Why Are Some Under Tthe Impression...

I started a thread on this a long time ago. Be prepared for a number of different views

I'm with you, though. If one "desires" to be an elder (not "ordained" to be an elder), that is a good thing...but he must meet the qualifications outlined in Scripture.

 

Surely you jest

 

Oh, don't get me wrong...if they match up with mine, they are all good ones

 

OK, I always know how to answer then

(sorry TC :wavey: for the hijack)

 

IMO, elevation to the pastorate is de facto ordination. I see no biblical reason to view ordination as an alternative process.

That being said, I think that the ordination process in Baptist life draws much of its character from the Roman Catholic concept of ordination.

 

Mark 4:14 says "And he ordained twelve that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach..."

I don't know what form that ordination took, and I wouldn't offer this as solid backing for ordaining pastors, but some sort of ordination took place for the twelve. Maybe others can shed more light.

 

Ordination is the biblical process of 1 Tim 5 where a man is examined and then laid hands upon symbolically as evidence of the church's evaluation and approval of a man's doctrine and life suitable for eldership. It is not required to be a pastor. But it should be a normal part of being a pastor.

 

I agree that the act of being called to serve a church as minister is in fact "ordination." So being asked to serve as a deacon, an elder or as a minister (pastor) is ordination. The idea of perpetual ordination in all churches and all situaitons, I believe comes from the Catholic hierarchy.

I may be quickly branded as a heretic here for saying this but all ministers function as pastors - no matter what his "area of assignment" (music, worship, discipleship, education, etc.) is in thenlife os the church. We are all associate pastors.

Actually the quoted verse is Mark 3:14 - The only translation to use the word ordained is the KJV - all others use either appointed or chose, including the NKJV.

 

Spurgeon thought that ordination was unnecessary. I agree. Too many ordained have degrees and approval by men with little or no temperature.

 

I would agree.

I have always viewed it as the local church giving their support for the Lord's calling on a man's life.

 

If God has already done that, then what else is necessary. Too mnay churches are unable to recognize the call of God on a person's life. However they are able to recognize and subscribe to the success syndrome.

 

I am not saying it is required. I just think it is a good and helpful thing for the local body of believers to say they support the Lord's calling on a man's life.

 

I saw that Tthe and I thought this was surely anohter one about Tithing.

 

I will be preaching/interviewing with a small church in January (I have been supply preaching for them off and on the past few months) and I am not yet licenced or ordained. After the new year I will begin the licensure "process" at my home church. (An SBC church) There are no denominational rules, but the hiring church in this case wants me to at least be licenced. i have discussed this with my pastor and the "process" should take a couple months--a series of meetings with the diaconate licensure committee (for the purpose of questioning, etc). I have no idea when I will be ordained and if the new church (potential) or my "home church" will do it. I find solace in a honorable process that pleases the Lord. I find strength and integrity in accountability. I have been called by the Lord, this I know for certain. But as I am under the Lordship of Christ, I feel the need to I also be under the authority of a local new testament church which alone has the power and authority to "send" in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

My Church has Licenced our Minister of Youth and the Pastor's son to ministry recently (a year ago). The service looked very much like an ordination or commissioning service. when God's people affirm God's people and collectively agree in the Spirit to carry out the will of God, God is honored and glorified and pleased.

I do not believe in "rogue" preachers or ministries.

K

 

I'd just like to clarify here...would you classify John the Baptist as a rogue preacher?

 

Let me put it to you this way sir, if he was, then we are all it a bit of a fix.

Anyway, bad question if I may. All Christians are "preachers/ministers of the Gospel and need no authority or affirmation save that of our God to proclaim the Word in our daily lives. But to minister in a position of authority as one called of God to be an under-shepherd, then one needs to be affirmed by a stable NT church.

The local expression of the church did not exist during John the Southern Baptist's Ministry.

He was the first preacher of the New Covenant. Who'd gonna ordain him? He was ordained by God in the womb. I believe he was regenerated in the womb. He jumped when he felt the presents of the fetal Messiah.

Ordination is a tad bigger deal than some would make it out to be. It is a covenant relationship with the the ordinand and the church and Christ. It's not about the certificate. That said, once I become ordained, and should I ever decide to jump denominations, or "quit the ministry" (God forbid) I would, or at least I should, return the ordination certificate to the church which ordained me.

To operate outside that which one is ordained for is, to me, being a rogue minister.

There is nothing wrong with being re-ordained (reconfimred) for a different type of ministry under the Lordship of Christ and the authority of His bride.

k

 

Thanks for your reply. I just take issue with your last point. Ordination aside, or not, I believe that when one is a minister they are a minister in the Body of Christ, the Church. Denominations aren't necessarily a good thing. If one changes their denomination I believe they are still called to preach. We all belong to the Church and not a denomination.