First:
Then…
Finally:
The problem is our modern preaching methods leave the majority of the people in the first picture.
1.You see initially a Christian is like a baby who needs his/her food purated. They have to understand that Christ in the metanarrative of the scripture, that God’s plan was always the Gospel. They to understand the basics of the bible, church, Christianity, some of the basics of living like a newborn.
2. Then they should progress to feeding themselves a little bit, but they still need a smaller plate. You give them a few books like Basic Bible Doctrines, a book on understanding some of the more complex theological truths. Give them a concordance, maybe a small Systematic Theology book. They should begin to learn a bit about hermeneutics, different genres, and arguments.
3. Finally the person should end up where Paul calls “maturity” in Ephesians 4. This person should not only be giving steak dinners, he should be hunting for his own food! This person can fix their own plate, feed themselves, and put the dishes up or cover the bill at a restaraunt. Leading bible studies, making disciples, feeding his family spiritually, given chances to teach in the local assembly. This person should spend just as much time in their word as their elders or “pastor”.
The problem is that our current method usually lands people in the first two. In really good bible teaching churches they will go to number two. But most churches don’t take people past number 1. They are codependent on their “pastors” to bring them a word! The ones who go to number 2 dont’ get past a concordance, they are also heavily dependent on the preacher to “feed them” or “pour into them” they always need “sound expository sermons” to motivate them. They won’t hunt for themselves they pay someone else to do it and that isn’t maturity, though I would rather see someone at number 2 than 1 I believe Paul says “you should all be teachers, but you need someone to teach you”!
I believe pastors should be working themselves out of jobs with each individual christian. Sooner or later they should become peers! If not then the equipping they are called to do isn’t being done! My heart should be to see you at the table eating steak dinners with me, not me purating the food because it is too difficult for “laymen” to digest!
Lionel I’m in complete agreement with your overall analysis of the eating patterns in church. Are you aware of any modern examples of churches or experiences of churches who successfully move people towards stage 3? Does anyone else know of any examples? Not in the way to slavishly copy their programme bt perhaps to get some principles and lessons learnt on the journey.
I think Christ Fellowship of Kansas City is doing it greatly! As a matter of fact a I know. They have a clear program that turn maturing Christians into thriving elders and church leaders which I believe is to be the pursuit of every single man in the local church! I believe every single man who becomes a believer should be given a plan to become a church leader/elder.
I totally hear you that we should be building everyone in the body up towards maturity, to become peers, and with the intent that at some point those mature believers move on to build up others, and so on and so forth.
But….
The idea that achieving maturity and “peerhood” is defined by things like:
“…a few books like Basic Bible Doctrines, a book on understanding some of the more complex theological truths. Give them a concordance, maybe a small Systematic Theology book. They should begin to learn a bit about hermeneutics, different genres, and arguments.”
I would say puts an unbalanced emphasis on a scholarly-infused approach to truth. Which, if we are really serious about returning to a way of life which strives to depend on the Holy Spirit as the teacher and keeper of His church, seems to go in the opposite direction….
I agree that we “should spend just as much time in their word as their elders or “pastor””, but I don’t know that being an expert in things like “hermeneutics, different genres, and arguments” is necessarily a prerequisite to understanding the “meat” of the Gospel. The bible teaches us that in the end, it is the man who stands up, and lives OUT what the bible teaches, who is to be commended, not the one who can articulate what it teaches in the most eloquent, or intellectually impressive way. I’m learning that our Christian culture has to a large degree confused teaching with talking a lot, while the scripture depicts teaching as something that is done with the full expanse of one’s life, rather than an encapsulated time period where one is laying out a 5-point message….
Lionel,
As usual. Very perceptive and willing to look at reality!
I am with you on every word in this article!
Fit’s well with Alan Knox’s current “Christian Bubble/Cocoon” blog.
Daniel,
I think you and I will disagree on this one. Here is why.
