Guest Post: A Call for Reasoned Discernment Before Judgment Is Made Upon Others

880 thoughts on “Guest Post: A Call for Reasoned Discernment Before Judgment Is Made Upon Others”

1. Brian asks, “I’m curious. To what exactly is it that you guys are NOT wanting to submit to church leaders/pastors?” The question appears to presuppose the legitimacy of “church” as an organization, as opposed to church being simply the followers of Jesus. If anybody claims to be a leader or pastor of a “church” as an organization, their self-proclaimed “office” is Illegitimate. Therefore, I will not submit to any such leader/pastor’s pretended authority. Neither will I be inclined to submit to claimed authority of any church institution, it being my view that authority-based church institutions are the ecclesiastical expression of the great whore who sits on many waters. The other possibility is that authority-based church institutions are the great whore’s prostitute daughters. Rebellion on my part? No. It is resistance–resistance to the very machinations of the enemy of our Souls, the enemy who will seek to enslave where he cannot destroy.

   LikeLike

2. Been following a lot of the comments, they’ve ballooned to over 300 really quickly. Definitely hard to just jump in somewhere. Since there are so many places I could jump in at, I’ll just jump in at the end with the last comment from Gary W, as I do have a question from what he said.

   Gary W, do you believe that when Christians gather to worship, they should be organized? In other words, should there by somebody to lead discussions, music, prayer, decide what should be spoken about that Sunday, etc. Or should people just decide to do whatever they want to do when they meet? That would be an unorganized structure. No plans, no leadership. I can see this working with very small groups and home-churches, but I see this as being extremely difficult to the point of impossible whenever a church grows above some size. At some point, there must be some level of more formal organization. Without organization, you essentially have anarchy.

   The Bible tells us that some are given to be pastors and teachers, whose responsibility (along with other people) is to equip the rest of the church body for God’s work. The authority (and responsibility) I see that these people have is to follow God and faithfully fulfill this particular ministry to help others fulfill their own ministry. These pastors and teachers then are the ones who decide what should be taught that particular week and how to teach it.

   Reading several of Brian’s other comments, it seems that this is the type of authority that he is saying a pastor has. I believe I’ve read at least one comment from him where he says that a pastor does not have authority or superiority over anybody else. It is possible I missed something else he said here or somewhere else, and I do not personally know Brian, but from these snippet comments, that is what I am gleaning.

   LikeLike

3. The English “translations” of Scripture contain various references to “offices.” As Lydia has pointed out, there is no corresponding word in the Greek text. The translators (I would call them interpreters) have, outrageously enough, simply inserted the word “office,” quite apparently by way of imposing their views and agendas on the very Word of God. Then, Brian Thornton comes along and suggests that we should give the benefit of the doubt to those who would claim to hold such offices. No, those who are called to places of responsibility in the Body are called to serve and not to lord it over. Whenever love is replaced by claimed authority, which is ultimately coercive, the following, almost axiomatic, truths found at http://tinyurl.com/komtvxa, apply:

   “It is not only the slave or serf who is ameliorated in becoming free… the master himself did not gain less in every point of view,… for absolute power corrupts the best natures.” Alphonse Marie Louis de Prat de Lamartine.

   “Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it.” William Pitt the Elder, Earl of Chatham.

   “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton.

   There are people we call pastors who appear not to have not fallen prey to the corruptions of authority-based power. We are privileged to enjoy the contributions some of them make here. For my part, however, I will not give the benefit of the doubt to anybody who accepts either the title or the institutional position of “pastor.” 1 Thess 5:21, Rev. 2:2.The burden is on these potentially dangerous people to demonstrate that they are ministering as fellow bond servants, from a base of love—not authority and power. Unless and until they pass the test, it will be my assumption that men and women claiming to be “pastors” may be wolves, pigs, vipers, and “shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted. Jude 1:12, ESV.

   LikeLike

4. Good questions, JoeJoe. While I do not consider Paul to speak with the authority of Moses, or of any other prophet, and while I deem that we are at liberty to conduct fellowship in a manner that varies from what he prescribed, I submit that we would do well to engage in fellowship according to the spirit of the following:

   What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. 1 Corinthians 14:26-33a, ESV.

   Gatherings of Christians should ordinarily be interactive. If any regular gathering of Christians is too large for this kind of interactive fellowship to work, it has simply become too large. The typical sermon format, with a single “authority” preaching from on high to a captive and silent audience, with no opportunity to interact, is simply Pagan. See Pagan Christianity by Barna and Viola. There may be occasions where a lecture format is appropriate, but if one would claim an Ephesians 4:11 place of service (notice I was careful to avoid the use of the word “office”) they will be most effective in what they demonstrate, not in what they merely speak or preach. Jesus example is that the teacher/student relationship is most effective when it takes place in close, intimate, personal relationship. I also note that, with Jesus, the relationship was temporary, lasting only about three years.

   I reject the notion that Ephesians 4:11 servants have some sort of inherent authority attached to their supposed “offices.” They are entitled to be honored and respected, as are we all, but anything resembling the deference demanded by “authority” must be earned. Before entrusting ourselves to any human minister, we will do well to first test their fruit.

   LikeLike

5. I would agree that caution is prudent when judging the character of a pastor. This is especially true if one is contemplating joining a local church body. There are indeed wolves posing as shepherds out there. I have to say though Gary W, what I read out of your comment is not caution, but cynicism. It seems you would not go into a church with a cautious, neutral outlook, but a negative one from the start, which would color your observations and magnify anything you could potentially see is wrong with the pastor into something that is much bigger than it really is. I could be wrong, but it is difficult to read it differently with comments such as, “it will be my assumption that men and women claiming to be “pastors” may be wolves, pigs, vipers, and “shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted.” This is where giving the benefit of the doubt is important. Granted, we can never be completely neutral when observing, but we should try to be. It seems you go in assuming guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty.

   LikeLike

6. When we don’t know or forget history, we are destined to repeat it.

   JoeJoe,
   I’ve learned more about God & the Bible in certain Bible studies with other Christians than in a structured setting with a leader. I’ve learned more on the blogs of laity & the discussions that ensue than in most Sunday morning sermons. I grew up & spent my whole life in church. I was there 3 times a week for decades.

