* * *
On Sunday, I was at my daughter’s volleyball tournament and in between games, I was “twittering” with a guy. At the time, I didn’t know who he was, nor that he was a pastor, I was merely looking at his tweets and responding. Don’t all moms tweet with pastors on Sunday in between volleyball games? BTW, said kid and her team qualified for Nationals. Oh yea.
I removed his name from the conversation below because I don’t want him to be the focus, but the content. I’m just curious to know what your thoughts are on this. If you’ve never tweeted, it’s quite a challenge to have a decent conversation with the 140-character space allowance.
Keep in mind, a few hours earlier, I had posted Compassion with Shoes On, so this post was still heavily on my mind. My tweets are shown next to my picture. His are shown by the hyperlinked dates (and most likely you can see who this guy is if you click on the hyperlink). I have to tell you that I cracked up after I saw who this guy was. I’m mom/blogger and he’s got a bazillion initials behind his name. How do I get myself into these things? LOL I think you will see this guy handled himself very nicely. I was impressed. He didn’t behave like other twittering pastors who shall remain nameless. Character counts with me. He starts off with #1 tweet:
-
Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1-5). In other words, a leader’s doctrine matters more than his personality.
-
-
@DefendTheSheep I wouldn’t go that far. Doctrine indeed must be shared in love, but truth is truth. -
If you saw doctrine w/o love, you’d know what I’m talking about. I still hold to my statement.
-
@DefendTheSheep Truth doesn’t change regardless how it’s presented. I think you’re going a step too far. True dDoctrine is never “nothing.” -
Pls help me understand how you see I’m going too far. I deal w/fallout of people who are harmed bec pastor failed to love….
-
@DefendTheSheep All I’m saying is that doctrine is still true even when it’s shared in an unloving way. It’s never “nothing” if it’s truth. -
I’m talking about those who focus so much on doctrine that they fail to live out love (separate from doctrine).
-
@DefendTheSheep If they present truth accurately/biblically, then their doctrine is true even if they don’t “live out love.” -
But even if doctrine is true, if they fail to love, then they fail! Check out my blog at my link. Might help explain.
-
@DefendTheSheep If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord,” is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing? -
I really want to discuss this pt in particular with you but my daughter is playing Vball now. I’m going to have to wait.
-
Julie Anne Smith@DefendTheSheep
I am interested in understanding you. Email might be easier. Spiritualsb @ gmail
If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord,” is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?
Do you see why I would find this statement bothersome? I say it is less than truthful coming from an abusive pastor. The content is true, but the behavior causes so much confusion that it smacks of fraud. It reminded me of my former pastor who said he preached the true gospel. He may have mentioned grace from time to time (rarely), but if grace is not there, isn’t his message wrong? I saw the path of destruction this man left. Some of his victims are still as confused as ever. I guess where I’m going with this is I think actions do speak louder than words.
Spiritual Sounding Board 
I agree about truth having to be presented in a loving way. I’m pretty sure that the same Bible that so many preachers like to use to beat us over the head while teaching us truth says that things without love are like clanging gongs… just a bunch of worthless noise. How true or useful is the “truth” when it’s presented in such a way that people wind up rejecting or walking away from it?
I also think that preacher is more impressed with his own degrees and achievements than he is with the people he claims to love.
LikeLike
“If an abusive pastor says, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?”
simple answer- no, the statement “Jesus is Lord” is no less nor more truthful depending on who is saying it. Like Paul said, whatever motivation when the gospel is preached, it is still truth and it is still powerful to save.
longer answer- Is God as obsessed with “speaking truth” as the neoCalvinist crowd is? Does God see truth as something that can be divorced from love? Isn’t there something inherently paradoxical about the very question of an abusive pastor speaking this “truth” ?
Sure the words spoken are true, but as soon as they escape the mouth of someone whose life contradicts their words, these same words sound empty to the hearer. If an abusive husband tells his wife he loves her, and in his heart truly means it in all honesty, but because of a variety of reasons, does not know how to love in a healthy way, is his sincerity any less “true” than the same words spoken by a loving husband? No; they both are saying what they know to be true. But one has a much deeper understanding of what is true, and his actions are consistent with the truth.
How will others know that a pastor is speaking “truth”? This is what Paul says
(2 Corinthians 3:1-6):
Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Surely we do not need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you or from you, do we? You yourselves are our letter, written on our[a] hearts, to be known and read by all; and you show that you are a letter of Christ, prepared by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.
Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God, who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of letter but of spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
LikeLike
Lol. He has an incredible amount invested in his education.
I think his mind works a bit differently than yours and he is a product of his environment, as are we all. He has almost as many letters after his name as the alphabet.
He is SBC taught and bought, culturally I find it difficult to relate.
He exhibits a love of semantics on twitter, quite the feat.
Your PhD is in the school of hard knocks.
I’m reminded there is a difference between knowledge and wisdom, he strikes me as young.
Each of you has a place in the Kingdom.
Got thinking though…
Even Satan quotes scripture,..God’s Word doesn’t return to Him void…
At the end of the road, seeing all the wounded around me, I’ll take truth spoken in love. (I Cor.13. John 17) I am influenced by behaviour. And by personality. Doctrine and truth don’t operate well in a void for most of us, and I respectfully disagree with this statement as an absolute: “Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God.”
We are all stewards of the mysteries of God.
LikeLike
If anyone understands all mysteries and knowledge, but has not love, they are nothing. Knowledge, including doctrine, will pass away, while love will abide. 1 Corinthians 13:2,8,13. Every speaking of truth without love is a transgression of Scripture. Ephesians 4:15. If Jesus is the truth, John 14:6, then truth is a person, not a proposition, doctrinal or otherwise.
To the extent doctrine consists of conclusions derived from reason applied to Scripture, there is every danger of going beyond what is written. 1 Corinthians 4:6. We are to know a tree by it’s fruit. Matthew 12:33. The fruit of doctrine without love has been the division of the Body of Christ.
I submit that truth (who, again, is Jesus) cannot be communicated without love. For example, if an abusive pastor says to me that “Jesus is Lord,” what my mind and heart hear is that Jesus is a tyrant.
LikeLike
Real truth contains love because real truth contains God and God is love.
If “Jesus is Lord” is said by a person who doesn’t ‘get’ love, then the Jesus he is talking about is a plastic Jesus who is not able to love as the person speaking is not able to love.