1. One must be able to faithfully handle the word and this has to be taught. Rather that is taught in a school or in a home or in a coffee shop it has to be taught. For example, I know many Christians who don’t read Revelation or comes away with a Tim Lahaye type of interpretation when they do. When we understand that The Revelation is in the apocolyptic genre and it must be read differently than say a Romans that is in the discourse genre which must be read differently than a Proverbs which is labeled poetry then the way we read our bibles will be important. When we see that Narratives are to read differently and applied differently than epistles then and only then will I say that a person can faithfully handle the word in a teaching capcity at least. Can the Spirit teach this? Yes, maybe, but what I have seen 99% of the time is people trying to read and apply Exodus the same way they do Romans and this causes all types of problems that plague evangelicalism.
2. Next I believe scholarly studies in Systematic and Biblical theologies are important. We have to understand that scholarly or theology does not negate or subdue the Spirit. Niether is there anywhere in scripture where education in the scriptures is frowned upon. Most of the young Jewish boys would have been well schooled in the Torah and many others in the Psalms and prophets. The Holy Spirit didn’t erase years of studying the scriptures He just illuminated what was there.
3. Finally life on life is important and putting what you know into practice, accountability, elder brothers sharpening you and seeing the Gifts of the Spirit into practice in a biblical community are all important. But I also believe that education is important and theology is critical to understanding the scriptures. We have all been shaped by theological education one way or the other.
Lionel,
These scriptures come to mind when speaking about “theology”:
“For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever.”
Paul is aptly describing a large amount of the current man centred theology of today.
I am thankful for my own theological training, but when that traing is about moulding men and women into the theological clones of their teachers, then run from it as fast as you can, because it will, without doubt, overshadow, what Paul was about, and which every Christian should be about, regardless of whether theologically trained or not.
“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
“For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly”
Even the theologically untrained, when taught by the Holy Spirit, can understand this:
“For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE, AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE. Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”
I’ve listened to countless rounds of theological education in my short lifetime, but it has been TRUTH that has shaped me, in all the forms that God has chosen to reveal it to me…
I wholeheartedly agree with you desire to see more people be able to get into the “meat” of the Word of God as you do, but I sincerely believe that if that is ever going to happen, then you are going to have to let go of the notion that this means that they will need to articulate the Truths of the Gospel in the same kind of theological rhetoric that comes so naturally to you.
The whole “genre” thing is a perfect example of taking something that is really patently obvious (that for instance Revelation is the account of a dream John had, while the epistles are letters, etc….) and making it needlessly complicated. Really it’s just borrowing a means of classification used by secular scholars to dissect literature, with the belief that this actually helps us understand the Gospel better… (???)
I mean really, which is more important, for someone to be able to explain what hermaneutics is, or to have a deep-seated trust in the simple commands of God?
According to the bible, maturity isn’t defined by your exegesis, or by how many extra-biblical resources you are able to master as you criss-cross your way from one Greek tense to another, but by how you treat people. Really, it’s that face-slappingly simple.
It’s weird, because I don’t think I appreciated just how fired up about this issue I (we) really am/are, until reading a post like this! I feel the same conviction you do to see brothers and sisters encouraged and built up to where they can navigate through scripture soundly, but I think I see that the main roadblock to achieving this is the very scholarly mindset that you feel is so essential. I’d go as far as saying that even if you remove the office of Pastor, in the official sense, you will continue to maintain a clergy/laity distinction within the body as long as you equate maturity and spiritual understanding with being able to speak the academic/theological language.
Tell me, is it more important if someone knows a plant by it’s scientific, Latin-derived name, or if they know whether it is safe to eat? The first kind of knowledge is really only useful in impressing other people who’ve studied lots of plants, the second is a matter of life and death….
Lionel,
Are suggesting that preaching isn’t the answer to all of our problems? Even good, biblical preaching?
-Alan
Amen Daniel!
Lionel,
You stated:
“I believe every single man who becomes a believer should be given a plan to become a church leader/elder.”