   We have something that no one else has had in the history of the world. Unlimited information. The Bible, translations, Hebrew & Greek meanings, etc. are accessible & free online. Each one of us has a responsibility to learn for ourselves. Dialogue is good. Different viewpoints are expressed. We think critically. We constantly review what we believe, affirm it, or throw it out. We grow.

   This seems to be viewed as dangerous. Just like having a printed copy of the Bible was viewed as dangerous. The Bible was kept in the hands of the leaders, not the laity, because the laity could not be trusted with a Bible in their home. They needed to be treated like children & told what to think.

   “Unorganized structure”: It is not odd, wrong, or dangerous to have informal discussions with other Christian believers about the Bible, it is healthy. It’s part of living out our faith. I have learned more this way. We each have insights into certain parts of scripture. It’s not natural to think one person understands better than the rest, ALL of the time, on ALL aspects of scripture. Why does it have to be organized or have some sort of official stamp of approval?

   Brian Thornton said, “If a person can’t get close enough to their elders to actually know who they are then they should find a church where they can.”

   I know of a very small, close-knit highly educated reformed church, less than 50 maybe, where the laity doesn’t know at least one of the elders. Size doesn’t solve the problem. People put their best face forward in church, hide their stuff. Sly evil-doers are even better at hiding.

   It seems evil-doers aren’t attracted so much to informal structures or churches like Carmen’s, where there is no ladder of control, power, office, or position to climb. Just servants longing to obey & follow Jesus, and serving each other.

   LikeLike

7. While Jesus did have a small, core group of followers who were close to him, he would regularly teach to VERY large crowds, larger crowds even than some of today’s mega-churches. Many of whom would follow him from town to town. It was sort of like a traveling church. Would this be considered pagan?

   LikeLike

8. Brian,

   I don’t blame you if you feel a bit overwhelmed. You’ve been fielding questions and objections left, right & center, and that would be hard on anyone. If you want to take a breather from this blog, I don’t think anyone has a problem with that.

   However, I hope you will stick around and keep an eye on discussions here, even if you don’t comment for a while. Also, I hope and pray that you’ll think, and think hard, about what people are saying. Although not everyone is a Christian, there is much wisdom and experience here, and knowledge of the Bible. It’s just that many of us understand the Bible differently from you.

   Based on your article and comments above, you seem to assume that all Christians believe (or should believe) in such doctrines as church membership, pastoral authority, EFS (which sounds a lot like ESS, by the way) and complementarian marriage. Your rather strident tone towards Lydia at 7:37 p.m. stood out to me.

   Please try to understand that not everyone sees these doctrines and interpretations spelled out in Scripture as clearly as you do. Some of us may have lived without even hearing of them or considering them — or considered them and rejected them — and have grown and matured as Christians just fine. As I said before, through the lens of experience, we interpret some passages of the Bible in different ways (without negating it), and God still accepts us.

   I hope that you too can accept us as brothers and sisters in Christ. If you can’t — if you insist that all Christians must adhere to all these secondary doctrines — I’m afraid you will continue to find these surroundings uncomfortable. Very few people enjoy being dictated to in such a manner, and no one on this blog does. We will all continue to think for ourselves.

   LikeLike

9. A Mom said: It is not odd, wrong, or dangerous to have informal discussions with other Christian believers about the Bible, it is healthy.

   I don’t think it is wrong either. I actually think it is good and healthy. Churches should advocate it. God also gave us people to be pastors and teachers though who are specially equipped to help equip others. Sitting under a pastor(s) or teacher(s) would require at least some amount of organization though. There can be many ways to do this. Gary W’s thoughts on 1 Corinthians 14 are one good way, especially when it comes to smaller groups. I disagree though that having larger churches is a bad idea. There can be many advantages to larger churchers including more opportunities to serve and use your own gifts and having more resources to minister to a greater number of people and help those outside the church.

   As to Brians comment of not being able to get close enough to an elder, this does not have to do with size of a church, as you said. I don’t think that is what Brian was referring to either. It seems he was saying that if a pastor or elder won’t let you even have a chance to get close to them, which can occur in any size of church, then run.

   LikeLike

10. A Mom, just wanted to clarify so people don’t think there’s NO structure in our church! If you’d like to look up the structure, it’s clearly laid out in the United Church of Canada website so you’ll see how we work. I’ll give you a concrete example of the only ‘issue’ that’s ever been contentious in our little charge’s history. We had a guest minister – a ‘fill in’ one summer who was an older man and had a military background. He had been a ‘padre’ who worked on an air force base, where there were multiple denominations. His theological background was Baptist. One Sunday, in his ‘sermon’, he railed against homosexuals. You need to understand that THAT kind of thinking is directly opposed to United Church doctrine – and I happened to have our impressionable 12-yr. old son with me that day. Needless to say, I left – furious and upset. I immediately contacted our Clerk of Session and together we wrote up a letter that went to the Presbytery (where all the ‘charges’ in our area are represented). We didn’t hear of him preaching in any United Churches after that. Lest you think we all get together and hang around (we definitely do that after church service!), there is a bulletin put out every week, the minister leads the worship (sometimes others, including members of the Sunday School), and we have communion four times during the year. We also have quarterly meetings in the Pastoral Charge (which would include the two churches in our PC) where financial reports are given and items pertaining to the work of the church are discussed and voted on. Members vote on motions, but if you aren’t a member, your opinion is certainly valued – anyone is invited to come to a PC meeting. We also have a Ministry & Personnel Committee to deal with any item that might be problematic – say, if someone is upset about the format of the worship. It would be brought to the minister’s attention, she would add input and rationale, then a course of action would be decided on. We also have appointed Elders (female and male), who usually have a list of people in the charge that they visit on a regular basis – we have many elderly and shut-ins. Also, anyone working in ANY position who has regular contact with children has to have a criminal records check done and submitted to the M & P committee. (That’s the usual process for anyone doing any kind of program for children these days – has been for awhile now).

    LikeLike

11. Office:

    8 words for office in the New Test. 7 Greek words used.

