Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Pastoral Authority.


Recommended Posts

  • Members

To add to that, I don't believe a pastor was established to be a babysitter or sherriff in Christ's church. However, as a member of a church he is just as responsible, as any other member, to confront someone(in meekness and love) who is in that church and in sin, according to the method prescribed by Christ:

Matt. 18:15-17
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy brother.
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.

Too often we place too much burden on the pastor to fix the problems when we are very much an equal part of that congregation and just as responsible to confront sin and keep the church in right doctrine. Also, Christ didn't commission just one in that first NT church(Matt. 28:28). He commissioned all of them.

The main responsibility of a pastor is that of food service(in a spiritual sense). They are responsible for feeding Christ's sheep the food which Christ gives them to distribute.

John 21:15
So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jona, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.

And as they feed us in the spiritual things, we are responsible to feed them in the carnal things.

1 Cor. 9:11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

I also believe in plurality of elders.

Churches have it all mixed up now. Some have one pastor as a supreme dictator. Others have deacons as the decision makers in the church. The Bible teaches that churches are lead by a plurality of elders with deacons being the servants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Acts 1:15-26, we don't see elders selecting the next apostle, but we do see the church at Jerusalem picking the one to replace Judas.

In Acts 6:1-6, we don't see elders selecting the deacons, but we do see the church selecting them.

In Acts 11:21,22 we don't see elders sending, but we do see the church at Jerusalem sending.

In Acts 13;1-5 we do not see elders sending, but we do see the church sending.

1 Corinthians 5:1-6, its quite clear the Apostle Paul stated that the church at Corinth was to expel the fornicator, not the elders, pastor, not deacons.

No, neither elders, pastors, nor deacons have authority, but the New Testament Church itself is the only authority. And one who lords over Jesus' church is doing so without one bit of authority given to them by Jesus.

If anyone will prayerfully study these verses, they will see very plain, the authority is given to the New Testament Church, not pastor, not elders, not deacons.

But your right, many churches has it mixed up, many pastors have it mixed up, and they let men who have no authority from God rule, and that is very sad.

God's way is the right way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I can tell that our modern culture and times are the only lens that some people look at this question through. Much of the world doesn't have the option of just choosing another church when they have a problem with their pastor. I think that this philosophy has led to stiff unmoving people and stiff, unmoving pastors, neither of which are correct.


The suggestion that one should either agree and follow everything a pastor says or sets as the standard or "get out" is a rather spurious one indeed. The suggestion to just "go to another church" is a poor suggestion and is why we have places with 7 IFB churches within 10 miles of each other and so many others without IFB churches at all.

Personally, I would rather someone who disagrees with my standard to discuss it with me. I do agree that one should not be a rabblerouser and try to mutiny over a standard of a pastor, but I certainly also don't agree with the shut up and move on philosophy.

There is room at the table of our church for people who disagree over pants on ladies, etc. As long as the pastor and his family live a standard, I think that speaks in much greater volume than the "my way or the highway" philosophy.


Good post!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There are many issues where there is no compromise. Then there are areas where there are personal choices. Them there are areas where a person ought to grow in as they grow in Christ.

But that said, no pastors worth his weight is going to try and force the church members to follow him or Christ, but to follow Christ freely, that is do those things that will bring glory to Christ because they want to please Christ, don't do those things that will bring shame on Jesus or His Church.

But that said, many times a church will reflect the pastor, if he is liberal, generally if he stays very long, the church will go liberal.

For instant, the church I grew up in, some 20 years ago, it would not fellow ship with liberal SBC Churches, nor invited their pastors to stand behind their pulpit, nor invite women pastors behind their pulpit as it now does. It also will join together in worship with any church that will join in with them. They claim, it makes no difference, any and every church ought to worship with any church that will worship with them and put all differences aside, for we are all one in Christ.

They recently had a mans day, I saw a picture taken while this was taking place. The pastor was standing behind the pulpit in his hunting clothes, all the men were wearing their hunting clothes standing during the worship service with their caps on their head.

We are suppose to keep the world out, and use the Bible as the guide line to run our church and contend for the faith as it was given to us and not join together with those who teach false doctrine.

When a church starts compromising on one area, shortly it will compromise in many areas as I have pointed out about the church I grew up in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You have to take the whole counsel of God, not just the verses that prove your point.

1 Peter 5:2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;

I Tim 5:17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Yes, we are to follow Christ, but the pastor is, as undershepherd, to lead us as well. Can we forget when Paul said, "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me." and "Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."

If the pastor is following God according to the scripture, we are to follow him. If he deviates and begins teaching heresy, we are to get rid of him (following the scriptural guidelines for it). If he won't leave (and we all know of churches where the pastor has retained "control" and most members have not voted him out), then we must. But if the pastor is being obedient to God, we are to follow. After all, he is the undershepherd, and sheep follow the undershepherd as well as the head shepherd!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
As far as standard go, the pastor can set them anywhere he wants, and you can choose to follow, not follow, or leave the church. A good pastor, like mine, sets standards such as women in dresses that go below the knee when sitting (I wouldn't mind lower).. but make this clear: He does not make woman who show up in pants unwelcome, and does not FORCE women to follow this, he has said "If they are out to follow God, sooner or later they will make that choice on their own". The only ones "forced" to follow the standards such as women in dresses and men with hair above the ear and collar, are the kids in the school who get demerits for not doing so, and deacons who are officers of the church.

