The ultimate accountability is to God. The local church is not my Lord, Jesus is. He deserves and commands my ultimate accountability.

When Ahraham left not knowing where he was going who was he to be obedient to?

Who supported Job?

 

No to both.

Not sure what you mean here. God’s will for things is not always clear once you get outside of Scripture.

What’s the problem? These churches were a mixed bag, just like all churches are. God still commends most of them.

I didn’t do any such thing.

I stuck to the facts. The facts are what I stated, that I am beginning to think that you have no idea what it means to make a disciple. That’s a fact … I actually think that. Your comments here and in other threads over the years seem to reveal a great amount of arrogance. It reminds me of the old saying that people who do, don’t talk about it. You seem awfully constrained to keep telling people how great a disciple maker you are. I don’t know why.

Your comments remind me of some people I know. They talk a lot, and use a lot of big words, but they don’t know what they are talking about.

If we read the NT we see no justification for ministry outside the local church. God desires that Jesus be given glory in his church, not outside of it.

And you have the audacity to tell people how to make disciples? You gave a pulpit to a man who is headed for hell?

Support of a local church is necessary for obedient NT ministry.

And he says to minister in a local church because he is head of it. You can’t be obedient to Christ if you are not involved in local church ministry.

He wasn’t in the church.

Job was pretty spiritually immature, to the point that he questioned the justice of God. He also wasn’t in the church.


After reading this, I am reminded of our past conversations where you revealed your disdain for the local church which is God's plan for ministry in this age. It was distressing then that someone who claims to be making disciples has no greater grasp on what it means to be a disciple than you do.



As I said, it is unfortunate you weren't around when God created the church 2000 years ago. With your advice, surely he would have done it differently. As it is, he ordained the church. I will stick with him.

 

Then Abraham was blind and God gives double minded directions for our lives? .

In Rev. 2 & 3 which ones are those.

You stuck to opinions and gossip.

The fact is that your statement is nothing more than gossip and opinion. "Beginning to think" is a statement of opinion and gossip. Apparently you are so involved in gossip that you really do not know what it is and are unable to see it in your own life.

I gave you my statement on what I believe a disciple is earlier. Did you not read it? A disciple is one who follows Jesus. Anything wrong with that?

You should spend more time studying your Bible than thinking about your erroneous judgments and opinions. Proverbs 29:20 teaches that there is more hope for a fool than you.

Could you quote me once where I ever said I was great. If you did read what I wrote awhile back I did address that issue. If you were making disciples then you would understand 3 Jn 4. Passionless people do not understand 3 Jn 4. If it were not necessary to say and do then why did Jesus say and do Mt. 28:19,20.

Just imagine Jesus doing evangelism and making disciples without talking about it!

Your comments remind me of a lot of things that are not edifying.

Are you a Catholic? The RCC would agree with you. You should be ashamed to be a Baptist then because your Baptist church is disobedient and without justification. The largest mission organization in America that plants churches is not supported by any convention, denomination, or any local church.

Could you quote me where I said this?

What local church (within a one day walk) was William Carey involved in for the first 11 years as a missionary?

It is unfortunate that your theology is so mixed up. People make up the church. Did you not say earlier that God never ordained anyone?

If you were to read your Bible you would learn that God gave the advice about 2000 years ago. What you would also realize as you study the historical context of the gospels that when Jesus made disciples you would clearly see what He did and how different it was from what is being done in so many churches today.
=========================
So now that we can learn from you I will give you the opportunity to tell us what you are doing to make disciples. Give us practical examples of what you are doing to make disciples. Then tell us what they are doing now to make disciples.

 

No. Abraham lived in an age of special revelation. You and I do not. God does not give infallible revelation outside his word in this age.

All except Laodicea receive commendation from the Lord on some point.

No I didn't. The fact is that I think a certain thing. It may not be factually true thought, but that is a different issue. My statement was a statement of fact. It is factual that I think what I said.

No it is a statement of fact. What I said was, "in fact" what I was beginning to think. Please think about what a fact is. I may be wrong.

No, that's not true. It is not gossip when I say what I think. That is factual. But I sense that is a distinction that will be lost on you.

No, but you seem to separate that from the NT teaching about what it means to follow Jesus.

So you think I am lower than a fool? And you accuse me of gossip?

I think the full spectrum of your comments here over the years have made it pretty clear that you think you are among the few actually making disciples.

I don't follow this at all.

No.

No they wouldn't. I am a Baptist. They don't agree with Baptists.

How so?

You said you invited a Mormon bishop to teach at your church. (BTW, "pulpit" is a metaphor for teaching platform.)