No love, no truth. End of story.
I Corinthians 13:If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
Perhaps instead of ‘truth’ or ‘true doctrine’ (as in Jesus is the Way, the Truth, the Life) what this pastor is talking about is facts. Hard, cold facts.
But if he is talking about Jesus, the Way, the Truth, the Life, then hard, cold facts mean nothing because they are dead and Jesus is alive.
Jesus being alive and being Lord contains love. If there is no love in it, then there is no truth in it. It becomes fake, lifeless, plastic.
Am I making sense?
LikeLike
I would say that truth is truth no matter who speaks it. My statement is rooted in the statement of Christ — “Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. (Matthew 23:1-3)”
Unfortunately, this truth often proves to be absolutely useless without the motivation of biblical love as indicated by the fact that Jesus had to make this statement to motivate His followers to heed the truthful teachings of the Pharisees and the words of 1 Corinthians 13 — “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. (1 Corinthians 13:1-3)”
I would say that you are both correct and as the brother said you are probably much closer to agreement than either of you think. What appears to be a disagreement is part of the specialization resulting from gifting and progressive conformity to Christ of different members in the body. This is why churches function poorly without input and participation by all members.
LikeLike
Love is the first fruit of the spirit. Without it, we are nothing.
LikeLike
I’m going to step out on a real big limb here and watch myself be challenged by the commentors (it’s good for me — 🙂 )
Truth is not a concept, a precept or a doctrine. Truth is a person. (John 14:6). While concepts, precepts or doctrines be truthful, there is only one Truth.
Love is not a feeling, or an action, God is Love (1 John 4). For God, love is not one of his attributes, its the core of his very being. Certainly we can have loving feelings and loving actions but God is Love.
Because, in the Godhead, The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one and the same in “three persons”, it is impossible to have love without truth.
Now, to address the twitter posts.
You can say truthful statements without being loving. I would direct you to 1 Cor 13:1, however. I think, for the most part, people know when that is being done and, especially today’s generation, will shut it out.
LikeLike
Oh… And just to clarify.. It’s also impossible to have Truth without Love.
LikeLike
Gary beat me to it, but you got it right when you tweeted the Pastor. On a side note, even the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is Lord. In any case, Jesus himself states that He is the Truth. I think that this pastor is “puffing” himself up in stating that “he” holds (is a steward) of the mysteries of God. That places him above anyone else. But here is the thing…we all have a bible. We all can read. We all have the mysteries of God in writing. All we need is the Holy Spirits help (not any man). If we want knowledge and wisdom, we pray to God. Paul was a different story. He wanted us to be “like him”…a minister of Christ. A minister is a servant. We are to be servants of Christ…just like him. And then we will have what Paul has. I think that this pastor was elevating himself to the Apostle Paul, thinking that only he has the mysteries of God, and that only he is a minister.
Colossians 1:26
Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
When? NOW. When was NOW? Long ago. Who does this pastor think he is, Paul?
LikeLike
Truth is God and a gift from God. The fact that truth is from God but not equated with the person of God in every instance is evidenced by such passages as the following:
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)
But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:21)
But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. (John 8:40)
And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. (John 8:45)
Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. (John 16:7)
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (John 16:13)
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. (John 17:17)
This makes context essential when speaking of truth. So it is impossible to have Truth without Love but quite possible to have truth without love. The only problem is that neither Truth or truth is recognizable without love.
LikeLike
@chapmaned24 You’re going somewhere that I’ve been thinking for a couple of days.
I’ve heard pastors say that a “pastor” is a shepherd and he is to “shepherd their flock”. Who does the Bible say is the shepherd? Psalm 23 – The Lord is my shepherd. John 10:11 – Jesus said “I am the good shepherd”.
LikeLike
joelfredrick do you think these guys might be making reference to what they see as their responsibilities based on the following passage:
“The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: 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; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away. (1 Peter 5:1-4)”
Perhaps this is a misguided effort to encapsulate feeding, overseeing, and being an example to a “flock” with terminology that matches the analogy. Maybe “eldering” would be a better term if it was a word. 🙂
LikeLike
I think several of the previous commenters have put this into good perspective, and I agree with them. A true statement is indeed true, no matter who says it or in what manner. If Hitler had said something like, “Jesus died for the sins of mankind,” that would indeed be a true statement. When we look at the person saying it however, based on Hitler’s actions, we would have to conclude that either he does not really believe it, or that he believe’s it to mean something other than what Christian orthodoxy teaches. It is a true statement, but because of who it is coming from, based on their actions, the truth loses value in the mind of the hearer. The speaker is perceived a hypocrite, and the natural tendency is to question and suspect whatever a hypocrite says.
Yes, doctrine is important. Without sound doctrine, people are mislead. But without love, credibility is lost and your sound doctrine won’t be heard.
In addition to 1 Corinthians 13 that people have mentioned, consider also John 13:35 which says, “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” It is not by doctrine that we know who the disciples are, but by the love that they show.
LikeLike
@Wesley Roy – I do think there is the confusion from that verse. I do like your “elder” interpretation better.
LikeLike
Oh wow, you guys took off while I was sawing logs in the desert of WA. Cool, I have to catch up.
I just wanted to let you know that I sent this pastor a direct message on Twitter and invited him to the conversation. I hope he joins in so we can have the opportunity to understand him without the 140-character Twitter limitation. Understanding is key.
LikeLike
JA-
Haha, I don’t know about everybody else, but I live in the central time zone, so I’ve been awake for a few hours now.
Hopefully he does join in. Misunderstanding is very easy when you are limited in your writing, as you said.
LikeLike
Paul states, “. . . ‘all of us possess knowledge.’ This ‘knowledge’ puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, he is known by God.” (1 Corinthians 8:1-3, ESV)
LikeLike
Eric said: I also think that preacher is more impressed with his own degrees and achievements than he is with the people he claims to love.
Eric, I cannot and would not make that call based on our short exchange. I’m big on looking at character and I thought he challenged this volleyball mom in a very respectful tone. That thought has not left me. I have much more respect for character than position, initials behind a name, etc. He got my respect.