I disagree strongly with that statement!
Have all men been gifted to teach?
Do all men have leadership abilities/gifts? Certainly not!
You also stated:
“When we understand that The Revelation is in the apocalyptic genre and it must be read differently than say a Romans that is in the discourse genre which must be read differently than a Proverbs which is labeled poetry then the way we read our bibles will be important. When we see that Narratives are to read differently and applied differently than epistles then and only then will I say that a person can faithfully handle the word in a teaching capacity at least.”
I have to ask:
Does this rule also apply to how one handles or mishandles the usage of parables in the Gospels?
Specifically, the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in which many preachers/teachers interpret this to be literal instead of figurative speech. I have personally witnessed many respected teachers/preachers who fell to rightly divide the truth from this parable in particular.
So where would you draw the line?
Would it possibly be based on your perceived importance of the scriptures in question?
Aussiejohn said: Even the theologically untrained, when taught by the Holy Spirit, can understand this:
There is nothing a “theologically” trained man or woman can learn from a textbook or worse yet a seminary that is in anyway superior to what is taught to the so called untrained by the Holy Spirit.
The whole premise that we make disciples by giving someone a seminary type education is flawed in so many ways.
I would maintain that it is actually harmful to the discipleship process and the spritual health of an individual.
I am writing this as one who would have considered himself at one time to be very well theologically trained.
Gentlemen!!!!! I love this discussion, I am so excited that you all responded this is going to be a very nice discussion so let me address you guys individually to see exactly where you are coming from!
Aussie John,
I agree it is quite simple to understand the Gospel! No doubt there but lets continue on. How about how we interpret the Old Testament? Is that a theological discussion? Or even Monergistic Salvation. We have now dipped into a more complex discussion one that will take some theological discussion to work out. I am also against cloning. But for me my exposure to theology actually helped me with my current way of thinking.
Daniel,
I will respond in number format.
1. The first problem is hermeneutics is not theological language maybe post-secondary but it is not limited to theology. Nor are the terms justfication (legal term), atonement or other such words. I believe words that are in the bible are to be used so terms such as: propitiation, justification, atonment, and others are words the Holy Spirit used.
2. I don’t know if you ever experienced this or not, so I can only go from my consistent exposure to it. But yes understanding genre actually helps you understand the Gospel better if you believe the entire bible is the Gospel as I do, that may be a discussion for a different post. However, the way you read Genesis and Acts is different from the way you read 1 John and Romans. If you don’t understand that you will have a hard time interpreting the bible. Most Christians that I know don’t understand the difference, thus being introduced to theological terms will help. Many of the Jews understand this just go to a Messianic Temple and ask.
3. I never said maturity was measured solely on exegisis. However, you best read 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 and see what a qualification of an elder is. In both lists handling the word properly is a prerequisite. Even my good Anabatist brothers were big on trying to read the text properly they spent a great deal of time teaching how to handle the word and how to live. One does not negate the other.
4. Why do you continue to accuse me of wanting people to speak theologically? Where did you get that from in my post. Can you show me so I can clear that up? Being able to understand concepts of the bible does not diminish your obligation to live out what you know. Nor does living out the one anothers erase the obligation to use your mind to wrestle with some of the tougher bible concepts. I am sorry but I don’t get you there.
5. Who has used latin here? I haven’t even used Greek! Why do you consistently accuse me of talking in theological jargon because I desire to have people understand ST and BT? I can’t for the life of me figure that out. Because I want someone to understand how to read and apply the book of Acts I have now made a clergy/layity distinction? That is a huge leap bro and a false accusation as far as I can tell.
Jon,
Can you show me once in scripture where being a leader in the Church is a “calling”. Show me anywhere in the qualifications and pursuit of being elder. As a matter of fact the first prerequisite is “if one desires”! I don’t believe in a special calling to lead God’s people, just maturity you missed me on this one dude.