    2407 (To Be A Priest, i.e. Perform his functions)
    Luke 1:8

    2405 (Functions of a priest)
    Luke 1:9

    2405 (Functions of a priest)
    Hebrews 7:5

    1248 (Attendence, as a servant, aid, service)
    Romans 11:13

    4234 (practice, i.e., an act)
    Romans 12:4

    1984 (Superintendent) NOTE: “The office of a Bishop” is what was translated as superintendent. The definition of Bishop is superintendent. Therefore, it shows that the word office was an insert from the interpreters/translators, and, based on the other verses with office actually used, it is clear that the meaning is to serve, not to lord. Note the definition of superintendent. An overseer. Stephen oversaw the widows being fed. The Apostles likened that to “waiting on tables”. So, a Bishop is a waiter. GET ME SOME COFFEE BISHOP!! He waits on me, I don’t wait on him.
    1 Timothy 3:1

    1247 (assistance)
    1 Timothy 3:10, 13

    Now, I think we all have a Bible that we can look up those verses. I was gonna do a cut and paste, but thought against it.

    Ed

    LikeLike

12. JoeJoe said, “It seems you go in assuming guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until proven guilty.”

    Assuming innocent until proven guilty is exactly the problem. To take comfort in any organization, just because it is organized & has a hierarchical structure is to put yourself at risk. And let’s be clear, comfort is one selling point to a chain of command based church. They are Monet paintings, pretty from afar, ugly up close.

    Yikes. If this assumption is correct, there would be no need for controls in church. This is extreme thinking. It leaves the laity wide open to abuses of all kinds, not to mention pilfering of the coffers. And the lack of controls, accountability, critical eye is what has contributed to damaged lives of precious souls in these authority-based churches where leaders are trusted & obeyed because of their position. Trust must be earned.

    LikeLike

13. Gary said:

    “What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. 1 Corinthians 14:26-33a, ESV. ”

    My response: IF ANY (third sentence).
    Now that is church…and that is the proper organization. It shows that everyone participates, not just the teachers, preachers, pastors, or bishops. Those preachers, teachers, pastors and bishops will NOT have the revelation, a tongue, interpretation, prophets, etc.

    Ed

    LikeLike

14. Peter Enns has a very interesting post today, and I think it may have a lot to do with the polarity of opinions and difficulty communicating concerning these issues.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peterenns/2013/08/you-and-i-have-a-different-god-i-think/

    From the post:

    And the Gospel certainly does not teach me that God is up there, at a distance, guiding the production of a diverse and rich biblical canon that nevertheless contains a single finely-tuned system of theology that he expects his people to be obsessed with “getting right” (and lash out at those who don’t agree).
    When it comes to things like Adam and I hear how people explain their position, the question I ask myself now is “what kind of God are you presenting to me here when you say X….?” Is it
    an incarnating God–Immanuel, God with us, or
    a Platonic god–where you have to peel off the obscuring “down here” hindrances to get to the untainted “up there” god, with the Bible as an encoded inerrant guidebook to get you there.
    I don’t like the platonic god. I don’t think Jesus did either.
    You can tell something about the god people believe in by paying attention to how they talk about controversial issues of the Bible–like Adam. Do you see a system-dispensing administrator who keeps his distance or “God with us”? If you keep your eyes open, my bet is that you will see one or the other coming through loud and clear.

    I think Mr. Enns’ post hits the nail squarely on the head, and the debates here demonstrate it quite well. The regulars here are no longer willing to live under the bureaucracy of a Heavenly SysAdmin, we long for Emmanuel, and we find Him, so long as He is the one we seek.

    LikeLike

15. Trust must indeed be earned, but I don’t think it is wise to go in distrusting until the trust is earned, but to rather be a neutral observer (at least as neutral as possible). Careful examination should be done when deciding on any church with any type of organization. To avoid making faulty assumptions though, we have to be as neutral as we can until evidence warrants deciding one way or another. Even assuming the liklihood of the pastor being one way or another can taint how we see them. That was the problem I had with Gary W’s statement. He wasn’t saying that he neccessarily believed that a pastor in a new church IS a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but that there was a strong liklihood that they are until they prove otherwise (that is how I read it). That is not going in neutral, it is going in with a negative bias. That is what I am trying to advocate, going in with a neutral stance, which is not easy, but I believe is important.

    LikeLike

16. Elders in the church.

    Based on what I see, it appears that the elders are to be readily available to us for spiritual advice, as they are supposed to be spiritually mature, hence the word elder.

    They are not to seek us out, we are to seek them out. We are to go to them with spiritual issues. They are not to come to us.

    It goes back to when I was a child. We were always told to respect your elders. Why do we respect them? Because they have lived life. They have the experience.

    Therefore, I disagree with the notion that one is to be “ordained” as an elder.

    I have seen young kids “ordained” as an elder in the Mormon church. They are the ones who knock on your door, riding a bike, with a white button down shirt and a tie. What have they lived? What life experience do they have? What level of maturity to they hold?

    Ed

    LikeLike

17. Carmen, That is helpful. It seems that a church can have structure without an authority or power structure. Organization, order without a parent-child relationship type of structure.

    JoeJoe said, “Sitting under a pastor(s) or teacher(s) would require at least some amount of organization though.”

    I agree, JoeJoe. The organization you speak of is authority based. I would say an organization which isn’t authority based does not require laity to “sit under” a pastor, or for laity to be “preach over”. The pastor & laity are equals. That’s the difference.

    LikeLike

18. Sitting under does not necessarily imply authority over. It means that you agree that you believe the one speaking has something important to say and has been equipped to do so. When somebody is teaching you something new, you sit under the teaching of your teacher. When you allow a friend to mentor you in some area, you are sitting under them. They do not have authority over you. That is an important difference. They do have the authority, given by those in the church by simple matter of attendance, to decide what to teach and what direction to take that local church in. The pastor is still accounable to those they pastor, however, and if the members feel that the teaching or direction that the pastor is taking, then they should have the power to either remove the pastor, or to go elsewhere.

    LikeLike

19. Sorry, missed a couple words in a sentence. The pastor is still accounable to those they pastor, however, and if the members feel that the teaching or direction that the pastor is taking,

    SHOULD BE

    The pastor is still accounable to those they pastor, however, and if the members feel that the teaching or direction that the pastor is taking IS UNBIBLICAL, UNETHICAL, OR WRONG…

    LikeLike

20. Ed said:

    Elders in the church.