LikeLike
JoeJoe, your John 13:35 reference is perfect. If truth from the pulpit is not done in love, then the person is not a disciple of Christ at all, and therefore, we have no obligation to listen to him at all. Even as someone pointed out already, even the devil can quote scripture. But Jesus scripture whipped him back with scripture. So then the question is, is truth really being preached from the pulpit from someone who does not do it in love? I don’t think so. From that kind of a person, scripture is easily twisted to be a pseudo truth, just as Satan quoted scripture to Jesus.
2 Cor 11:13-15
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
LikeLike
Maybe there is a practical reason that it is the Calvinists, in my experience, who tend to emphasize doctrine over love. There is little if any need for an individual to find the way of love if the following doctrines are true:
Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints
I dare say that even to the extent I can find God’s love in these doctrines, He is made to appear arbitrary and capricious. I respectfully submit that TULIP fails the test of love.
LikeLike
Eric: You zeroed in what I was trying to get at right here: How true or useful is the “truth” when it’s presented in such a way that people wind up rejecting or walking away from it?
I concur! That truth is worthless when it is rejected. (I know, I know, all truth is truth, but played out in real life, it is worthless.)
LikeLike
Recovering Pharisee said: If an abusive husband tells his wife he loves her, and in his heart truly means it in all honesty, but because of a variety of reasons, does not know how to love in a healthy way, is his sincerity any less “true” than the same words spoken by a loving husband? No; they both are saying what they know to be true.
Ok, this is perfect example (and btw, loved your comment). I propose that to the husband, his words are truth, but look at it from the other side. The wife is the one dealing with the abuse. If she views his treatment of her as “love” (as he believes it is), she might stay in that abusive marriage and be harmed more. In reality, his actions are not loving whatsoever and she better get the heck out of there based on the truth that he is beating her up. Now what? LOL
LikeLike
Great comment, BD, and it was funny when you mentioned this: “Doctrine and truth don’t operate well in a void for most of us, and I respectfully disagree with this statement as an absolute: Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God.”
Just as I was pasting the conversation on the blog post I wondered why I didn’t delve into that juicy morsel. I guess one debate at a time 🙂 You and I are definitely on the same page.
LikeLike
Gary, there is also another movement within the church. There is a major reaction against what some are calling the feminization of the church. Touchy feely stuff is rejected and logic and reason (considered holy man traits) are embraced. In some circles it is so bad that even love is suspect as touchy, feely, feminine, and less than desirable.
http://www.dougwils.com/Liturgical-Notes/your-worship-service-might-be-effeminate-if.html
I’m not saying that this is what is going on with the Pastor JA was twittering with. But this is a serious issue in the church, none the less. These groups reject the part of the Bible where Jesus says, “He who is without sin cast the first stone,” because He looks like He’s going soft on sin and letting a guilty woman go free.
LikeLike
Hey all, I just noticed something – – it looks like there is more to our Twitter conversation. I thought I grabbed it all, but I have no idea how to get it on one long thread (in order). I counted more than a dozen of my responses, so clearly there is more content missing. If someone knows how to get the whole thing on one thread, please let me know and I’ll replace the above.
LikeLike
JA, I’m going by what I see on his web presence, and by the statements he made in these tweets, filtered through my experience, of course.
His point is basically the old “it’s about the message, not the messenger” cliche, which is fine and dandy when you’re speaking about dry facts, but the Truth of Jesus is anything but a dry fact. It is first and foremost a matter of emotion, since the Gospel is directed to people’s souls and hearts. Were the Bible simply a set of provable facts, then anyone that could reject it could be viewed as a flat-earther. But it doesn’t work that way. Carrying this message is about appealing to hearts to produce faith and affection, so the messenger’s tone is of paramount importance. You can claim to be sharing absolute truth, but if your delivery causes people to turn away, then your truth is pretty useless to people. In my experience, the people I see using the “it’s about the message, not the messenger” cliche are either disconnected from the suffering in the world, or trying to exert power and influence over others.
As far as his character, I’m sure he’s a perfectly fine gentleman, but he does make it a point to emphasize his credentials in his web presence, and that is something that I don’t see the theologians and other experts doing. They may list their present job and their writings on their site, but you usually have to look past the first page of their sites to see what degrees they hold. The fact that he lists his degrees so prominently tells me that he wants people to be impressed with his academic achievements. And that brings me to another cliche, “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” If you’re telling me that I should dispassionately accept a message about love from someone who is unloving in their delivery, then it’s pretty obvious that you don’t care about people as individuals, and that you possibly have an added agenda.
So I’ll stand by my original assessment until I see otherwise.
LikeLike
Mara: My former pastor was absolutely huge on “preaching with authority.” This may tie in to what you are talking about. No wussy preaching allowed. In fact, he paid the big $$ to take a class down at John MacArthur’s place to learn how to do so.
LikeLike
And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes. (Matthew 7:28-29)
It appears from this passage that Jesus’ teaching was set apart from the teachings of the Pharisees and Scribes by the fact that it was done with authority. So are we to follow Christ’s example in this area when teaching? I think the problem lies in whether one understands that the authority is in God’s word and not the person who happens to be explaining God’s word at the moment.
LikeLike
Yea, though I possess all knowledge, yet possess not that love which prompts me to, by natural inclination, feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, visit the sick, go to the prisoner, and such like, I will, with the rest of the goats, be consigned to eternal punishment. Matthew 25:31-46; c.f. Hebrews 8:8-11, Romans 2:14. Please, preachers, do not try to foist loveless doctrine on me. Show me how to love.
LikeLike
(If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord,” is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?)
Yes, it is true the Jesus is Lord. If an abusive pastor says that, is it any less true? I would step out on a limb to say, yes.
Here’s a question…Do you think that truth can be distorted? Does this pastor think this? Again, I would step out on a limb and say, yes, he thinks truth can be distorted because I am sure that there are plenty of people out there with whom he would disagree with their doctrine. Because someone else holds a different doctrine than him, does that make it any less truthful?
(Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1-5). In other words, a leader’s doctrine matters more than his personality.)
I also have a problem with his initial statement. Because Jesus left the Holy Spirit to dwell among us, and we all are a priesthood of believers, aren’t we all stewards God’s mysteries? I find this original statement to be pulling out the power card to show who’s really in charge and who has all the answers.
He included verse 5, which I think is hilarious. It says, “Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.” Expose the motives of men’s hearts….hmmmm.
