The following is from a pastor's CV

[Invicta]

The following is from a pastor's CV

What do you think?

"As a Baptist by conviction, I believe that baptism by full immersion is the proper mode of the rite. Nevertheless, I also recognize that there may be extenuating circumstances which mean that this specific method is not appropriate in a particular situation. The proper subjects for baptism are individuals who have made a personal profession of faith in Jesus Christ as their Saviour. It is a practice which is intended to accompany conversion and is therefore not to be repeated in the believer’s life. I do not accept the baptism of infants as biblically supported, but I am unwilling to dogmatically oppose those who practice this outside of my tradition. Instead, when ministering in a church which adopts this doctrinal position I would personally regard paedo-baptism as a form of dedication rather than baptism and modify my pastoral practices to accommodate the sincere spiritual interests of believing parents who desire to have their infants “baptised”.

8. Worship styles

Whilst I do not believe that any particular worship style is mandated by Scripture we should be mindful that our worship practices are God-honouring, Christ-centred, faithful to the Word, and edifying the congregation (the whole congregation not just a part of it!). I accept that our rapidly changing culture demands that we continually examine
the relevance of our practices, however I believe that it is also important that we do not jettison our Christian heritage for the sake of a superficial, transitory, contemporary relevance. My preference as pastor is to take a balanced approach which seeks to include the diverse range of preferences within our congregations as much as possible. Obviously, the make-up and context of the individual congregation are significant factors to be considered when examining the particular worship style to be followed.

9. Use of “spiritual gifts” in meetings I believe God has given His church gifts for its edification and those gifts will continue to be exercised until Jesus’ return. However, our meetings are to be conducted in order and with appropriate reverence for God so that we do not expose Him to ridicule. Therefore, I do not support the overt charismatic/Pentecostal approach to the use of spiritual gifts in meetings, nor do I accept the definition/interpretation which is assumed in relation to some of the
more contentious gifts.

10. Bible versions

I do not regard any single English translation of Scripture as the only definitive version. I enjoy reading/using the New King James for my own personal benefit (& preaching when appropriate), I prefer the New American Standard Bible (1977) for translation or study purposes, I use the Good News Bible for religious education with young children and I am accepting of the common use of the New International Version in worship services. I regard the Old and New Testaments in their original languages as the only definitive versions of Scripture and all others as simply translations/interpretations of them.

14. Small groups

I am keenly aware of the necessity for small groups within our fellowships – particularly as the size of the local church grows – and I would encourage the participation of everyone in such an activity. Small groups provide a setting which is more conducive to spiritual intimacy in prayer, fellowship and Bible study and thereby actively promote the
spiritual growth of the individual in ways that a larger assembly cannot. However, I do not believe the small group is a substitute for the corporate meetings of the entire local body, nor should they be solely a “social” group. Their purpose is the sanctification of the individual in fellowship with other believers, centred on the Word of God and
prayer, and do not replace the participation of the individual in the wider life of the body of Christ."

[Seth Doty]

I would agree with number 14 "small groups" but would strongly disagree with most of what is left.

[Salyan]

Here's a thought to think on... At what point does a church become 'too big'? If small groups are needed to maintain fellowship within a church body too large for that to occur naturally, is that an indication that the church should consider 'reproducing' itself into two smaller bodies that can then reach out to two separate neighborhoods? What are y'all's thoughts on this?

[JerryNumbers]

They are only God honoring when done in truth. The gate is truly strait & narrow, yet many there be that hates the narrow strait gate.

[swathdiver]

Disagree with 8, 10, 14 and probably 9 if I could figure out what he meant.

#8 we don't change for the world. The Lord is the same as yesterday, today and tomorrow. So should our churches be.

#10 You can not be consistant when using inconsistant information.

#14 Small groups bad. The preaching should be done at the pulpit. There is but one shepherd and having 20 throws consistent doctrine out the window. In our church those small groups are fellowships. If you go to church Wednesday night, Sunday night, Sunday School and Sunday Service and listen to your pastor, why would have need for another? Excepting of course the head of the house leading his family in daily devotions.

Whenever I see a liberal church adopt something "new", as in politics, I run the other way. They are always wrong.

[Invicta]

I disagree with all the points.