If I recall correctly, he was trying to plant churches, was he not? But even at that, the fact that one is not biblically involved in a local church doesn't mean that he shouldn't be.

How so?

Yes, but my comment was that God ordained the church as an organism in this age.

Yes. We were talking about ordaining men to gospel ministry.

Please keep straight on what we are talking about. Don't jerk my words out of context.

I completely agree with this. You will also see how different it is from what you are talking about. The NT is a story about church planting and church building. Disciples were made through churches and incorporated into churches. They were not made apart from churches.

I spend time studying to preach and teach. I spend time with people one on one teaching them the Scriptures and how to live them and apply them to their lives. I teach regularly about how to get involved in other people's lives and see the fruit of that as they actually go and do it. It is great. It thrills me to see. I just don't feel compelled to talk about it all the time. I don't do it as well as I should. I hope to keep learning though.

 

How does that make God different then than He is now? Isn't he the same today. He does not change. The problem is that your theology smacks of many parallels to Mormonism. Those who support Mormonism use that same argument to support their doctrine and against Christianity in regards to progressive revelation. I take the position that whatever name you give it that God is still the same today as He was then and chose to deal with and reach Abraham with what he could identify with.

Gossip is things that are not edifying and may or may not be true.

Just because we think about something, it may or may not be correct and it may or may not be edifying. If it tears down a person it is gossip whether it is true or not.

I know many who are making disciples whom I associate with. The thing that bothers me a lot is when anyone peddles Bible studies and various other gimmicks as discipleship when they are not and never will be. We have people in churches who have Bible knowledge but are afraid to share their faith and do not know how to make disciples. They have been fearful for so long that they have been paralyzed into trusting themselves instead of God. They have not experienced the joy of living for Christ by trusting Him. My heart is in the church. That is the reason why I am there. I also recognize that God uses whomever He wishes where ever He wishes. As a child I had gone to church for 16 years and was turned off by the religious nonsense I saw. One of my best friends in high school was the son of a Baptist pastor. I was never invited to any church function by any Christian I knew in high school. When I began to tell some of them that I had become a Christian the look on their face spoke of shame. It is our responsibility to equip people to disciple others and to be effective wherever they live and work. Why would people share something when they have nothing to share or are not convinced of the truth of it.

One of the men I know was a diver and worked on an oil rig in the ocean. He would spend two weeks at a time on that rig. He told of how he complained to God about the lack of fellowship until he started a Bible study among the men and then began discipling them. Isn't that what discipleship is all about? No pastor or local church would ever be present on that rig.

Your comment earlier was about an old saying much like and old wives tale and is not in accordance with scripture nor what Jesus did and said.

A review of Baptist history will show that the first Baptist church was not supported by any other local Baptist church because there were not any. The first Baptists left other churches.

If I ever wrote such a thing then it was wrong. It was me who took a stance against such a practice of about 25 years and the deacons did not like it claiming that the bishop was a Christian. It was like hell came loose. Satan had come in the door of that church. There were past pastors who knew about the practice and did nothing. When I asked other Baptist pastors in our local convention to stand with me I got all kinds of excuses. It was one local pentecostal pastor who stood with me. When I pastored in TX as a church we stood against a teacher that was requiring a text to be read that used very vulgar language. When I asked a number of pastors to stand with us not one would. You might say that is unsual and it may have been but I tend to think that it is typical among pastors and church people. If the pastors of churches wil not lead then how can we expect the congregation to follow?

Think about what might happen if in America you could no longer pastor a church and it was illegal to meet with a group of Christians then what would you do?

I would contend that you would change the focus of your ministry and would become much more focused on what really matters. When I listen to a friend of mine who was a missionary in a former communist country for about 25 years it gets my attention about what really matters. When I consider Daniel and when he was told not to pray I see a man who was focused on God and not much of anything else.

When I listened to Rev. Wurmbrand years ago and he told of the numbers of pastors who left the faith under threat it grabs my attention and challenges me to reach people in a thorough way so that they ccan reproduce themselves.

When I pastored any other thing I did was pale compared to making disciples. I preached at a large youth conference and when I came back to meet with those I met with each week the cinference was pale in comparison to what I saw in the people I met with and where they were going. They were involved in ministry and reaching other people where I would never be welcomed or ever go. I could not preach enough sermons in my lifetime that would equal what those people were doing. When I think of the last group of college students I met with and consider the fact that each one of them were attending church and some were doing something in church but not one of them were reaching people. At the end of two years everyone of them were doing some kind of ministry to reach people. That is when it gets exciting. No amount of preaching will ever train them to do ministry. It is one person reaching another that trains people and enables them to do reach people where ever they are.