    Based on what I see, it appears that the elders are to be readily available to us for spiritual advice, as they are supposed to be spiritually mature, hence the word elder.

    They are not to seek us out, we are to seek them out. We are to go to them with spiritual issues. They are not to come to us.

    It goes back to when I was a child. We were always told to respect your elders. Why do we respect them? Because they have lived life. They have the experience.

    I agree with this. Although if you see your brother sinning, or struggling in some area, it is not necessarily wrong to go to them to help them. If they refuse advise or help though, then that is their perogative. Ordination is merely when a representative body of believers agrees and acknowledges that that person is spiritually mature enough/wise enough/knowledgeable enough to be an elder/pastor/deacon or whathaveyou. It is basically just a public stamp of approval from that group of people. Nothing inherently wrong with that that I can see. Mistakes can be made, but that doesn’t mean that it is wrong to ordain.

    LikeLike

21. No time to respond to everything, or even to respond well to a limited number of points, but here goes. My understanding is that a cynic is contemptuously suspicious of human nature and motives. Sounds a lot like the doctrine of the total depravity of man, the first point on the Calvinistic TULIP pentagram. Well, when it comes to assessing those who, contrary to Scripture, hold themselves out as being possessed of the authority inherent in some “office” in an authority-based institution (for which, again, there is no Scriptural warrant), I will apply what may well look like a guilty until proven innocent standard. These “pastors” are already holding themselves out as being something that is opposed to Scripture–and especially the law of love. While I certainly have had good experiences with “pastors,” I have also had bad ones. The bad experiences have tended to be with “pastors” who knew a good deal more about authority than about love.

    So, am I contemptuously suspicious of men and women who would assume an extra-Scriptural “office” from within the context of and extra-Scriptural institution? No. I am merely exercising the caution recommended by hard-won experience. I consider myself a seasoned, objective, realist–not a cynic. And yes, the burden is on these authority-claiming, “pastors” to demonstrate that they are not wolves, pigs, vipers, and “shepherds feeding themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted.” To my mind they can only do so by ACTUALLY DEMONSTRATING in the circumstances of day-to-day life that they are servant-oriented and operating from a base of love.

    LikeLike

22. JoeJoe said, “While Jesus did have a small, core group of followers who were close to him, he would regularly teach to VERY large crowds, larger crowds even than some of today’s mega-churches. Many of whom would follow him from town to town. It was sort of like a traveling church. Would this be considered pagan?”

    I would call this evangelism, not church or a traveling church. Big difference. Well, maybe not so different compared to what’s called church today.

    The small group of followers were believers, yet even one was not at true follower of Jesus.

    LikeLike

23. Brian

    Was wondering…

    I still have two comments in moderation on your site…
    Will you post them?

    And also this question…
    Can you name one of His Disciples who had the “”Title” – Pastor?
    And asked someone to submit to them?

    LikeLike

24. JoeJoe said, “Sitting under does not necessarily imply authority over. It means that you agree that you believe the one speaking has something important to say and has been equipped to do so. When somebody is teaching you something new, you sit under the teaching of your teacher. When you allow a friend to mentor you in some area, you are sitting under them.”

    I have never heard “sitting under” or preaching/teaching over” outside the context of church. Ever.

    Never heard a teacher talk about their pupils “sitting under” them for the school year. When I was 6, I taught a fellow 1st grader how to draw a 5 point star. Was she “sitting under” me? Uh, no!

    No one needs to “sit under” anyone else to learn, gain insight from or be taught something new.

    I think that’s stretching it at bit to make “sitting under” more easier to swallow. These defenses of authority go down some strange rabbit holes…..

    LikeLike

25. JoeJoe

    You write…
    “**Ordination** is merely when a representative body of believers agrees and acknowledges that that person is spiritually mature enough/wise enough/knowledgeable enough to be an elder/pastor/deacon or whathaveyou.”

    In the Bible, can you name, one of His Disciples,
    who was ordained as a – pastor? Called pastor? Had the “Title” pastor?

    Seems to me, shepherds and teachers, you mention in Eph 4:11… Have nothing in common with those – Today – who have taken the “Title” pastor/leader/reverend. And post there name and “Title” everywhere advertising them selves.

    Two vastly different shepherds.

    Those shepherds mentioned in Eph 4:11, are left un-known in the Bible.
    There is NO record of who they are. They took NO “Titles.”
    Like Jesus – They humbled themsleves, made themsleves of NO reputation,
    And took on the form of a “Servant.” Phil 2:7-8.

    Have you checked out these two EX-pastors. One 33 yrs – One 3 yrs.
    Who say – “There aren’t any *church pastors* in the New Testament”

    —————-

    The Glass Pastor – “Casting Off The Task-Masters”
    http://theglasspastor.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/casting-off-the-task-masters/

    “Don’t get me wrong, for my part I did my best to play the role of ‘pastor’, but I always knew that I would not be able to really pull it off. First of all, I didn’t really buy it. **There aren’t any church pastors in the New Testament,** and I could never get past that.”

    —————–

    “I’ve Resigned from Professional Pastoring”
    http://eric-carpenter.blogspot.com/2010/09/ive-resigned-from-professional.html

    “I’m not sure how else to say this, so here it is:
    I’ve resigned from professional pastoring.

    After much study of scripture, prayer, discussions with some of my friends, and reading good books, I have come to the conclusion that I can no longer in good conscience remain a salaried pastor. I cannot find it anywhere in the bible, so I’m not going to do it.”

    —————–

    Seems the only one in the NT with the “Title/Position” Shepherd/Leader
    Is…

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}

    LikeLike

26. Sitting Under:
    And if I told my 6 year old peer she was going to “sit under” me while I explained & showed her how to draw a star, she would have looked at me funny & asked to change seats. Kids sometimes have more God-given sense than what we adults have. We’ve allowed it to be talked out of us while we were “sitting under”.

    If I told a 40-something year old friend she was going to “sit under” my advice, I would hope she would give me some much needed advice, that my bum was too big for my britches!

