Questions to ask a prospective pastor

I think where many churches are in error is coming in with a preconceived idea of who should be their pastor rather than allowing God to lead. We certainly have biblical standards for pastors, but we should not read more into them than what is there. Nor have an expectation that a pastor is more than a sinner saved by grace through faith.

I in fact was 21 when I started pastoring my first church. I was newly married, and finishing an undergraduate degree. I made a ton of mistakes, but God was faithful and blessed my three years there. I go back to that church every year to preach a revival. I have a love for that little country church that will be with me no matter where God takes me in life.

When God has led him to that flock, and that flock to him.

 

I wholly agree with what you say, yet at the same time we are required to make sure one is qualified biblically. If I come to you with a bad reputation, angry, and bitter, telling you that God has led me to your church, do you agree? Why or why not?

I feel the same about the maturity of the pastor/bishop/elder. He must meet the requirements set forth. I am simply asking do these requirements address age/maturity in any way.

 

I would say the requirements address maturity (yes) but age (no).

A pastor coming onto any field is a two way street. The pastor must be led to the church and the church to the pastor. I can see a situation where a pastor may come into a new church with some bitterness and even anger over a bad previous experience serving a church. Much like some churches I know can hold onto bitterness and even anger when a new pastor comes in because of the damage done by a previous pastor. Something I am dealing with at my current church. That to me indicates more of a valley in the personal journey of this potential pastor. In which case I would seek God in prayer concerning this candidate because my church may be the mountain top God is leading him to.

Now as far as bad reputation that tends to indicate more of a pattern of problems which certainly could be an indicator of trouble. But again the overwhelming criteria for a pastoral candidate should be the guidance of the Lord through prayer.

I do agree that the Biblical requirements for a pastor are important. However, I think many people inject personal preference into them. For instance being able to rule his own house well. This indicates a pastor must be a leader in the home. But if a pastor who is trying to be that leader goes through a period of discord in his family life, does he suddenly become unqualified to pastor? I would say no.

 

My opinion is based on what the Bible says. I don't know if God called you to that church or not. I think you have testified that, at that point in your life, you were not qualified. God apparently chose to work anyway, and that is his prerogative. But I don't think that means we should presume on God to work when he disregard his qualifications.

I agree.

In some cases, yes. Again, the Bible which is God-breathed gives us a qualifications.

I don't know that God was leading you to that church. If your marriage was as you seem to indicate, I would say God wasn't calling you because God doesn't call pastors to violate his standards.

Yes, but how is that relevant? God gives standards. Should we disregard them so God can do extraordinary things? I don't think so. God did not intend the call to the pastorate to be left up to some subjective impression. He gave clear qualifications.

Super Christians? No. But a sub-group? Absolutely. That's the point of the qualification in 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1. Not everyone is qualified to pastor. It is a sub-group that is qualified.

Sure, but so what?

I don't think anyone here has done that. I certainly haven't, though I have read everyone's comments. My point was not about being 24. It was about a second pastorate at 24. That means you have already been somewhere and left. That raises questions on several fronts. It may be fine (though you admit to some immaturity in your marriage). But it raises questions.

But more to the biblical point, do you think there is any significance to the NT focus
on elders? Why does God say "elders"? I think that perhaps has some merit.

 

Wouldn't you say it depends on what the period of discord is? If the wife leaves home for a month over it, and his children run away, isn't that an issue that disqualifies him at least temporarily?

Again, remember, my poitn has not been disagreement with a spouse, or insisting on perfect. It is rather that there are qualifications that require some measure of attainment, not merely making it a goal.

 

Many churches have at least one antagonist and keep cycling pastors. They are a reality that must be dealt with because Satan uses them. The problem is that a number of people do not recognize them as Satan's agent.

 

Wouldn't you say a wife leaving her pastor husband, and a pastor with children running away from home is a little different than just loud arguments between a husband and wife?

But where does that measure of attainment include loud arguments biblically? Who decides the specific requirements of a generalized biblical mandate? A pastor should rule his own house well. OK I'm with you on that. However, that is not a very specific statement. Do I think a pastor should be a good husband, father, and leader in the home? Yes of course. But do you define that by the number of arguments he and his wife have? He has ups and down in his marriage the same as anyone else. That doesn't make him a bad leader, it makes him human.

So in your opinion God blessed my disobedience in taking a church I was not qualified for? That's an interesting notion! God doesn't bless disobedience. I have the fruit of seven years of ministry as a confirmation of my call there. If God had not called me to that place do you think I would have lasted seven years?

Yes but those qualifications do not stipulate that a pastor and his wife cannot have loud arguments. That is simply your interpretation of what it means to "rule his own house well."

