Baptist No longer a Church Democracy, We Are Now a Theocracy?

So let's examine actual accounts of early non-American Baptists:

Anyone ever hear of John Gill?

Here's how he became pastor:

"On 13th September, 1719, by a majority vote in churchmeeting it was decided to invite John Gill to become pastor. This majority, however, was obtained by counting the votes of the women members and it was argued, by those who opposed Gill's appointment, that a majority of the men were against the decision."

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/bq/22-2_072.pdf

 

There you go, bringing actual church history into the conversation.
Just read it to my wife and she thought it was great!

 

Prominent English Baptist Pastor Benjamin Keach (late 1600s):

"Every member hath his peculiar vote in choosing of their officers; after election, they are to be ordained, by prayer, and laying on of hands"

http://books.google.com/books?id=oyVMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA713

 

Salty, here is the 1847 German Baptist Confession from the Reformed Reader site, GoogleTranslated to English.

 

OK, but OP is about Baptist churches.

IFCA Church Government:

http://ifcamedia.org/fireinmybones/?p=125

 

1 Tim 5:17, "The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching."

Sometimes false teachers need to be dealt with for the protection of the flock. False teachers are not just those who proclaim false doctrine intellectually but it also includes the way one lives.

 

A pastor I know was pastoring a Baptist church and as so many they nominated deacons from the floor. After nominating some prospective deacons from the floor the people were ready to vote. Before the vote a lady approached the pastor and suggested that they have a break first. So they had a break and the lady told the pastor that two of the prospective deacons were having a homosexual relationship. One of those men was her husband.

 

My Submission to God does not include the same kind of submission to a pastor for one very important reason. That kind of power tends to corrupt. Just look at the RCC. The Pope claims to be in stead of Jesus Christ. George Bush said talking to the Pope was talking to God. Give me a break. Theocracy is something I would be weary of. If the pastor decideds to include comtemplative prayer in what he teaches or yoga or anyother far eastern meditation and you are commited to following then you'll be pulled down with him. I for one just cannot place that much trust in an ordinary man who would claim to be your god. Which could be his ultimate goal.
MB

 

In my usual mugwump view, I see the need of elements of both sides of the issue.

Officially I endorse the "democratic rule" following after the traditional Regular Baptist history (although one local church of which I was a member was not "regular" Baptist (was an non-liberal ABC church) but followed after "regular" Baptist distinctives and polity.

Possibly I am over reacting to my Catholic upbring of a throughly hierarchical structure.

On the other hand there is indeed IMO, a strong need for accountability in our local churches - both of the membership and leadership seeing as sin abounds everywhere including the churches as the day of grace seems about to end.

After almost 50 years of walking (sometimes floundering, stumbling) in the Lord, I strongly prefer and am attracted to the regular Baptist distinctives and polity.

I would however attend (without official membership) a local church where the gospel is preached if nothing else were available.

Acts 17:11 models the Thessalonians as "noble" in that they searched the scriptures to see if what the apostle Paul was preaching aligned with the scripture. That along with Romans 14:12 (So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God) from my point of view makes the case for Individual Soul Liberty.

However, a pastor/teacher/elder is a special case in scripture (Hebrews 7:7;17).

My bent is toward those who "rule over" us and willingly/voluntarily put myself under their rule (obviously retaining my liberty in and accountability to Christ as the darkness of the day demands it IMO).

Personally I avoid getting involved with meetings or group discussion concerning issues about those who "rule over us" unless they are present and not even then if I discern for instance that it is unwarranted.

Those few times I did this I let the pastor involved know of the content of the discussion.

Yes, we all know that leadership can go astray in "doctrine" or "deed"
but David's words are noteworthy:

1 Samuel 24

5 And it came to pass afterward, that David's heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul's skirt.
6 And he said unto his men, The LORD forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the LORD'S anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD.​

So, yes I treat the church as a democracy (and vote, etc) but hold myself accountable to the leadership balanced by the the element of Romans 14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.​

Accountability grates against my flesh but that is the nature of flesh. ​

HankD​

 

What I see after reading these 7 pages of threads is that there are a LOT of church people who simply will not follow the biblical mandate to repect those whom God has put in positions of authority over them -- including, by the way, God.

It would seem that people who are responding could never see that godly elders might have their best interest at heart and might be led of God to edify and teach them so as to become effective ministers of reconciliation.

This lack of trust is built on something other than the Word of God or the Holy Spirit who is to lead and guide us into all truth from that Word. A lack of trust of this nature is built from the accuser of the brethren.

 

God is the head and that is not determnined by what I think (Phil. 2:9-11, "For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.")

What you say needs to be enocuraged by Acts 17:11 "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."

 

No, the lack of trust is two fold: 1. the clear teaching of scripture that we are to obey God, not men. 2. the presence of false prophets among us.


But then, many of us have no problem following those leaders that stick to what the Bible says rather than wanting us to see them, rather than Jesus, as the head of the local church.

As soon as someone approaches with the attitude of "I am in authority" you know they are not. Jesus said that the one who would be greatest would be the servant of all.

You know true leadership when you encounter it. It never claims the privileges Christ reserved for Himself.

 

Should it surprise us that 70-80 percent of the churches in America are plateaued or dying with people who want what they want--babies? In recent years I seen and heard so much baloney in churches that are dying and the answers they have being so self focused that I told my wife when the next time a church calls me to help them for her to ask me if I am crazy. The majority say they want to grow but in reality they are just plain lazy and are unwilling to do ministry. About one year ago I told a congregation where I was the interim at that if they decided to argue and fight that I would leave. The leadership decided they would argue about how to save money instead of reaching people. This went on for a few months without any ministry being done by those who wanted to save money. So I gave my resignation and 75% of the people left the next week. I told the troublemakers that I decided to deliver them over to Satan for their destruction. They voiced their disagreement and disapproval of what I told them but three months later the church disbanded and the property and building were put up for sale. The church just accepted an offer. The people who wanted to save money were left and they decided to get a preacher just like them who thought if he would preach the word then somehow people would come flying in the door. The group that was left is going around visiting churches as a group and they have not found a church for themselves who will accommodate their special needs. When they approached a pastor about keeping their group together in a small group he told them that they would be treated just like anyone else and not as a mini-church. They decided to move on as a group. Two of the leaders in that group have told me that the previous pastor and interim leader did not know how to pastor!!!! The pastors in the city have told me quite the opposite.

If a church asks me to help them and they want to argue and fight then they do not need me. They need to get on the boxing gloves so they can be a spectacle for everyone to see.