    Yes, we can teach, advise, even reprimand. But not out of positional authority whatsoever. If we are following Jesus it will be out of love.

    LikeLike

27. As I said, “sitting under” does not neccessarily imply authority of a person over another, only authority in the sense that the one doing the teaching has something worthwhile to teach, so I am going to sit and listen to what they have to say and learn from it. If you don’t like the phrase, that’s fine, we can simply say, “learn from.” Teachers and students in a public school type setting may not be the best example though, as I am referring to a more voluntary action of learning from another with knowledge or insight, not compulsory. It does also imply that it is for some extended period of time, not really a short tutorial or lessen or piece of advice.

    LikeLike

28. @ JoeJoe 8:33 AM~

    I understand what you’re saying and agree with how you are using “under.” I am hearing you say it means you have agreed to listen to (not necessarily comply with) what the person is teaching. And you wrote:

    “SHOULD BE
    The pastor is still accounable to those they pastor, however, and if the members feel that the teaching or direction that the pastor is taking IS UNBIBLICAL, UNETHICAL, OR WRONG… then they should have the power to either remove the pastor, or to go elsewhere.”

    Well, amen to that and it looks beautiful in print. Does it work like that in real life? Most likely if you have a problem with what is being taught, you will be the one leaving. Wouldn’t that be true of a church with an authoritarian type pastor with yes men for elders? Relatives for elders? SGM, for example?

    I would think that Brian would amen that statement considering the spiritual abuse he experienced. But looking at who he promotes on his blog ( Voddie Baucham, Grace to You, Albert Mohler-who loves Mahaney’s “strong leadership”, CHBC-Mark Dever,The Gospel Coalition andTogether for the Gospel) leaves me very confused as to what exactly Brian believes about submission to authority because these men practice what I would think Brian would hate.

    On the one hand Brian says pastors should not be dictators over areas of one’s life -MY examples of that would be whether or not it would be ok to use FB, reading certain blogs, physical discipline of children, first time every time obedience, spanking toddlers if they do not greet you in the eye and shake the pastor’s hand, pastors as the voice of God and obeying them, pastors being gifts from God to save God’s people from their ignorance ala Al Mohler, etc. Some people/ministries Brian promotes do that very thing. We’ve all read about it.

    Voddie Baucham is very extreme when it comes to authority and runs a very tight ship. Baucham may not come to your door unannounced and give you a verbal lashing, (but he just may if you are not having father-led devotionals at your home-he may call for an appointment first). He may announce that you are not welcome at his church if you fail in that area. I heard him say that very thing in a sermon 😦

    SGM goes without further discussion of their authoritarian, harmful practices..

    And Mark Dever shielding Mahaney at his church and then the dreadful statement of support. Brian did say that he did not agree with how Dever handled things, iirc, and asked- but does that make Dever evil?, or something like that. Well, if that is my only option- to call Dever evil…but of course it is not my only option so that was a bit of drama by Brian. It does make Dever suspect, and his actions and words (which come from the heart) enable us to see a bit of what is in his heart. He is a lover of men (pastors) and loves the praises of men, as does Mohler and Mahaney. That is obvious to see-if one is willing to open one’s eyes and see.

    LikeLike

29. The authority to teach is voluntarily given to a person when we agree to listen and heed what they have to say, because we believe what they are saying is right, trustworthy, useful, or important. We have the authority then to remove the authority we bestowed upon them either when the time of teaching is over, or when at such time they have shown that they are not knowledable, trustworthy, right, or are abusive.

    LikeLike

30. JoeJoe,
    The words “sitting under” pastor & pastor “preaching over” imply position in & of themselves. These words are used subtly or not so subtly by those who claim authority in church. They are used many times in a context of control or coercion. Which is why you don’t hear these words used in relationships of equality.

    This is not a discussion about whether I like some words over others. This is a discussion about what the words mean. You say authority is not implied. I say it is.

    I’ll bet many who attend authority-driven churches have heard these words from the pulpit, elders, deacons, & fellow parishioners over & over again.

    LikeLike

31. Diane said:

    I understand what you’re saying and agree with how you are using “under.” I am hearing you say it means you have agreed to listen to (not necessarily comply with) what the person is teaching. And you wrote:

    “SHOULD BE
    The pastor is still accounable to those they pastor, however, and if the members feel that the teaching or direction that the pastor is taking IS UNBIBLICAL, UNETHICAL, OR WRONG… then they should have the power to either remove the pastor, or to go elsewhere.”

    Well, amen to that and it looks beautiful in print. Does it work like that in real life? Most likely if you have a problem with what is being taught, you will be the one leaving. Wouldn’t that be true of a church with an authoritarian type pastor with yes men for elders? Relatives for elders? SGM, for example?

    Yes, that is what I am trying to get at.

    In practice, removing a pastor, especially a charasmatic one (charasmatic as in persuasive and generally likable, at least on teh surface) would be difficult, so while a pastor may not bbe able to be removed, that is how it SHOULD be. If you cannot remove the authoity of an abusive pastor for the whole church, you can at least remove their unbiblical authority in your own life.

    LikeLike

32. JoeJoe, said, “We have the authority then to remove the authority we bestowed upon them either when the time of teaching is over, or when at such time they have shown that they are not knowledable, trustworthy, right, or are abusive.”

    I’m trying to follow your train of thought here. Basically, we bestow authority & when we find out it’s being abused, we use our authority to remove them from their authority. Seems like a power struggle to me. Good luck getting authority to concede & give it back. Doesn’t seem to work with Driscoll, Mahaney, 9Marks, Mohler, et all. They won’t even admit they need to examine themselves or their policies.

    My questions is, “Why so much authority-driven behavior?” Why not follow Jesus’ command to love God, love yourself & others? Jesus claims the authority. The rest of us have no rightful authority or power over someone else. Sure, we can meet in structured environments as equals. An individual with authority over others isn’t necessary.

    As Lydia says, the position of pastor is becoming obsolete. With the vast amount of Bible knowledge at our fingertips, we can all study to show ourselves approved unto God, 2Timothy 2.

    LikeLike

33. “have never heard “sitting under” or preaching/teaching over” outside the context of church. Ever.