Hutch,
Tell me this. How do you and I uphold NCT or many of the other doctrines we uphold? I think I hear you saying like the guy who just ran a marathon “yeah that was easy” but was about to die a mile 20! The Holy Spirit is superior to all theology but one gift the Holy Spirit has given to the Church is “teaching” right? Is this gift diminished by writing it in a textbook? Does the gift of giving go away because someone puts it as a chartiable gift? I am so confused bro.
Alan,
I agree 100%
Lionel,
You’ve missed the point. You stated that you believe that EVERYONE should aspire to be a leader/elder. The scriptures you quoted (”if one desires”) obviously would negate EVERYONE becoming a leader/elder. What we seem to find is that those who do seem to desire becoming a leader/elder are the same ones who have been trained or gifted with the mental capacity, personality, etc. to be somewhat effective in their leadership/teaching efforts. Some people have been blessed with the gift of helps, others administration, still others teaching, and so on.
That’s also why we are spoken of as one body in Christ with many diverse members.
Should the toe, feet, hand, legs, etc. all aspire to perform the same functions because they have reached some level of maturity in Christ? Certainly not!
Jon,
I have not missed your point. You obviously has missed mine by quoting:
“Should the toe, feet, hand, legs, etc. all aspire to perform the same functions because they have reached some level of maturity in Christ? Certainly not!”
You use spiritual gifts to defend your position on elders. Spiritual gifts have absolutely NOTHING to do with being an Elder! One who has the gift of teaching no matter how good that teaching is doesn’t qualify them for eldership. Every single requirement for an elder is what EVERY SINGLE Christian should be aspiring to! Is that correct? Look at the list and tell me one thing that every Christian should not be doing. Leadership in the church has nothing to do with gifting. Leadership in the church has everything to do with maturity. So again I didn’t misunderstand you, you have an improper view of what an Elder is and what he does.
Bro. Lionel you typed:
“. One must be able to faithfully handle the word and this has to be taught. Rather that is taught in a school or in a home or in a coffee shop it has to be taught. For example, I know many Christians who don’t read Revelation or comes away with a Tim Lahaye type of interpretation when they do. When we understand that The Revelation is in the apocolyptic genre and it must be read differently than say a Romans that is in the discourse genre which must be read differently than a Proverbs which is labeled poetry then the way we read our bibles will be important. When we see that Narratives are to read differently and applied differently than epistles then and only then will I say that a person can faithfully handle the word in a teaching capcity at least. Can the Spirit teach this? Yes, maybe, but what I have seen 99% of the time is people trying to read and apply Exodus the same way they do Romans and this causes all types of problems that plague evangelicalism.”
Can I take this as an admission from you that you were not qualified to teach before you believed what you believe now? What happens if next month you believe something different concerning how to read the bible, will you then have been unqualified at this point?
Secondly, I think that we must think historically. The so-called early “Church Fathers” were all very well educated (in language and philosophy) and even in closer proximity to the Apostles and yet they disagreed at many points, one point being how to interpret certain passages of scripture. So which of them was qualified? The answer has to be either the one you agree with or none of them.
And if you’re only confident to say that “maybe” the Spirit can teach someone how to faithfully handle the word of God, then I have to ask; where any of the writers of the books upon which you depend, other than the bible, taught by the Spirit? If you trace the history of the knowledge contained in those books, will it lead to the Spirit?
These are honest questions based on what I have understood this paragraph to communicate.
BLD,
Keep them coming.
1. Depends on what you mean by teaching. All believers are to teach in song, in life and even expound upon as much as they know. So every believer is qualified to teach. But the bible speaks of teaching in different capacities. If you asked me 6 years ago was a qualified to lead a Sunday School with 100 adults my answer would be no.