When I see college students in my office who have been to church and know almost nothing about the Bible it grabs my heart. I think of how much time has been wasted in church coming and going while the person was never discipled.

Two weeks ago I met with a young college student that went away to a college out of state and he went down the road from faith in Christ to atheism and is now on his way back to faith in Christ. I met with him for two hours discussing where he was misinformed and how to correctly interpret scripture. I know he heard good preaching every week in the church he attended. I also know that he really did not know his Bible well enough to deal with the challenges he faced. People who know their Bible will not as likely be led astray by the misinformed. I believe we are in a serious struggle in America today for the souls of men and women. I think it is far worse then we think. It is up to the Christians everywhere to teach men and women to be prepared for ministry and know their Bible. I believe we have spent too much time in our churches trying to get people in the door when we should be going to them. I believe there is a deep urgency in this matter today that the church can take care of if it will. If we do not then we will become like churches in those countries which have stood by and watched the world come in. The world will be the world but the church must be the church. This is not a time to be silent and it is not a time to be complacent.

So if you think I am loud and full of passion about discipleship, you bet I am. There is a lot at stake for everyone today if we do not make disciples. Discipleship works most everywhere in every country at any time.

I am with you in that I need to learn more. It seems the more I know, the less I know. My ministry has not been the result of how good I am but about how big God is. If it were up to me it would be a complete failure and it would be as a pile of manure. My ministry is the result of one man reaching me and when it hit me of how gracious God had been to me and how my life changed as a result then I realized that not much else mattered. When I began to think about what lasts for eternity I came to the conclusion of two things.

 

Yes, but he doesn’t always work the same. The Bible is filled with testimony to the ways of God’s work in human history and it tells us that it is not always the same.

That’s a first. No one has ever accused me of being parallel to Mormonism before. I am not sure you understand the argument I am making about revelation. The point is that special revelation has ceased. There is no more inerrant, infallible revelation coming after the Bible in this age.

Then you agree with me.

Yes. Of course.

You said You forgot that I pastored a church that had a regular practice of inviting the local Mormon bishop to come and teach.

I think I would do what people all over the world do … They pastor a church and meet with Christians.

Yep, and I think it takes place best in the local church.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that you are not even remotely close to Mormonism. The problem is that I see many of the same arguments used by Mormons against the view on prophecy held by Christians. I see God as always being the same and He also works with people in ways they understand. In that way I do not call it special revelation but God being consistent in who He is.

If we say the way God dealt with Abraham is a case of special revelation what is to prevent that from extending itself onto the present time.

I see God as consistent from the beginning and He has never changed.

I agree 100%. However I am sure you have met pastors who are control freaks who want to control everything possible and discipleship by people in the congregation scares them. Nobody can control everything and must give people freedom if they expect the people to make disciples.

 

No doubt these pastors you met were all in the SBC, isn't that right?

 

There was a thread recently that asked why there are so many denominations today from the unified church in Acts. This thread gives the answer in action. Here we have basically two people who are Baptists and probably have more theologcial training at college and seminaries than 99.9% of anyone. Yet, here is a back and forth that would confuse the most learned layman and most pastors. When one Baptist pastor tells another Baptist pastor the quote above, something is amiss. As another thread has recently addressed, how do I become a Baptist, how could anyone read this exchange and have any idea what we believe?

 

Let it be a real lesson to you. If you think that is confusing then you would get a real shock if you were to read some of the old Baptist sermons. I assume you have never done that. If you cannot function among those who may disagree then do not join any church because you will ruin it.

If you think it strange that two people would disagree then you have never led a Bible study in the church. There are many more strange things in churches that come in like octopus arms from various sources.

It shows the difference between one who interprets scripture through the filter of progressive dispensationalism and the other through the filter of the historical context of the Bible.

 

Didn't you know that Jesus and Moses were SBC, but when Moses killed a man he became C of C? That is a type of what was to come when some FBC's became C of C.

 

No, sorry, to say a fellow pastor that his theology is so mixed up, is way over and above being confused, especially when the two come from the same faith. Your whole post is nothing but baloney. Yes, I have read some old Baptist sermons, and they make a lot more sense than your posts in this thread. I function fine at a church. It is one thing to disagree, it is quite another to tell someone their theology is mixed up, especially to a fellow pastor. I have been at the same church for 32 years, and do not think I have done one thing to ruin it. Hopefully, the Lord has used me as an asset to it. I have lead Bible studies and taught Sunday School, and without the kind of name calling and condoscending language you use.

There is nothing wrong with having an exchange of ideas about an unchanging God, or dispensationalism, but as is so common with the names in your posts, I do believe you reached a new low in this thread calling someone a Mormon and Catholic.