LikeLike
I think the dichotomy between appealing to emotion and reason when it comes to the gospel is an interesting one. I would submit that both are essential. The Bible certainly speaks to both. We must always speak the truth in love. Without love, we are a resounding gong as the passage goes. Nobody wants to listen to that. Love is not always touchy-feely either though. Some truths are hard truths that can’t be sugar coated. In this, we need to still be sure to speak the truth, or else what we say is still meaningless.
Our emotions are fleeting and can lie to us. People can say things that sound loving that tickle our ears, but without the truth, the people starve spiritually. There are numerous big name pastors who love to tell you about having the best life possible, and say it in the nicest way possible, but they leave out so much of the truth, that you have to wonder. I would say that this also is not TRULY loving at all.
Ephesians 4:15 says, “Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ.”
Both truth and love are needed.
LikeLike
Julie Anne, regarding the feminization of the church here is my personal testimony: In the small town where I live I can go to one conservative protestant church where the male preacher preaches a doctrine of justification by faith. I can go to another conservative protestant church with a male pastor where the emphasis is on a doctrine of salvation by baptism. I can go to another conservative protestant church where, in the past at least, you would think that the be all and end all of the Faith is to receive the gift of tongues. However, if I attend the very liberal protestant church in town, the female pastor preaches Jesus, and she does so from a heart, and with such resulting insight, that she leaves no doubt that she is personally and intimately acquainted with Him. God made Eve as well as Adam in His image, and we cannot know Him without Eve’s perspective.
LikeLike
@ Gary W, I agree with you totally but is he advocating truth without love or simply saying truth is truth? Kind of like this passage:
And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. (John 11:49-52)
Caiaphas’ lack of love does not alter the truth. Caiaphas’ lack of love does not prevent God from using this truth he spoke in the lives of people. Caiaphas’ lack of love does not nullify the beauty or power of this truth that we embrace and even teach to demonstrate God’s love and redemptive plan to others.
I think a simply query with this brother along the lines of “Do you think that a person can practice the Christian faith by repeating facts without practicing the love that the facts demand?” would clear up the whole matter. To answer yes to this question is to demonstrate biblical illiteracy or intellectual dishonesty.
LikeLike
This just came up on my newsfeed on Facebook:
“No doctrine in the whole Word of God has more excited the hatred of mankind than the truth of the absolute sovereignty of God. The fact that “the Lord reigneth” is indisputable, and it is this fact that arouses the utmost opposition in the unrenewed human heart.”
~ Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834 – 1892)
LikeLike
Gary W. – – – you are opening up a whole ‘nuther can of worms here, brother. Women preaching? whoa! 🙂 Point well taken.
Like complementarian/egalitarian issue, that is another one of those issues that confuses me at this point. (I just donated more Tweeting fodder to my former pastor with that statement.)
LikeLike
”’If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord,” is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?”’
How is this doctrine? That is what the point was yes?
LikeLike
Eric: I found this fascinating:
This guy obviously has a lot of education and when you are discussing doctrine, it’s a left-brain logical thing, isn’t it? I’ve known many people who are so doctrinally focused, they seem to forget the emotion/heart, yet the Bible does speak so much about the heart. Where does the “heart” fit in to doctrinal discussions?
I was sensing in our conversation that he was speaking about truth in the logical sense, but completely missing the heart issue, the love-in-action issue. I think it is necessary to join both truth and love together to present an accurate picture. Jesus spoke truth and acted in love.
LikeLike
Hannah said:
The doctrine part originated in his first tweet here:
LikeLike
*If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord,” is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?*
Without reading any other comments yet, here are some thoughts.
The way we ask our questions precondition our answers. It seems to me the pastor is asking a very Western-oriented philosophical question, where abstract truth statements are separated from the person who states it. So, he is right in one sense. It is “true” no matter who says it. But is the statement totally truthful?
However, if this were approached from a holistic, Hebraic mindset, it would focus on the here-and-now embodiment of character shown by practical actions not by philosophical abstractions.
So, Jesus tells people the equivalent of, “Okay, sure, the Pharisees say ‘true’ things and when they do, follow what they SAY — just don’t follow what they DO … those hypocrites.” Being the true God incarnate in flesh, He was concerned with both the truth and acting truthfully.
True principles spoken by untruthful people are easily tainted. Difficult to separate the two …
LikeLike
“Jesus spoke truth and acted in love.”
If Jesus had not acted in love, would his message of truth been as effective and long lasting?
LikeLike
“Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1-5). In other words, a leader’s doctrine matters more than his personality.”
Reading this statement again, I would say that it is generally true…with conditions. The condition is that the pastor must still be loving. A pastor can have a very outgoing, charasmatic personality, and be loving. A pastor can be more introverted and reserved, and be loving. A pastor can be a type A competitive person, and be loving. A pastor can be a more type B passive person, and be loving. A pastor can be an INJF, ESJA, or whatever those combinations of personality test letters are, and be loving. So in that sense, a leader’s personality doesn’t matter as much as their doctrine.
LikeLike
After reading this post, Matthew 22:36-40 came to mind: Jesus says that love for God and love for neighbor are the two commands on which hang “all the Law and the prophets.” I may be reading this simplistically, but doesn’t this say that doctrine and love are inextricably linked, that doctrine requires love (and vice versa)? Yes, truth is truth, but truth without love (or love without truth) does not meet the standard set by Jesus. Look at the context of this passage–the Pharisees and Saducees were intent on tripping up Jesus with doctrine, and his response is to point them to the doctrine (commands) of love.
LikeLike
“doctrine and love are inextricably linked” – – Thank you, B.K. Cobb – I completely agree that both cannot be separated. Welcome to SSB, by the way 🙂
LikeLike
If he does join in I hope the conversation with him will contain loads of mercy, buckets of truth, a boatload of unfailing love, peace & a holy kiss. A girl can dream, right!? ( ;
Psalm 85:10 Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other. or Unfailing love and truth have met together. Righteousness and peace have kissed!
LikeLike
Wesley, I love this: “The only problem is that neither Truth or truth is recognizable without love.” I love how you used truth with capital T and small t. Excellent. Christ is love. Amen.
LikeLike
Gail said: If he does join in I hope the conversation with him will contain loads of mercy, buckets of truth, a boatload of unfailing love, peace & a holy kiss. A girl can dream, right!? ( ;
I hope so, too, otherwise we’ll just be clanging cymbals and a bunch of noise.