2. Next just because you believe something differently doesn’t disqualify you or qualify you. For example I listen to McGee, Sproul, Tom Nelson, Chuck Swindoll, MacArthur, Duncan, Ferguson, Dever, Jones, Horton, Spurgeon, Keller and Josh Harris. Tell me which of those guys can you pair up with similar theology? They all believe different things about numerous things. However, they all can handle the word effectively and at a level that I would enjoy them teaching me. So I don’t understand why you ask that question. As we grow some things will change. I listen to Sproul who is a Covenant Theologian and I listen to Michael Adams who is a New Covenant guy and their theologies are radically opposed to one another.
3. Actually that doesn’t happen to be my answer. I listen to John Coleman but I don’t agree with Dispensationalism, I listen to Piper but I don’t believe in Premillenialism. I listen to Horton but I don’t believe in infant baptism and I listen to Keller and I am definitely not a Presybeterian. I read books from Bonhoffer to Thomas Watson from Swindoll to Frank Viola. Why do you take such an extreme?
4. Ah, you are correct on last paragraph, but you miss a huge deal! You are leaving out the Spirit in this friend, though you mention Him. The Spirit doesn’t always just drop knowledge out of the sky! That is a false assumption. If that were the case Jesus should have just died and then sent the Spirit into the lives of 12 men right? Why even teach them? Why does Paul use the verb “didaskō” or some derivative of it upward of 30 plus times not to mention it is the same word Jesus uses in Matthew 28 as one of the neccessities to making disciples! Jesus doesn’t say “Go and baptize and the Holy Spirit will teach them” He says go and make disciples “teaching” them!
So again one of the Gifts of the Spirit given to individual Christians is teaching. Teaching is not to be an isolated event and again if you look they didn’t have a canon! You believe in theology for the very bible you uphold. Was it the Spirit who made the bible or the Spirit using a group of men to solidfy our scriptures? This is as serious as a question as you are asking me bro! Teaching is a work of the Spirit and learning is NEVER EVER to be done in a vacuum! God fully expects us to teach one another and not solely rely on the bible and the Spirit. This is a position I don’t understand. Though men’s writing can be a crutch and should be used wisely that doesn’t mean they should be ignored.
Bro. Lionel,
Here’s the problem with me understanding what you are saying.
You seem to be saying that the men who wrote these textbooks only needed to understand language and terms and then think about it a whole lot. They didn’t need the Spirit. But…You don’t think that any believer, while depending on the Spirit, can just read the bible and study the languages and terms and think about it a whole lot and come away with accurate knowledge. They also need the textbooks by these men. That doesn’t make sense to me. Trace the history of the knowledge and it should lead back to the Spirit guided study of the language, terms and then subsequent reflection. In other words, ask the author of the first textbook what textbook did he read to come up with his theology.
I’m all for teaching and for being taught. I believe God placed this gift in the Body as a NECESSITY not as an option. I wasn’t arguing against being taught. That wasn’t my point at all.
Perhaps I should have asked for your definition of “qualified to handle the Word of God”. Or what do you believe makes an individual qualified? Take Apollos for example. Do you believe that Priscilla and Aquilla taught him everything that you believe a person would need to know in order to be “qualified”? Or take Polycarp. Did John teach him a series on, “How to read Proverbs vs. Revelations”?
I use what may appear to be extreme examples because if something is deemed “necessary” then by definition there are no exceptions. If you deem studying someone’s “Systematic Theology” as necessary, then there are no exceptions. “Helpful” would be a better term. Besides, that would beg the question as to which “Systematic Theology” is necessary: Charles Finney’s or Charles Hodges’?
BLD,
1. Actually no I don’t believe that! Nor do I believe every believer heals, nor every believer speaks in tongues, nor every believer prophecies. Teaching is a gift of the Spirit and no everyone won’t come back to the same answer. Show me that once. Polycrap was taught by John, Timothy by Paul (two letters actually), Titus by Paul and so forth. God has given us one another brother. It is bad to think otherwise. There are some things you have taught me, my wife have taught me and others have taught me that the Spirit DECIDED to use instead of teaching me from just reading my bible. So my answer is no.