Then show me "no loud arguments between a pastor and his wife"!

 

Little? Yes. Big difference, no. Loud arguments are indicators of selfishness, pride, lack of self-control, lack of peace, and lack of respect for another.

In the passages that describe the qualifications for pastor.

Generally, they are pretty self-evident. Ultimately, a church decides what kind of man they are willing to follow.

No, it might also make him a bad leader. Think about it: Why does someone raise their voice (assuming it is not to be heard over ambient noise)? Because they have lost control of themselves, they lack respect for the other person, they do not believe that their character and their points can win the issue and they raise their voice because they think volume will.

This is really simple.

I don't know if God blessed your disobedience or not. I don't even know if it was disobedient. All I have is the list of qualifications in Scripture and your testimony from several posts ago. My comments are based on comparing those two things. As I said, I am not sure God called you there.

Ever hear of Abraham? Balaam? Gideon? Jacob? Need I go on? At times, God works in spite of our disobedience. It is never a call to disobedience or a justification for it. Again, the Bible means something and we have to go by that.

Absolutely. I think people have lasted for years outside of God's will. And I think God may have been blessing his gospel in spite of disobedience.

Honestly, do you really think a man meets the qualifications for pastor if he has loud arguments with his wife? Please tell me you are simply playing devil's advocate here for the sake of conversation.

I have. Again, look at the qualifications. God doesn't expect his church to be dummies. He expects us to know what these things look like. Even the world gets this. Unbelievers don't like working for people who have no control over their temper. They see the problems with it. Why can't the church?

 

I guess Jesus should have calmly asked the money changers to leave the temple? Talk about losing your temper! Yet the Bible says we can be angry and sin not.

 

So you think your wife is equivalent to a merchant in the temple who is using religion as a means of gain? Wow ... Did you also get a whip out during this argument and drive her out of the house?

Somehow I doubt that you really want to lean on this story as a justification for your point.

We can be angry and sin not. But that doesn't sound like your testimony earlier. You admitted you were wrong didn't you? That your marriage was "sub-5." So why invoke Jesus? I am not following you here. The fact that Jesus had righteous anger does not mean that we do. And most marital arguments are not instances of righteous anger. They are instances of selfish pride in the context of a lack of self-control that seeks to win rather than to build up and edify the other person.

There is a fine line between righteous anger and sinful anger, and most of us are nowhere near that line.

So again, I would urge emphasis on the revealed qualifications rather than the emotionally engaging stories of people's lives.

 

A fine line between sin and righteousness? If that is the case then living for Jesus is painted with too broad of a brush.

 

Becasue you said

And that is simply not always the case. People can raise their voice in anger because they feel they are in the right and someone else is doing wrong. Which is what most arguments are based on. It does not make it a sin.

If I had could I still continue to pastor? Jesus didn't leave His ministry following the event.

 

Just viewing the title of this thread, I was hoping people would have brought up a number of questions about ministry philosophy, interaction with other philosophies that are popular.

I do understand that it is necessary to ask some intrusive questions. If I were interviewing a candidate for a position with children (by which I mean minors), I would ask them personal questions to ensure there was no hint of sexual impropriety in that area. It would not be pleasant, but better to have that out of the way than to blow it.

The same questions could be asked of anyone else interviewing for a ministry position.

But this list of questions is overly intrusive and, in some cases, pretty bizarre and unnecessary.

Okay.

I don't think that word is spelled with an asterisk, but I'm not sure. I don't think it's a necessary question, anyhow.

Do a background check. It's a lot more accurate.

Absolutely inappropriate. There are a number of valid reasons why people don't have children and they are between husband and wife.

As if having children made you a better pastor? I can't imagine why this would be necessary.

Don't forget many good and godly parents have rebellious children. Also remember that sometimes the worst kind of rebellion lies under the surface.

Another inappropriate question. Asking their view of human life would be better.

Hmmm...

Sweet mercy.

Is this supposed to mean "do you bleep cussing and fast-forward through nudity/sexual situations?"

Why are we picking on this one thing? Why not "do you have any pedophile friends" or "do you have any kleptomaniac friends" or "do you have any friends who gossip habitually?" I would hope that the candidate would befriend non-Christian people and seek to love them as a participant in the Kingdom.

Some spouses never argue and have a less healthy relationship. Sometimes loud arguments (never physically or verbally abusive) are healthy. I'd rather have a candidate who fought with a spouse than one in a repressed marriage.

Inappropriate. Christians can drink. It's an issue of conscience. Maybe ask if there are any areas of weakness or addiction.

