Accepting a Pastor position

I wasn't referring to Presbyterian, but presbyterial (elders).

That's the term Elder Nichols of Grand Rapids Reformed Baptist Church uses in his "Doctrinal Distinctives of the 1689 Confession" teaching.

He claims that the 1689 Confession calls for presbyterial government instead of congregationalism, which he calls an "error"!

Would a pastor committed to installing a presbyterial scheme work well in a church that follows biblical congregationalism?

 

That is kind of interesting because I studied under one of their former pastors who believes in both congregationalism and Elders. I am not doubting he said it, though.

I mentioned MacArthur's move to his form of eldership (about as low congregational as probably possible). I suspect that was a success. Dever's use of congregationalism is, in my opinion, weak on congregationalism. I also tend to be weak on congregational authority on minor issues but I do believe there are Biblical areas of congregation input (set apart elders, the final step in church discipline).

 

Where in the Bible does it speak of the congregation setting apart elders?

 

That is a Real Shame!

I have resigned from few churches for the very reason mentioned in the OP.

I have not, and will not compromise the Gospel message I have been called to preach.

When a church hires a preacher, they are hiring a shepherd to lead them, and it''s not up to the sheep to dictate to the shepherd where it is that they want to go.

2 Timothy 2:2-4 tells of a day when people will dictate the direction of the message, fire those preachers who step on their toes, and get some one who "tickles their fancies, ears, and preaches a feel good Gospel.

Can we say Joel Osteen? The Crystal Cathedral? TBN? Jim Bakker? And the list goes on.

I had members of the church come to me and tell me if I preached that topic again, they'd leave. So, I'd get out the phone book, open up to the church section in the yellow pages, and ask them I could help recommend a good church.

When it comes to the Gospel, the congregation needs to trust the Father to be inspiring their pastor. If they don't like where he's goig, doctrinally speaking, they can either fire him, leave the church, or, learn and grow.

It is not their job to offer compromising suggestions when it comes to the messages.

As a pastor I've heard every complaint. You preach to loud. You are too soft spoken. You need to where suit and tie. You move around too much, please stand still, right behind the pulpit. You are not animated enough. You are too animated. You are preaching too long. You need to use our favorite hymns more. You need to have us say the Lord's prayer after your opening prayer. You don't preach enough "salvation" messages! You need to stop pushing the need to grow and make changes. You don't preach enough on giving.

Some of those things are things we can work out compromises on. But, when it comes to the Gospel, it is up to the preacher to hear from God, and share that message, regardless of how many "good givers" get mad and leave!

This is my opinion, and certainly not wrong if you feel differently. It is just my belief, and if I lead people astray, their blood is on my hands. Thus, I am prayerfully tuned into the leading of the Spirit when it comes to presenting the Gospel.

Shalom,

Pastor Paul :type:

 

Here's the rest of the line: "....so they can go out and et."

 

The way that I have always heard it, was.........

 

“Sermonettes for christianettes, who smoke cigarettes.”

That's a new version to me, stilllearning.

Any other variations out there?

 

This is happening all over the place these days -- as people explore the Scriptures and discover that the two offices of the church are elder and deacon, and more so, that there are always a plurality of elders. There is still a pastor, but the pastor is one of the elders with varying levels of responsibility depending on spiritual gifts, talents, passions, and experience.

The one form of church government that is not particularly biblical is the majority model of many Baptist churches, with a single pastor and a deacon board who rules both the church and the pastor. Nor are there examples of congregational voting in day-to-day operations of the church found in Scripture, but that is somewhat a wash, for none of the big 3 forms of church government are found in Scripture. All are somewhat pragmatic based on the need for the church to govern herself in some form or the other. Rudiments of all 3 polities are found in Scripture, but not the full-blown governmental systems that we now see in place in Episcopal, Presbyterian, or Congregational church governments.

 

Yes, church oligarchy schemes are unbiblical, whether they consist of a pastor and deacons or your "plurality of elders".

 

Zenas,

I used the set-apart language which I believe is implied in the appointing process. They are set apart from the congregation as Elders of said congregation. I use it in a similar manner as when Paul and Barnabas were set apart.