2. Let me answer your question with a question. Would you let someone from Fred Price’s church lead your bible study group? How about his son? Would you let him teach a two month series on something? Why or why not? I believe John taught Polycrap what Jesus taught Him that He is the substance of the Law and Prophets I gurantee you that John taught Polycrap how to handle the Old Testament! You don’t think so?
3. I never said ST is neccessary, I said it would be helpful and beneficial. Now because of your biblical knowledge you have come up with what you believe all on your own. For me that has not been the case.
Bro. Lionel,
Either I’m not communicating well or we’re talking past one another.
1. I believe in teaching and being taught.
2. I believe in personal study for each and every individual.
3. I believe that an individual can learn just as many biblical FACTS studying on his/her own as in a group just not as fast.
4. I believe that an individual can not learn as many biblical PERSPECTIVES nor the inter-relationship of those FACTS on their own.
So we need the “one another”’s of scripture. Amen!
Btw, Fred Price can come and teach as an object lesson for our Apologetics course, LOL!!!
Lionel you stated:
“You use spiritual gifts to defend your position on elders. Spiritual gifts have absolutely NOTHING to do with being an Elder! One who has the gift of teaching no matter how good that teaching is doesn’t qualify them for eldership. Every single requirement for an elder is what EVERY SINGLE Christian should be aspiring to! Is that correct? Look at the list and tell me one thing that every Christian should not be doing. Leadership in the church has nothing to do with gifting. Leadership in the church has everything to do with maturity. So again I didn’t misunderstand you, you have an improper view of what an Elder is and what he does.”
Let’s start here:
I Cor 12:4-6
4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are DIFFERENCES OF MINISTRIES,but the same Lord. 6 And there are DIVERSITIES OF ACTIVITIES, but it is the same God who works all in all.
Taking on the role/minisry/activity of an Elder/leader is not to be desired by ALL!
28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third TEACHERS, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, HELPS, ADMINISTRATIONS, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? ARE ALL TEACHERS?
Notice that there are spirtual gifts in helps (assisting the leadership) and in administrations (leadership).
Now let’s look at the prerequistes for becoming a bishop/elder.
I Timothy 3:2
“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, ABLE (CAPABLE) TO TEACH;…”
I would agree with you that being gifted (made able by God) to teach does not automatically qualify one to become an elder/bishop. However, it does seem that this gift to teach is one of the prerequistes for becoming one. We all should mature in Christ but we all do not have this gift. So then everyone is not qualified to seek this position nor should everyone desire or have the desire to seek it. For it may not be in our ministries or activies for the Body.
Jon,
Let me ask:
1. In Titus are older women to teach younger women? Is there a gift of teaching that is a prerequiste to this command?
2. In Titus aren’t older men to teach younger men? Is there a gift requirement for this?
3. In Ephesians 6 aren’t fathers to teach their children? Does the dad need a “gift of teaching” to do this?
Let me know what you think.
Lionel,
It would seem that the context of “able to teach” in the list of qualifications would directly apply to being able to teach the word of God to the church which is composed of different maturity levels and ages. The book of Titus seems to expound on this point:
Titus 1:9
“holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.”
As opposed to the context of teaching that you cited in Titus for older men and women to follow:
Titus 2:2-5
“that the older men be sober, reverent, temperate, sound in faith, in love, in patience; 3 the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, TEACHERS OF GOOD THINGS— 4 that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.”
Notice the examples of what some of the GOOD THINGS that they are required to be able to teach.
Teaching the word or doctrines to the church does not seem to be one of them.
Okay Jon,
Let me ask this then.
1. Is the person with the gift of giving the only person who can give to the church?
2. Is the person with the gifts of help, the only person who should help in the assembly?
3. Is the person with the gift of encouragement the only person to encourage in the assembly?
4. Is the person with the give of compassion the only person to give compassion in the assembly?
5. If not why do you believe the person with the gift of teaching the only person who can be an elder? The gift of teaching and the ability to teach are different! The ability of teaching comes with one who can handle the word effectively. The person with the gift of teaching has supernatural ability to do it. Just because someone doesn’t have the gift doesn’t make them not able to do and even do it with proficiency right? If not what about the first 4 shouldn’t they we let the people with the gifts of these things do it?