    Never heard a teacher talk about their pupils “sitting under” them for the school year. When I was 6, I taught a fellow 1st grader how to draw a 5 point star. Was she “sitting under” me? Uh, no!

    No one needs to “sit under” anyone else to learn, gain insight from or be taught something new.”

    This reminded me of some blog convos years back when Grudem was trying to reposition the word “Ezer”. His problem was that God is called an ezer in the OT and many were pointing this out. So obviously Eve being an ezer is a problem since it has to denote a junior assistant helper in his hermeneutic. So, Grudem is doing all sorts of mental gymnastics trying to show how God “submits” to us when He “helps” us. He even uses the example that “parents submit to their children when they help them with their homework”.

    This was in one of his many books, I forget the name of it now.

    But I am seeing the same sort of mental gymnastics in this convo about pastor/teacher, sitting under /teaching over, etc, etc. It is all just verbal gymnastics to defend a system. And that is ok. If one likes the system as it is, then support it. Just don’t try and tell others it is a sin to disagree with it.

    I have a different view. If I elect (hee hee) to go hear a lecture, sermon, talk or whatever, then I am “lending my ears” so to speak. Then I decide the merit of the information based upon my own research, reading, etc.

    This brings me to another point. Parents should teach their children to politely question things they are taught. Encourage them to debate you on issues. Get them thinking for themselves and always insist they use reason/logic. God gave us these brains for a reason. We are the only created beings who can reason.

    Personally, I believe preaching/teaching as we know it in institutions now is fast becoming obsolete for many. Some people want interaction.

    LikeLike

34. While not a perfect analogy, look at it this way. It is kind of like the democracy and check and balance system of the U.S. government. Firstly, we bestow authority to our elected officials by voting them into office. Should they show that they are unfit for the job, then we have the authority to remove them from office by voting them out, even though we initially gave them the authority to speak for us. The president is given the authority to lead the country, but congress has the right, should the president prove unfit, to remove them from that positon.

    Now, it does not translate directly to the church, as in government you do have people with authority over others, but it is a similar idea to what I am trying to convey. Does that make help?

    LikeLike

35. “While Jesus did have a small, core group of followers who were close to him, he would regularly teach to VERY large crowds, larger crowds even than some of today’s mega-churches. Many of whom would follow him from town to town. It was sort of like a traveling church. Would this be considered pagan?”

    JoeJoe, Since I am guilty of spinning the Acts Pentecost mega church shtick, I will attempt this one as much as I can understand what you are asking.

    Here is what happened to the large crowds at one point soon after He fed the 5000:

    “66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.”
    Jn 6

    So when the teaching became hard, many deserted Him.

    You might find it interesting that women were part of the core that not only traveled around with Him but supported Him out of their own resources. We know that one of them was married to a man who worked for Herod. So we know she was not fulfilling her “comp” gender role. :o) (Luke 8) And yes, some saw that as pagan behavior as would many in the institutions today.

    LikeLike

36. “Now, it does not translate directly to the church, as in government you do have people with authority over others, but it is a similar idea to what I am trying to convey. Does that make help?”

    No, because we are a nation of LAWS to obey. Not men to obey. You get in trouble for breaking the law. Not for refusing to obey men.. That was a founding principle for a reason. To think of the president (or any other official) as having authority over you is one reason this country is going socialistic so quickly. I wrote about this earlier in the comment stream. It is becoming a big problem. The law has authority over you.

    LikeLike

37. For a non-Christian, non-religious example: Plato was a student of Socrates. Plato believed Socrates had knowledge and insight that he himself did not have, and felt it was worth learning. As such, Plato gave Socrates the authority to teach him by mere virtue of listening to Socrates. The knowledge/insight passed down from Socrates to Plato. It can be said that Plato “sat under” Socrates’ teaching. Should Plato have deemed Socrates’ knowledge not worth hearing and learning, for whatever reason, and he removed himself as a student of Socrates, then Socrates, by virtue of not having a student in Plato, would not the authority to teach him.

    The same can be said of Jesus and the throngs that followed him. Those that sat and listened to him, “sat under” his teaching, i.e., they gave Jesus the authority to teach them by virtue of merely sitting and listening to him. Many people, as Lydia pointed out, deserted Jesus. They, for their own reasons, decided that what Jesus was teaching was not worth learning. By removing themselves, they said by their action, “you do not have the authority to teach me.” Now, in this case I think we can agree that this was a mistake as Jesus is the only one with perfect authority to teach and we should listen to him. These people still voted by their attendance though that they proclaimed Jesus did not have the authority to teach them.

    LikeLike

38. Authority: Rule over, lord over, speak over, preach over, sit under, placed under, submit to.

    These are all positions of authority. Position is key. You are either OVER or UNDER someone else.

    Leader authority. Just the question of why it is so to being with, is what set the firestorm off.

    These words, that’s what the tweets between Julie Anne and Brian Thornton were about.

    Leaders are no more than teachers in the body of Christ. They are tasked with serving. We all are. Each one is important. This can be done without authority.

    LikeLike

39. My analogy of democracy and check and balances has to with our ability to give authority to another person, whether to speak for us or in the case of a pastor, to teach us. Just as the people have the authority to vote an elected official out of office, members of a church SHOULD (though in practice it is not always the case) have the authority to remove a pastor, thereby removing his authority to teach them. I think you are getting hung up on something that I was not trying to convey.

    LikeLike

40. Lydia wrote~

    “I have a different view. If I elect (hee hee) to go hear a lecture, sermon, talk or whatever, then I am “lending my ears” so to speak. Then I decide the merit of the information based upon my own research, reading, etc.”

    That’s how I am understanding this sitting “under” thing. I haven’t been raised with that kind of terminology, neither the bestowing authority to nor taking authority away from those we listen to. It’s a big whatever to me. I am not bestowing authority on anyone, and anyway, I thought pastors were the ones who bestowed authority on themselves because they have been ordained, or heard a call from God, or decided to just be a pastor without being ordained or whatever it is that makes a pastor a pastor…lol I really do not know these days. They do not appear to think they need our “bestowing” anything on them, well, maybe our obedience and money.

    I have agreed to listen….that’s all…not comply.

    I see Matthew 23 1-12 as something good to remember.