As far as pastor authority, I go by one leader, one pastor, one head of the church, one Shepard, who must answer to Christ for his management of the church. My church has 5 people with the title of assistant pastor, and they handle many things for the church, but no one with any sense thinks of them as part leaders of the church. They are people you can go to for specific needs so as not to bother the pastor. A good pastor, will start delegating things to trusted people as a church grows. One assistant pastor, has a specialty in finance. When someone has financial problems in the church, or wants to improve their budget, the first meeting might be with the pastor, and then meetings are set up with this fellow who spends more time and effort then the pastor can in helping them. The pastor of my church, I can attest, wants nothing more then to give one on one help in every detail to everyone, but he also understands that this is impossible and that God has given him helpers.

These helpers, assistant pastors, are not there to give the pastor advice unless asked. They are not there to approve or veto moves by the pastor. They are not there to tell people what the pastor thinks or what he really means when he preaches. They are there as an extension of the pastor, so that more people can be reached.

As a representative of the pastor, they all must adhere to guide lines set forth by both the bible and the pastor, including their prayer life, walk with God, weekly soul winning, family life, etc.

No one questions who is in charge though. Last time that happened, it caused a church split and many people are going to hell because they where not reached because of the harm caused by a man who thought "assistant pastor" meant "co-pastor"


This post sums perfectly the exact opposite of my position, and it details all of the problems with said position.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
This post sums perfectly the exact opposite of my position, and it details all of the problems with said position.

Uh, you're saying the previous post shows the problems with your position. I'm sure that's not what you meant. :wink However, I've read a couple of posts from folks who prefer elder rule and several pastors. But there's no comment on what the roles of multiple pastors are supposed to be? Are they all in charge? How do churches with multiple pastors get anything done?

Acts 12:17 and 15:13-21 seem to indicate that while the church at Jerusalem had elders, James (the brother of Jesus, not the apostle) was the pastor. In Acts 21:18, Paul meets with "James, and all the elders were present" to tell of his missions trip. Paul mentions that James was part of Paul's "ordination" after his conversion. If James was simply one of the elders, why does Paul specifically seek him out?

And, if human marriage represents the relationship between Christ and the local church, do you propose each family have multiples husbands? Actually, I guess the local church is considered the bride, so the proper comparison would be each family would have multiple wives ...

However, I do not agree with this statement:
As far as standard go, the pastor can set them anywhere he wants, and you can choose to follow, not follow, or leave the church. A good pastor, like mine, sets standards such as women in dresses that go below the knee when sitting ...
A pastor is to enforce "thus saith the Lord" and not some arbitrary preference he has. Some pastors preach their convictions, when there's no scriptural basis for that conviction. These types of pastors treat churches as "theirs" and not "Christ's."

Mitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Now, if there is a tie when the local church is voting on something, them and only them does the pastor have a vote. And with that the pastors had better be careful how he uses his vote, for I know of church that split because the pastors took sides in issues of personal choices. Now if its a doctrinal issue, he needs to stand fast no matter the outcome.


Where is that in scripture?

If a church is 50/50 on a decision, then the decision should not be made. Under the congregational rule style, we set some percentage (51%, 66%, or 75%) for various things. In situations where we voted on things, if the church was more then say 10% not in favor, we shelfed it. If God's people, who have the Holy Spirit, are getting different messages, then either God is not speaking at all, or a large portion of the people are not listening to God. Either way, its more important to resolve one of those two issues, then it is to make whatever decision you are trying to make.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


In the Scriptures I showed where the local churches is the authority and making decisions, it does not speak about any percentage, it just states what the decision was that local church made.

So adding that it takes a certain percentage for something to pass, is adding to.

And its quite clear in the verses I posted, that the local Church was the one who made the decision.

I might add, very important decisions.

Acts 1:15-26, the church picked the who would replace Judas as an apostle.

Acts 6:1-6, the church selected the deacons.

Acts 11:21,22, the church sent forth Barnabas that he should go to Antioch.

Acts 13:1-5, the church ordained and sent Barnabas and Saul.

1 Corinthians 5:1-5 the church used church discipline.

How can anyone agree to disagree on these verses where the church is clearly the ruling authority?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have never said the pastor makes all decisions final. I said the pastor leads. The church does agree on major decisions. I do not believe they have to vote on the color of the carpet though. The church should at least trust their leader to do the minor things.

A good pastor will not go ahead with a major decision that is splitting the church 50/50. However if God tells the pastor to do something Biblical then he should do it regardless of church vote. Keep in mind in our day we often have carnal fleshly church members and one big problem that arises when too many votes are made is that the church begins to be run in the flesh. The pastor should lead and guide and the church should vote/approve major decisions, usually financial or major church changes, or deacons.

Keep in mind the church selected deacons from among themselves but Paul placed elders in churches!!! There are certain things in which the church votes and other things in which the pastor does what God tells him.

The problem in this discussion is there is no balance. I believe in a balance between pastor rule and congregational approval/decisionmaking. Its not totally congregational rule and its not pastoral dictatorship...its a healthy working relationship between both parties with the pastor as the God-ordained leader (like it or not).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...