Steve, why pick up a book at all?
Lionel,
I believe that the gifting provides the capacity or special ability to be able to teach (spiritual things) effectively to various learners.
For example:
I maybe equipped to teach some things in math to my son at home, however it would require a special gift to be able to handle teaching a whole class of students in math effectively. For many would not have the patience to teach on this level.
The same would seem to apply for elders. Elders must be able to excersise authority in rebuking others and at the same time be patient with the growth of others. Many people have a hard time rebuking others and being patient with others. Should they too aspire to becoming an elder because of their maturity?
Taking on the role and responsiblities of an Elder is a type of ministry that encompasses various activities. Again, scripture plainly states that there will be differences in ministries and activities within the Body of Christ based on the distribution of the gifts by the Holy Spirit.
Jon,
1. Patience is not a gift of the Spirit but a Fruit, which is required by all Christians. The ability to rebuke, admonish and balance it with love is not a gift but an issue of maturity (Col 3). These are learnt behaviors not special giftings.
2. Again you keep trying to slide Eldership into the Gifts of the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit are seperate from Eldership.
Jon-
I was browsing on your web-site and was wondering when and where the church/local fellowship that you pastor meets, what are the meeting/service times for Church at Heart Christian Fellowship?
Hutch,
We no longer meet (teleconference nor physically) on a regular bases. Here is a brief explanation in to why this is so:
We started out meeting at a YMCA in southwest Atlanta on Sundays and Tuesdays for a couple of months beginning in September 2006. We then went on to meeting there on Sundays only and I held a bible study teleconference on Thursday nights. Eventually we fellowshiped primarily through teleconference bible studies/teachings on Sundays. I currently no longer hold the teleconferences and have at this point decided to no longer minister in those capacities at this time.
The ministry started shortly after I came out of a non denominational (former COGIC) pentecostal syled church with a dominant charasmatic Pastor/Evangelist. As God continued to lead me out of that church as well as away from many false teachers and their false teachings, I begin this ministry in part to help teach (those who I knew around me and some of whom I brought to the former church and anyone else who would listen) basics to understanding how to rightly divide the word, what salvation entails, avoiding false teachers and various errant teachings, and helping them in growing in maturity in the things of God so that eventually they would be able to stand on their own and therefore be non dependant on my teachings or anyone elses teachings on a perpetual basis. I made this very clear to those who sat under my teachings in the beginning and throughout this season of my ministry. I never received pay and really had no intention for the teleconferences or weekly in person fellowships to continue forever. Back in August, I decided that it was time to discontinue the teleconference for I felt that I had adequately prepared those whom God had led to me over the course of little over a year and a half. I recorded many of the teleconference studies and have posted some of them on my website so that anyone can listen to or download them for free.
The last study that I dealt with was back in August of this year and it dealt with the biblical understanding of God, through Christ, reconciling/restoring all of His creation back to Himself (this teaching as well as the study on tithing has so far got me in the most heat with many “religous/church” people and their traditions). This took a little while for me to accept because of the traditional blinders that had been over my eyes for so long. I am still continuing to grow in my understandings on various things. I have found myself having to restudy many of the teachings that I had received from the mainline religous establishment.
One thing that has truly helped me to see the truth in the teaching of the reconciliation of all things is the fact that some of our popular bible translations/commentaries/dictionaries have been corrupted by mens traditions. Therefore, it is vitally important to cross check various reference tools that we use in order to see through some of the subtle distortions based on mens traditions. I relied (like I’m sure many of you at some point) too heavily on Stong’s Concordance and Vines dictionaries. But I have come to find out that these two sources in particular have indeed caused much confusion on some key words and explanations all because of a theology that the authors decided to adhere to.