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
There are some Pastors speaking from my own experience that would interpret and preaching the kind of Love you are talking about in 1 Corinthians 13:13, as “ear tickling” or consumed with “self-love”.
Judging by all the strife and lack of Love and Kindness over Doctrine and Methodology, I don’t think “ear tickling” or “self love” is the problem.
The Pastor you tweeted based on what I read, (by appearence) he was more consumed with maintaining the integrity of his Methodology, rather than emphasizing 1 Corintians 13:13.
LikeLike
Julie Anne
Great conversation about love and truth – Jesus was both. 😉
You are having too much fun with these guys…
Just two comments is all I need to understand “this false teacher” – ooops…
Sorry – can I say that? Is that speaking the “Truth?” – In Love? – Or, With out Love?
I wonder how that pastor would enjoy hearing that “Truth” from my snarling mouth?
Would he receive it as “Truth?” – Or would he defend himself? And attack me?
And I know which one. – 😉 Ask me how I know. 😉
This pastor says two statements that are false – and a LIE – ooops – there I go again.
Speaking the “Truth.”
1 – “Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God.”
2 – “Although, I long to be perfect, I fail.
Yet, the message I proclaim from Scripture is always true.
Hmmm? “The message “I” proclaim “from scripture” – Is Always True.
Well, he mentions “Church Leaders” in #1
But – the term “Church Leaders” is NOT in the scriptures – He added to the Bible.
And Jesus teaches His Disciples NOT to be called “Leaders” and NONE did.
So, In Love, I tell him “Truth” – I warn him – What you proclaim – Is NOT always true.
But – He is having a Four major Delusions.- It will be difficult for him to hear “Truth.”
1 – Believing the LIE – He is a “Church Leader.”
…… “Church Leader” is NOT in the Bible. NOT one Disciple called themself “Leader.”
2 – Believing the LIE – He is a “Steward” of the mysteries of God.
…. And the rest of “US” sheepies can NOT get Revelation from our pastor – Jesus.
3 – Believeing the LIE – The message he proclaims from scripture – Is always true.
….. Talk about arrogance – and delusion – It’s one thing to think it – But “Say It.” wow.
4 – Believeing the LIE – Pastor is a Title.- NOT one Disciple had the “Title” pastor.
….. In the bible, Jesus, is the only one with the “Title” Shepherd and Leader.
….. And we are warned – NOT “to take the name” of the Lord in Vain.
….. Take the – Name = authority, character- of the Lord.
….. Vain = Idolatry, falsly.
When you believe the LIE – You start to die…
When you live the LIE – You die daily – day by day…
LikeLike
Mathew 23:23 (ESV)
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.”
Notice that Jesus says that their doctrine of the tithe is correct- they “ought to have done” it. But he did not have nice things to say about them AT ALL.
Mathew 7:21 (ESV)
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.”
This does not deny that Jesus is Lord, but what good has it done the speaker? He may speak truth, but it is not credited toward him. Jesus CLEARLY states he is more interested in behavior than our ability to articulate truth.
Jesus said the highest law was love of God and love for one another. Paul said love was the summation of the law.
In fact, it was the “Stewards of the mysteries of God” who Jesus rebuked the harshest, and it wasn’t due to their understanding but because of their lack of love. Now we might ask if it was a doctrine problem- that they just didn’t “get” the “weightier matters of the law”; however, I suspect it was not a lack of information that was the problem of the pharisees, but a character issue.
As for without love doctrine is nothing, Paul is quite clear in 1 Corinthians 13, 1-3 (ESV)
“If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.”
Now please understand, I think doctrine is HUGE and it must not be neglected. How can we love what we do not know? Doctrine is how we grow in our knowledge of God. We MUST NOT neglect doctrine. We are to be people of love AND truth- we really cannot do one without the other. To love God is to want to know him, to know him is to love him.
LikeLike
Someone posted this comment on my SSB Facebook page and I thought it was good. Again, the question: If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord,” is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
If this Pastor is so consumed with embracing “Truth” then he would be emphasizing “And these three remain: Faith, Hope and Love, But the greatest of these is Love”, it seems he was putting an asterisk next to “Love”.
Was Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:13 suggesting Faith is less important than Love? Was the Pastor you were tweeting suggesting “Faith” is more important than “Love”?
Love is “Truth”. I heard “Reformed” guys emphasizing the word “Truth”. They just seem to place greater emphasis on certain “Truths” and place less emphasis on other “Truths”. (Methodology)
I have been in Baptist Churches for 30 years, but I never heard the word “Truth” with greater emphasis until a couple of “Reformed” guys use the word “Truth” as a way to push their “Methodology”.
I’m sure the word “Truth” isn’t only being exploited by the “Reformed”, but if “Truth” is being emphasized they better be emphasizing Love, or they are embracing a reckless interpretation of scriptures.
LikeLike
Wesley, the best I can tell from the pastor’s tweets, he is advocating that truth in the form of doctrine has value in and of itself, apart from love. I’m sure I’m in agreement with Wheaton College professor of philosophy Arthur F. Holmes (March 15, 1924–October 8, 2011) who wrote the book All Truth is God’s Truth. However, insofar as eternal values are concerned, I am convinced that the pursuit of doctrine or any other knowledge apart from love (or maybe I should say Love) is a chasing after wind. For in much wisdom is much vexation, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow. Ecclesiastes 1:18.
LikeLike
I hear you loud and clear Gary. I think the distinction has to be made in that a person can tell the truth without love and God can use the truth they tell like Caiaphas but they cannot claim to be really acting as a minister of Christ once this lack of love is pointed out and they fail to make any corrections.
LikeLike
“If an abusive pastor says, “Jesus is Lord”, is it any less truthful than a loving pastor who says the same thing?”
The statement “Jesus is Lord” is still true, but I would submit that an “abusive pastor” is not a true pastor.
LikeLike
Wesley said, ” a person can tell the truth without love and God can use the truth they tell like Caiaphas but they cannot claim to be really acting as a minister of Christ”
I think this is true. I would imagine that there have been some people who have been saved in abusive, un-loving churches. They were taught that they were sinners and that salvation is by God’s grace through faith in Jesus’ sacrifice. They believed, confessed, and were saved. God was still able to use that truth to reach their hearts, even if the pastor was lacking in love. One would hope that the new Christian would see this lack of love and get away from the abuse non-pastor, but that is sometimes easier said than done.