There's more to politics than abortion. There are a number of godly people who believe there is more at stake. Politics is another issue of conscience and has significantly less to do with Kingdom work than many evangelicals seem to think. The tide is turning, though.

Wow - where in the world did you find this?

In short, this list is peculiarly specific about a number of things and completely absent of any questions about theology and ministry.

 

Fair enough. but surely you recognize that you are not Jesus, and that your own admission is that you were "sub-5" right?

What does "feel" have to do with it? That's the problem (including here). We operate on feelings rather than on facts and revelation. So we have some guy defending loud arguments with his wife because Jesus drove money changers out the temple. I have to be honest ... that's abominable use of Scripture. The fact that you "feel" something is irrelevant. We are commanded to live by Scripture.

Obviously not.

And Jesus wasn't loudly arguing with his spouse, he wasn't out of control, and he wasn't "sub-5" in his marriage. Or more simply, he was perfect. You, by your own admission, were not.

 

Do you acknowledge that there are also some bad reasons that could disqualify a man from pastorate?

So what do you think the "rule your own house well, having children in subjection" means (both in 1 Tim 3 and Titus)? Do you acknowledge that family problems can disqualify a man from ministry?

When would that be? I can't imagine any case of that, but I will listen.

Why have to choose? Why not have a man with a healthy marriage who models Christian marriage and has learned biblical conflict resolution?

 

Thank you for a respectful response.

I don't think so and, if there are, that will likely come out in other ways. With this issue, things are not always as they seem. I just believe this it between spouses and not information a church needs.

I think they can to a certain degree, especially if the parents did a poor job, but even godly parents have kids that are rebellious. Kids just go through stuff sometimes. Sometimes there are mental and psychological factors that have little to do with upbringing. Having the most well-behaved children doesn't always mean that everything is right under the surface. All of that needs to be taken into consideration.

I should be more clear. I'm not advocating screaming and yelling as a proper form of disagreement. I don't think screaming at each other, especially in front of children, is ever a proper was of handling things. There are times when arguing is okay. It indicates both spouses are invested and committed. It gets underlying concerns out in the open. Couples who say they never fight are either suppressed or disengaged or lying.[/QUOTE]

 

So if I were to change that to "they know they are right" would that make it ok to disagree with someone in a loud voice?

Certainly all true. But He was angry, He was yelling, and He was expressing His frustrations. If Jesus is our example for living then that tells me there are situations where this is acceptable. You seem to view these situations as a sign of unholy living which clearly is not always the case.

.

Well said jaigner.

 

Question #3

Background checks miss sometimes and this is an opportunity to show complete honesty by the candidate.

Question #4

Again this allows them to explain something maybe not in the norm. After all what if he answered "because we can not stand children".

Question #5

This would fall under specific scriptural qualification Titus 1:4,5 and 1Tim 3:12.

Question #10

This is a chosen and continued lifestyle and should not even have the appearance of being condoned. Loving the sinner but not the sin is appropriate but accepting a continued lifestyle that is an abomination should not be tolerated.

Question #12

Read the question and the way the candidate answers, this has to do directly with scripture 1Tim 3:4,5 & Tit 1:8 (many churches do not tolerate any alcohol to used by members) The apple cider bit does puzzle me because then they should have included soda pop too.:laugh:

Question #13

Abortion may be political as well. But scripturally it is murder no matter what politics say.

Some questions are very weird at best but they are ALL not completely absent of questions about theology or ministry.

 

So if a guy says, "Because kids cost too much and the wife would have to stay home and keep them" that would be okay? I think that would show a great misunderstanding of both family and moneythat would disqualify him.

Do you think God knew all of this when he said that? Of course you do (I think). So how are we to understand that because you seem to be saying that it really doesn't matter what his kids are like. I don't want to misunderstand you though.

I am all about proper forms. That has been my emphasis -- biblical conflict resolution.

Really? I would say if they never disagreed they are either disengaged or lying. But fight? My wife and I don't fight. So you think we are either disengaged or lying?

 

Not unless they were in a loud place where they had to raise their voice to be heard.

I wonder where you get the information that Jesus was yelling in the temple. I don't recall that in the text (but I don't have time to look right now).

I don't see any problem with expressing frustrations or being angry. My issue has always been the way the anger is expressed, and I don't see Jesus yelling at his wife whom he promised to love like Christ loved the church and build her up to make her more holy.

Let's ask this a different way: How does yelling at your wife express your love for her like Christ loved the church? How does it make her more holy? How does it build her up?

How does a verse like Ephesisans 4:29 fit in here?

I laugh when I hear people yell in an argument. I think to myself, if your point isn't good in a normal tone of voice, making it louder won't help it. Get a better point. Don't try to scare the person into agreement.