Isn’t it strange that so many of the known false teachers of today stongly promote the usage of the Strong’s Concordance as the concordance to most trust?
Just like many of those same teachers will promote the King James translation and other revisions of it as the most trusted sources of bible translations.
I know that many of you strongly disagree with me on the restoration of all things teaching but I’m still compelled to warn as many as who have ears to hear, BE CAREFUL IN BECOMING TOO DOGMATIC ON DOCTRINES THAT HAVE BEEN MAINLY BASED ON THE TEACHINGS THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM THESE FALSE TEACHERS AND THEIR KNOWN ERRANT BIBLICAL REFERENCE WORKS (the leaven of the Pharisees). DECEPTION, AS WE ALL KNOW, CAN COME EXTREMELY SUBTLE TO US AT TIMES. BE WARNED!!!
Lionel,
Would not the members that we entrust to primarily oversee and teach the church not be the ones that God has possibly gifted to teach?
I no this would not be true for all who have taught in some capacity but I would think that this speacial gifting would be appropriate for the elders function to the Body of Christ.
I stand to be corrected on this, but I don’t see how the elder would hold one of the prime teaching positions in the body of Christ and not be gifted to teach. Am I wrong in assuming that the elders hold the prime responsiblity in holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict?
Why do you believe Elders hold the “prime responsibility” to teach?
Lionel,
I should have said “MAJOR responsibility” rather than “PRIME responsibility”.
And it’s not a matter of Elders only holding this responsiblity, but it seems to definetly be one of their major functions within the Body.
Would you not agree?
Martin Luther makes an interesting comment on some of the same points in his table talks on the sacraments:
“the apostles altered baptism; therefore, say they, the bishops have power to alter the sacrament of the Lord’s supper. I answer: admit that the apostles altered something; yet there is a great difference between an apostle and a bishop; an apostle was called immediately by God with gifts of the Holy Ghost; but a bishop is a person selected by man, to preach God’s words, and ordain servants of the church in certain places. So, though the apostles had this power and authority, yet the bishops have not.”
In the same tone, if one is able to teach, learned in the area of which he is preaching then what is the error in allowing him to teach. The bible is very clear anyway that we are all ministers of the gsopel anyway. As Luther describes he feels that because the apostles were sent of God for the task at hand they had privileges in certain areas that the bishops did not.(Now understand his was talking about the papist of the time but in context the point is made.)
Furthermore:
I would think that we would find the gifts in operation in the areas where they would be most needed. For instance, those who EFFECTIVELY lead and handle the administrative function in the body, I would expect the gift of administrations to be in operation. Those who provide a lot of EFFECTIVE help/care/support to other parts of the Body, I would expect to find the gift of helps in operation. Those who provide a lot of EFFECTIVE teaching to the Body (whether it be an Elder, or, I would assume the gift of teaching should be in operation. Or else when would the gifts be in operation.
Would not those who God has designed to carry out certain functions within the Body not be equipped with the appropriate gifts to carry out that responsibility?
Lionel,
My theological position came about BEFORE I had any theological training, and only from reading the Scriptures.
It was three young theological college students who asked me whom I had read to bevome a lover of the doctrines of grace, and what has now become recognised as NCT.
Until that time I honestly would not have labelled myself.
Correct me if I’m wrong, Elders are there to teach and build up the members. In this process the members are learning and are being equipped so that they can build each other as a church. If all the members are brought up to think like Christ (pastor, elders, members) then I would figure the whole church can work together in unity and strength with one goal and purpose more easily.
I would encourage every christian to be able to rightly divide scripture and most importanly live it out. If I was a teacher or elder I want the members to know as much about God as the pastor. This isn’t the job of one person or group of people it is available to all in the body.
Aussie J,
I also agree with you. Most of what I believed was formed already just defined later.
Eddie,
Most are not taught to think in that way. We have distinctions that prevent us from making from the pew to the pulpit (a pulpit that shouldn’t be there)