LikeLike
Hey peeps: I added a new tab at the top of the page after getting blocked from another person (who happens to be a pastor) on Twitter yet again – lol. It’s called “Negative Responses”.
LikeLike
Wesley, you are correct. Caiaphas spoke truth, however unwittingly. In this instance, it was God speaking through Caiaphas. I expect that the tweeting pastor is claiming that doctrine-apart-from-love has a value in and of itself, a value that is not dependent on God’s intervention to give unintended meaning to a matter asserted.
LikeLike
I haven’t read all the comments, but I find this statement interesting:
“Church leaders are stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1-5). In other words, a leader’s doctrine matters more than his personality.”
He has used the word “personality” where he should have used “character.” Personality has nothing to do with a leader, unless a man let’s his personality control his character.
Character is something created and lived out by actions. We are born with personalities. I’m sure the personalities among the 12 disciples varied greatly; however, personalities need to have God honoring actions attached to them to be known as people of good repute.
So showing/being loving should be a hallmark character of any Christian leader. Initials behind names doesn’t make up for what might be lacking in character.
LikeLike
@JoeJoe, I would also like to think that some Christians converted in these situations would then see the need to minister to those who do not understand love and see themselves called to that ministry.
LikeLike
Am I missing something here? Said pastor is equating himself (and all pastors) with the original 12 disciples by using 1 Cor. 4:1-4 in this manner. This bothers me greatly.
LikeLike
Bridget,
That is along the lines that I was getting at with my comment at 7:59. If he really did mean personality, then his statement, so long as the pastor is loving in his character, is certainly true. Doctrine is more important than personality.
Without a character of love, however, then it doesn’t really matter if you have right doctrine, as you would turn so many people off, nobody will want to hear it.
LikeLike
I don’t think that is the case Bridget. As has been pointed out all believers are stewards of the mysteries of Christ.
LikeLike
Without knowing more details on the pastor’s theology, doctrines, and philosophy, I think we should be careful about saying this pastor is trying to equate himself with the apostles, or that he sees himself as “above” the laity.
Pastors are called to be shepherds of the flock. Many (not all) pastors also have the role of teacher in their local church. In this way, they are entrusted to be responsible stewards of God’s teaching. In other words, they are the ones that have been intrusted to bring instruction, teaching, and sound doctrine to the local church body. This is not saying that individuals cannot do this for themselves, but the pastor/teacher (if they truly are called to such by God) has the responsibility of doing this on a larger (church body) scale. Some pastor/teachers fail in their responsibility, but not all do. I hope this makes sense.
LikeLike
I suggest that the explosion of posts on this thread is compelling evidence that way too many have been subjected to truth without love. Indeed, I would suggest that all too often too many pastors have used truth, apart from love, as a bludgeon to achieve their own fleshly ends.
LikeLike
Wesley Roy –
What point isn’t true? His quote about church leaders? (I’m confused as to what you are referring to.
I think all believers are stewards as well, but that is not what said pastor proclaimed, and he used a curious passage to back up his statement.
LikeLike
JoeJoe,
You may be right about that.
I am guilty of being under the impression this Pastor has “Reformed” tendencies with the way he loosely emphasized “Truth”, which by appearence is incomplete and lacking the emphasis of Love.
He may not be “Reformed” or lean “Calvinist”.
I have to be careful of “Guilty by Association” when I hear the word “Truth” being used loosely, because I’m sure the “Reformed” aren’t the only ones that exploit the word “Truth”.
LikeLike
JoeJoe –
I’m just inquiring about what he tweeted. I didn’t add to it, I didn’t say he was above laity. He is the one that quoted the passage with the statement.
This is what the Apostle Paul wrote about him self –
1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant
5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;
6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.
7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.
9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.
11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.
12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.
13 So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
He thought highly of love 🙂
LikeLike
Bridget, when he said “church leaders” I did not think of pastors only. There are many different ministry positions in churches that are classed as leadership positions.
LikeLike
Indeed, I think that sometimes somethings are espoused as “truth” when it is merely a theological or doctrinal construct that is open to interpretation. The difficulty arises when determining which theological/doctrinal constructs are worthy of following and holding onto more rigidly. Even then, we must often be careful of calling them “truth.” Even then, if any of these theological/doctrinal constructs is taught without love, grace, and humility, one must question the author of the theology/doctrine, which immediately makes the theology/doctrine suspect (not necessarily false, but suspect).
Based solely on the 14 tweets shown in the article, and my interpretation of them, I would have to say that they are all correct.
Doctrine is more important than personality.
Doctrine, without love, is true so long as it is indeed true.
Truth does not change, so long as it is indeed true.
However, doctrine without love is also meaningless, as it is like a “resounding gong” in the ears of the hearer.
Even still, God is capable of reaching those under unloving pastors with the truths that are in the message. If a person’s heart is open, thye can hear God’s voice beyond the clanging symbols.
I believe God would want the person in that circumstance to then show love to those who are not receiving it from the pastor (this can take many forms, including leaving that church)
LikeLike
Bridget,
My comment was addressed more to all of the commenters (myself included) in general. And while I don’t think anybody said that the pastor was saying he was above the laity, that was the impression I was getting as to what perhaps some people were thinking from their comments, or that they were heading in that direction. I could be wrong about that, but that was the impression I got.
LikeLike
JoeJoe,
Doctrine without Love is incomplete.
The word “Truth” is being used loosely in the context of this Pastor because he dismissed or placed less value of Julie Anne’s proclaimation to include Love as being the center of Doctrine.
LikeLike
Mark – – I’m pretty sure that anyone connected with SBTS would most likely have some Reformed leanings. I don’t know that you would feel comfortable not being Reformed there.
LikeLike
“Doctrine without Love is incomplete.”
This is true. The entire doctrine of the Gospel is about God’s love for us. To neglect love in doctrine is completely wrong, and if somebody does neglect love in their doctrine, I would question as to whether that person really understands it.
I think I am interpretting the pastor’s responses somewhat differently. I could be wrong, but they way I am reading them, he is approaching the conversation from a much more analytical and technical point.