    “23 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them. 4 They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. 5 But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their [a]phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments. 6 They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. 8 But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 Do not be called [b]leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. 11 But the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.”

    We are all brothers.

    I have heard the phrase sitting under before related to charismatic churches (am not a fan of the charismatic movement) who have their little a apostles and prophets that hear God speak for them and get new revelations from God (supposedly)…so people speak of sitting “under” their teaching, which, obviously, does imply authority and an elevation of the man of gawd and people seem to like that. It gives them a sense of pride?…or something.

    LikeLike

41. One definition of authority does have to do with control or power over another person. A parent has this type of authority over their child within reason. If a parent tells a child to do something, they should do it (within reason).

    Another definition of authority is (from using the google search “define authority”):
    “The right to act in a specified way, delegated from one person or organization to another.”

    This is the type of authority a pastor is supposed to have, not the first kind. A pastor has been given the right by a group of people to teach them. This right should be able to be removed by the church body should the pastor abuse this right. THIS is the definition I am using when I speak of a pastor having authority.

    LikeLike

42. “Those that sat and listened to him, “sat under” his teaching, i.e., they gave Jesus the authority to teach them by virtue of merely sitting and listening to him.”

    This statement makes me a bit uncomfortable, Joe Joe. I think authority is not a good choice here. Can you equally say you are “giving” Jesus authority to teach you when you open your bible to read?

    I think it was more the crowds saw Him as different and followed him out of curiosity (some) and for the miracles He did. I just am not sure they were thinking about giving Jesus authority to teach them as they listened to Him.

    LikeLike

43. “The same can be said of Jesus and the throngs that followed him. Those that sat and listened to him, “sat under” his teaching, i.e., they gave Jesus the authority to teach them by virtue of merely sitting and listening to him. Many people, as Lydia pointed out, deserted Jesus. They, for their own reasons, decided that what Jesus was teaching was not worth learning. By removing themselves, they said by their action, “you do not have the authority to teach me.” Now, in this case I think we can agree that this was a mistake as Jesus is the only one with perfect authority to teach and we should listen to him. These people still voted by their attendance though that they proclaimed Jesus did not have the authority to teach them.”

    JoeJoe, I am at a loss where you are coming from. They deserted Jesus because his teaching was hard. I am not sure it had anything to do with authority. They had enough of that with the Pharisees.

    Are you trying to map Jesus to a present day pastor/teacher? Are you suggesting by not listening to a sermon one is actually saying you have no authority over me? Because listening to a sermon does not mean the one speaking has “authority” over the ones hearing. I am at a loss as to how this became the definition for authority.

    And where do you see Jesus using “authority” with His followers? Authority suggests control. Yes, He “spoke” with authority but that is not the same as controlling people.

    LikeLike

44. “Another definition of authority is (from using the google search “define authority”):
    “The right to act in a specified way, delegated from one person or organization to another.”

    yes, an employee or contractual agreement situation. Remember, the ones listening are paying his salary. He is their employee.

    One problem we might see creeping in here is guys like Al Mohler are running around teaching young pastors that they are “God’s appointed agents to educate the ignorant”. He automatically sets up the listener as the ignorant one and the pastor as the one “set apart” with the knowledge straight from God. Very dangerous situation. I am so sad that young people are falling for this stuff.

    LikeLike

45. Also, see 1 John. ALL believers are given anointing. Pastors are not given an extra special dose of anointing you cannot have.

    LikeLike

46. JoeJoe,
    I can listen politely to a Jehovah’s Witness on my doorstep. At no point in time, not for one second, does that person have authority over me nor have I given them authority over me, just by lending them my ear. This is a ridiculous claim.

    But you seem to be telling me the exact opposite.

    They can listen to me next or not. At no point in time, not for one second, do I or they think I have authority over them just because words are coming out of my mouth. Just because I am speaking.

    My 6 year old friend can listen to my star-drawing instructions. There is no authority transfer ever between us, not for 1 second. She may listen & do the exact opposite.

    Listening does not imply authority transfer. It does not imply agreement. It is just that. Listening. There is no authority being passed back & forth.

    Paul commended the Bereans for listening, but then deciding later it was so.

    JoeJoe, You’ve now defined the word “listen” to include an implied transfer of authority between any 2 people. Yikes. And we wonder why abuse is a problem in the church.

    LikeLike

47. Diane and Lydia, you are still believing that I am using the definition of authority that has to do with control and power. That in not the only definition for authority though!

    Yes, the crowds left Jesus because his teaching was hard. They didn’t want to do it. They didn’t think it was worth the effort. So in their minds, for themselves, they removed the right that Jesus had to teach them. Jesus was still speaking, but they were not listening to what he had to say. In their own minds, Jesus was not their teacher and not worth listening to.

    LikeLike

48. JoeJoe, As to Plato and Socrates…only the few wealthy and well connected were allowed to learn/study in that time. And Plato is one of our biggest problems today in the church! Form over substance! Dualism and Determinism. Not good stuff at all. Evil stuff. Perhaps it would have been to our advantage if more of the peasants had been allowed to challenge him?

    LikeLike

49. “Diane and Lydia, you are still believing that I am using the definition of authority that has to do with control and power. That in not the only definition for authority though! ”

    JoeJoe, I can’t concede word meanings except as they are typically understood today. This is a huge problem right now all over Christendom. And word meanings change. Just look at what was done to Kephale over time! It was made into something it is not. Look at Piper and “Christian Hedonism”. Or Scream of the Damned.

    Once you concede word meanings, it is all over. That is how many movements gain power…they use the same language with a slight different meaning and that changes everything. Complementarian is a perfect example of this bait and switch game. Even the word “Gospel” is starting to mean anything and nothing depending on who is talking. It is becoming meaningless. Definitions are of huge importance today. Even the word “grace” means different things to a Calvinist than it does to a person who believes in free will.

    Most people are going to equate authority with having control. That is just how it is. So I cannot in good conscious concede it. I would much rather see folks insist on being “servant nobodies” in the Body. But you won’t see that very often.