Small groups are bad, imho, as I believe they split the church into cliques.

The worse point is that some in our church want to call him as a pastor.

Even worse is that they want to bring him from Australia. This has caused more bad feeling than in any church that I have been in.

[John81]

Here's a thought to think on... At what point does a church become 'too big'? If small groups are needed to maintain fellowship within a church body too large for that to occur naturally, is that an indication that the church should consider 'reproducing' itself into two smaller bodies that can then reach out to two separate neighborhoods? What are y'all's thoughts on this?

That's an important question that Christians most often don't come to agreement on.

Myself, it seems clear that if a church becomes too large there are functions of the church that can't be rightly performed. How well can a pastor shepherd his flock if he doesn't know most of them, if he doesn't recognize many of them? How well are the members loving one another and bearing one anothers burdens if they don't know one another? How much fellowship is there if most can't connect in church and those looking to connect feel they need some outside connection such as a small group?

At what point does a church become too large? That's probably somewhat subjective because the gifts of each pastor and the rest of church leadership will vary. For instance, one pastor may be gifted in ways he can rightly minister to 300 more people than another pastor. For each of these pastors, the actual point of where the church becomes too big would be different, but the principle would be the same. At what point is the church no longer able to function in accord with Scripture?

Today there are many who love to be a part of mega-churches and other large churches. Often this has more to do with prestige, pride, social aspects, etc. than in actually being involved in a church in accord with Scripture. There also seems to be a problem that larger churches often face when money and popularity become so large they are taken into consideration as sermons are being planned, before events are considered, etc. Along these lines comes the difficult aspect of how many pastors who experience such growth, popularity and the flow of money would be willing or able to say their church has reached it's max and it's time to start another church?

[HappyChristian]

Sounds to me like he's trying to please everybody and leave room to go whatever direction the majority want once he's installed as pastor.

[John81]

Sounds to me like he's trying to please everybody and leave room to go whatever direction the majority want once he's installed as pastor.

That was my first take when I read it last night but then something happened and I couldn't post again on here last night.

There seems to be a lot of wishy-washy out there today. Some pastors will say they are more conservative but are willing to bend or lean more liberal for the sake of others.

There is, or should be, a difference between reasonable flexibility and outright compromise.

[swathdiver]

How well can a pastor shepherd his flock if he doesn't know most of them, if he doesn't recognize many of them? How well are the members loving one another and bearing one anothers burdens if they don't know one another? How much fellowship is there if most can't connect in church and those looking to connect feel they need some outside connection such as a small group?

Experienced this first-hand in a mega-church with 16,000 attendees, they didn't have membership, that might exclude or hurt people's feelings. LOL Pastor never returned my e-mails or responded to my posts on his blogs. Never shook his hand or even saw him after service, like a rock star he disappeared off stage at the end of the show.

My pastor and IFB church family have been such a blessing and the church is run much the same ways as most of yours. We have a roving fellowship where a family will host 5-15 other families for dinner at their home and the adult men will get together discussing various topics with a lot of time spent on the Gospel and doctrines. Last year 10% of our church members went camping together for about a week, how nice it was to fellowship without the constant distractions from everyday life!

[Invicta]

At what point does a church become too large?

As scripture addresses each church in a house, perhaps they are too large when they do not fit in a house.

[John81]

As scripture addresses each church in a house, perhaps they are too large when they do not fit in a house.

How big of a house? :icon_smile:

[Invicta]

We met a man in France who said he saw a "student of all christianity" and told us details of all the churches for miles around. When we asked jim if he would like to come to a service one Sunday he said he would stay and worship at home as after reading J N Darby, who, he said, that all churches should meet in a house. When we left he gave me a list of scripture references, all of which refererred to churches meeting in someone's house.

[swathdiver]

We refer to our church as God's house. A typical prayer opens with, "It's good to be in your house...". Is it possible this fellow knew so much that wasn't so? Wonder what he would have said about Hebrews 10:25???

[John81]

Spurgeon, along with many of his like and similar minded contemporaries, all denounced Darby as unstable, a nut with strange, unbiblical ideas. Spurgeon said if it wasn't for the novelty and the way Darby presented his crazy ideas, no one would even pay attention to it.

Darby's views were rejected by the Fundamentalist Christians of his time.