TECHNICALLY, if something is “Truth” then it is still true even if the person teaching it is teaching in an unloving way, and it is POSSIBLE that God could use even this unloving circumstance to bring the truth to the people who hear it. HOWEVER, the liklihood of a person accepting truth in an unloving circumstance is much less. The lack of love does damage to the truth, because the truth and love are intertwined. To seperate them is wrong, even though the truth is still technically true.
LikeLike
@JoeJoe, I think that is what Gary and I have arrived at as well.
LikeLike
Wesley
You write @ APRIL 25, 2013 @ 10:46 AM…
“There are many different ministry positions in churches
that are classed as leadership positions.”
I need some help – Because – In the Bible…
I’m NOT familiar with any positions “in churches” classed as leadership positions.
Can you name three or four positions “In Churches?” That are Leadership positions?
Seems Jesus, in the Bible, has a unique take on “Leaders” for His Church, His Body…
“ONE”
Haven’t you ever wondered? Why? Jesus taught His Disciples?
NOT to be called “Leaders?” For you have “ONE” leader – the Christ?
And NONE did…
In the Bible, ALL of “His Disciples” called themselves “Servants.” 😉
Mat 23:10-12 NASB – New American Standard Bible
Do NOT be called leaders; for “ONE” is your Leader, that is, Christ.
But the greatest among you shall be your servant.
Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled;
and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.
The Message – Mat 23:10-12.
And don’t let people maneuver you into taking charge of them.
There is only “ONE” Life-Leader for you and them—Christ.
**Do you want to stand out? – Then step down. – Be a servant.**
If you puff yourself up, you’ll get the wind knocked out of you.
But if you’re content to simply be yourself, your life will count for plenty.
Hmmm? If someone calls them self a “Leader?”
Allows others to call them “Leader?”
Allows others to believe they are in the position of “a Leader?”
“Ignoring” what Jesus taught His Disciples…
Are they one of His Disciples? 😉
LikeLike
JoeJoe,
Now I get it.
If a person takes an exam and he gets a 50%. Then 50% of his exam is filled with “Truth”. He will still flunk the exam because he only isolated 50% of his answers as “Truth”. I guess 50% is better than 0%, even though that person still flunked the exam.
LikeLike
Amos,
I’m not entirely sure, but it sounds as if you may be getting a little hung up on a technicallity of semantics in the use of the term leader.
I think when Jesus told his disciples not to call themselves leaders, I think what he was more concerned about was the diciples thinking of themselves as above and seperate from the laity, in a way similar to what the Roman Catholic Church teaches.
In taking a “leadership position” in a church, you really are taking a servant position. I think the way that most of us are using the term leader is in reference to somebody that takes the responsibility for something or provides direction for something.
If these people do begin to see themselves as above those whom they are “leading” then that is indeed a problem. But I am not so sure that simply using the term leader is a bad thing.
LikeLike
Mark,
In a technical sense, yes. In a realistic sense though, in the case of pastoring and teaching the church, then I would say that it is probably WORSE to have partially true doctrine without love. Many cults, false religions, and false teachings have arisen from partial Biblical truths. And if the Bible is taught without love, I think it will make it that much harder for people to come to faith in Christ.
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
I must of surfed through your column and tweeting a little too fast and failed to see SBTS.
What I recognized was the way this Pastor loosely emphasized “Truth” which in some respect countered or dismissed your emphasis to include Love as part of the “Truth” equation.
(“Truth” was a common word used by a “Reformed” former Pastor I know, fresh out of a Calvinistic Seminary in his attempt to Covertly indoctrinate our Congregation with all 5 Points of TULIP, that lacked Love in his Sermons)
The tweeting Pastor’s “Truth” proclamation lacked Love and reaked with a “Reformed” Methodology.
I have to admit “Truth” shouldn’t be a buzz word. I’m able to recognize who the Reformed are, when they use the word “Truth” in the manner that they use it. But of course it isn’t full-proof.
“Truth” is a good word for those of us that embrace it.
(as I stated the “Reformed”, are probably not the only ones that recklessly use the word “Truth” on their Congregations)
LikeLike
@AAL, Come on now……..I was addressing the tweets in question and simply pointing out that when someone says “church leadership” they are not referring to pastors/elders/bishops (are whatever you want to call them) only.
The following passages along with many others teach that all do not have equal responsibility in the churches though all are equal as humans and believers:
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) (1 Timothy 3:5)
Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. (1 Timothy 5:17)
Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation. (Hebrews 13:7)
Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. (Hebrews 13:17)
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; (1 Peter 5:2)
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. (Ephesians 4:11-16)
Again we see the requirement to speak the truth in love as these responsibilities are discharged.
LikeLike
JoeJoe, Amos,
I appreciate the points both of you are making. I would like to think that it is possible to, for example, serve in a pastoral manner without taking on a title and without being elevated above others. It has been my observation, however, that church organizations have a way of hiring leaders to whom they give the title of pastor. Further, in my unfortunate experience, and without exception, these salaried and titled pastors become elevated above the so called “laity.” They in fact wield compulsory authority. They do not succeed in simply serving without fanfare. These things are true even of paid and appointed pastors who have my respect and friendship. Perhaps it would help if we simply quit referring to leadership positions and started speaking of places of service, or some such. My apologies to Wesley, who I recognize makes efforts to avoid being like the pastors I describe in this comment.
LikeLike
Mark, re: your comment. I found SBTS when I clicked on his name to see his Twitter profile. It’s there hidden among the initials.
LikeLike
Hi JoeJoe
You write…
“I think what he was more concerned about was the diciples
thinking of themselves as above and seperate from the laity,”
Now I cuuda missed it but – “the Laity” – Is that in the Bible?
What does “the Laity” mean?
Who is “the Laity?”
LikeLike
Amos said:
Amos, I know where you are going with this – lol.
LikeLike
JoeJoe,
I thought you were talking in a technical sense all-along.
The issue I have is the tweeting Pastor, either dismissed or placed less value with Julie Anne who merely was attempting to include the emphasis of Love, in his “Truth” proclamation.
He too was very technical. With respect to him and his technical skills (and good auto mechanics) he probably would make a good auto mechanic at a Ford or GM dealership, which is nothing wrong with that, like all of us, they need Jesus as well.
LikeLike
I just want to make my standard objection to painting “Reformed” folks with a broad brush. Not every “Reformed” believer is guilty of recklessly using the word “truth”.
LikeLike
@Gary, I appreciate the exclusion from that company Gary. 🙂 I often teach and speak of myself as simply exercising the gifts that I have been given and being no different than anyone else who has a different gifting. I refer to pastoring as one of many ministry opportunities within a church.
LikeLike
Amos,
As far as I am aware, laity is not in the Bible. Let me clarify what I am meaning, however. When I refer to the laity, I am simply referring to those people who have not been called to a role of pastoralship in the church. Pastors are not above, nor are they to be separate from the congregation. I am using it only as a distinction between those who have been called to the specific role of pastorship, and those who have not.
LikeLike
Mark,
I think I see a little better what you are saying now. While I still don’t technically disagree with this pastor (again, basing this ONLY on the tweets that are in this article), he probably could have better addressed what Julie Anne was trying to say.
LikeLike
Let’s get this right.
A loveless and insufferable jack ass pastor should be taken seriously and listened to when he proclaims doctrine because of his (man made) “spiritual authority” and his place in the (man-made) hierarchy.
But heaven forbid if a woman or anyone who lacks “spiritual authority” proclaims the same. It doesn’t matter how she lives out her life. She should be silenced with impunity even when she says, “Jesus is Lord.” Whether she is under proper authority is a much bigger issue than her silly doctrine.
I love the story of Lazarus and the rich man. How clueless was the rich man when he implored father Abraham to send Lazarus back to talk to his brothers. Yeah, like his brothers would have listened to a homeless guy like Lazarus. He must have slept through the sermons on spiritual authority.
Ah, the authority fetish.
LikeLike
JoeJoe,
The “exposed tweets” are the only thing we have to base our interpretations. The Spiritual guidance God gives us, is that words really do matter when discovering God’s “Truths” and who the deliverer of those “Truths” are really are.
If the deliverer’s interpretation of “Truth” lacks Love (or no Love) in the technical sense those “Truths” are incomplete and he may be a heretic.
Even though the “exposed tweets” by the Pastor were more technical, I couldn’t (or wouldn’t anyway) make the determination if this Pastor is a heretic or not.
LikeLike
Mark,
Simply put, I agree. 🙂
LikeLike
In response to David Cho: While I don’t recall one way or the other what if anything he says about women and authority, John Bevere, in his book Under Cover, makes exactly the point that “A loveless and insufferable jack ass pastor should be taken seriously and listened to when he proclaims doctrine because of his (man made) “spiritual authority” and his place in the (man-made) hierarchy.” Of course, he uses different wording. Interestingly, I tried the Bevere approach with one pastor, but I still ended up being marginalized and even angrily dressed down. I hate to volunteer this, but I cannot say the Bevere approach failed to return dividends. I had the congregation’s instant sympathy, and the pastor wasn’t around much longer. Scary. Probably something about turning the other cheek or something.
LikeLike
Jeff @ 12:24 p.m.
I have stated several times in this thread and previous threads, that not all “Reformed” embrace or practice a reckless interpretation of Scriptures on their Congregations.
Thanks for the re-clarification.
LikeLike
JoeJoe
Thanks for the explanation. NO – “The Laity” is NOT in the Bible…
You write…
“Pastors are not above, nor are they to be separate from the congregation.”
And – As far as I can tell – From reading the Bible…
The “Title/Postion” Pastor/Leader – also – is NOT in the Bible.
Hmmm? Todays “Pastor/Leader” is this a “Title/Position” in the scriptures?
Don’t know if you ever noticed, or attempted your own study, research, on pastors?
I mean in the Bible? What does the Bible say about pastors?
Makes an interesting study.
Here’s some questions to ask as you check out pastors.
In the Bible, How many of His Disciples are called – pastor/leader?
In the Bible, How many of His Disciples call another Disciple – pastor/leader?
In the Bible, How many of His Disciples have the “Title/Postion” – pastor/leader?
In the Bible, How many of His Disciples are ordained as a – pastor/leader?
In the Bible, How many of His Disciples are hired, or fired, as a – pastor/leader?
In the Bible, How many congregations are “led” by a – pastor/leader?
And every pastor I’ve met also has the “Title” Reverend.
Can’t seem to find anyone with the “Title” Reverend in the Bible either.
Best I can figure – Jesus is the only one with the “Title/Position” Shepherd/Leader.
But – I cudda missed it. 😉 Oh yeah – God – Holy and Reverend is His name. Ps 111:9
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice; “
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Voice – One Fold – One Shepherd – One Leader
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
LikeLike
David Cho said:
Whoa – and now we’re venturing down another path. I felt like I was treated with respect in this conversation and didn’t sense any dissing of my gender. But as you know I have certainly dealt with this issue in the past. Now if he said, “where is your husband in all of this?” – I would have been immediately triggered and it wouldn’t have been pretty. Just sayin’
Good to see your smiley face, David!
LikeLike
Amos,
As far as the idea of a pastor being called Reverend, I am not entirely sure this is a good idea either. I am not entirely against it, but I do find it questionable. At none of the churches I have ever either attended or visited as the pastor used the title “Reverend.”
As for the idea of pastors–Ephesians 4:11-12 say, “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up,”
Pastoring is a calling that is given to some people and not others. It is a position of leadership. It is leadership by taking the responsibility to SERVE the body of Christ in helping to equip others in their service to Christ.
LikeLike
Forgot to put in the previous reply. There is THE Shepherd, and there is A shepherd. A shepherd is simply somebody who watches and tends to sheep. Christ (THE Shepherd) left the tending of his flock of sheep (the church) in the hands of those who are called to serve in equipping the church (see Ephesians 4:11-12). Thus, by definition, these people are like shepherds. They are watching and tending the sheep. Not all of them are good shepherds. And not all of them that think of themselves as shepherds should be.
LikeLike
Oh, one thing I just remembered. At the church I attend, those were are various positions of ministry (including but not limited to: music, audio/visual, teaching, child care, greeting, and security) are all on what we call the “Serve Team.” We try to put emphasis on the fact that our various ministries are all meant to as service to the church body, and ultimately to God.
LikeLike
I am speechless JoeJoe………because you have said it so well. 🙂
LikeLike