    LikeLike

50. I think you guys are getting me completely wrong. Merely listening does not imply a transfer of authority. Listening to what a Jehova’s Witness has to say, per your suggestion, does not mean that you are giving authority to that person. You are just being polite. Nor does a pastor need to have a salary to be given the right (or have the authority) to teach or pastor a group of people. Yes, we are all capable of learning the truths of God and studying for ourselves, and we should! The bible tells us though that some are equipped to help others out in these things. A person who is a pastor could, for example, travel to Africa on his own money, apart from any specific organization, and pastor a group of believers there. Let’s say he doesn’t even call himself a pastor to avoid any possible power going to his head. He could do it without receiving any monetary aid from any group in the states, or from those he is pastoring. This group, however, has decided that the pastor has something that is worth learning, so they agree to let him teach them and pastor them, and help to equip them to serve in whatever way they are gifted to serve, whether it be to be an encouragement to others, or to go and pastor a group themselves. They have, by definition, granted him the right to act as their pastor (even if that is not what they call it), i.e. they have authorized him to be their pastor, he has authority.

    LikeLike

51. “My analogy of democracy and check and balances has to with our ability to give authority to another person, whether to speak for us or in the case of a pastor, to teach us. Just as the people have the authority to vote an elected official out of office, members of a church SHOULD (though in practice it is not always the case) have the authority to remove a pastor, thereby removing his authority to teach them. I think you are getting hung up on something that I was not trying to convey.”

    Joe Joe, You are confusing “representation” with authority in your example. King George had “authority” to a certain extent but not complete when we defied him. He had more authority over the state church than he did the government! The closest example you will find of authority to control people today is the military.

    You want so badly for their to be an authority over people you are inserting it anywhere you can. Even is speaking/listening situations. It is a totally wrong paradigm to map to the Body of Christ where to be lowly is to be great. But some folks think it pious to have someone in authority over them in the Body. I don’t get it since we have the indwelling Holy Spirit.

    LikeLike

52. It is important to understand word definitions, as words can have multiple definitions. That is why I clarified which definition I was using in this particular topic, so as you could better understand what I am trying to communicate. If you think I am using the definition of authority that has to do with power and control, then there is a big miscommunication, and the discussion is pointless. I clarified, however, which defintion I was using. Even if most people understand authority as having to do with control, once I clear up that I am using the other definition of authority in this particular context of this conversation, then that is the definition that we must use when I am speaking of that particular type of authority in that context. If I switch the definition I am using, it is up to me to communicate that. To say that you are only going to use the definition that is commonly thought of, even though I have explained specifically which defintion I am using, would be unfair.

    LikeLike

53. “.e. they have authorized him to be their pastor, he has authority.”

    Are you sure it was not influence?

    LikeLike

54. With the analogy of democracy and checks and balances, again, teh definition of authority being used has to do with giving a person the right to act in a certain way. In democracy, we give the right to be our representative to a person by voting for them. We authorize them to do that. We remove that authorization, or right to act as our representative, by voting them out.

    With churches, we given a person or persons the right to act as a pastor(s) or teacher(s). We authorize them to be our teacher or pastor. We can likewise remove that authorizaton, that right to act as our pastor/teacher, either by removing them, or by leaving and going somewhere else.

    Mod note: Made Joe’s correction

    LikeLike

55. Lydia said: they have authorized him to be their pastor, he has authority.”

    Are you sure it was not influence?

    No. Go to google and type in “define authority.” See the second definition. The right to act a certain way bestowed by a group or organization. The group of believers has bestowed upon the pastor the right to be their pastor, the right to act as their pastor. By definition, he has this authority.

    LikeLike

56. Sorry, saying a variation of authority too many times. This sentence in my comment above:

    We remove that authorization, or right to act as our authority, by voting them out.

    Should read:

    We remove that authorization, or right to act as our REPRESENTATIVE, by voting them out.

    Mod note: I made the correction for you, JoeJoe.

    LikeLike

57. “To say that you are only going to use the definition that is commonly thought of, even though I have explained specifically which defintion I am using, would be unfair.”

    I disagree Joe. For example, pastors are “mass communicators” and it is important for them to define how they are using such a word and best if they not use it when we all know the commonly thought of definition is different. But using it anyway when communicating to the group then claiming later to one who asks that they were using the other definition gives plausible deniability if needed. In some cases, one can even be in a group that uses a word so much the meaning is really something very different than what the word communicates. Complementarian is one such word. “Servant Leader” is another one that has been a HUGE bait and switch.

    If I had not been involved in tons of marketing for mega church and sermon series promotions, I probably would not even know this sort of thing exists. But it goes on a lot.

    It all boils down to our paradigm. Why is “authority” so important in the Body of Christ? It should be the opposite for us.

    Sorry to spend so much time on this. I know I am wearing folks out. But I really hope we can think these things through. I come at this from watching close up and personal some of the games played and the pew sitters have NO clue they are being played. And I don’t want to paint all like this. Some are just young and easily influenced by the gurus and want to be like them thinking that is the same as being like Jesus.

    We must all be Bereans. Paul commended them. Not commanded them. :o)

    LikeLike

58. I am not a pastor or mass communicator. I am having a discussion with a couple of individuals. I have said before that a pastor does not have control, power, or authority over an individual. When you misunderstood what I was saying at some point when I was using the “authority” it became apparent that there was a miscommunication. Good communication would require me to clarify myself so as to avoid further miscommunication. That is what I did. I gave specific examples as to how this definition works and have said specifically that this is how pastors should be authorized (using the second definition). I was explaining that this is the extent of a pastor’s authority. They do not have power over any individual (which would be the first definition of authority). Forcing me to use only one definition of a word when another definition is valid and I explain that I am using that particular definition is indeed unfair.

    Authority is important in the body of Christ, because a pastor should show that they do indeed have the right to pastor a group of Christians (using the second definition of authority, they have the right to act in a certain way, that is to use the gift that the Holy Spirit has bestowed upon them). Should they abuse this right to act as a pastor, then the church should have the authority (1st definition) to remove the authority (2nd defintion) of the person to act as pastor. Many pastors feel they have authority (1st definition) when really all they have is the right to act as pastor that has been bestowed upon them (2nd definition of authority). When a pastor believes they have authority (1st definition) abuse is likely to occur, which is why I agree with nearly everyone that comments here that pastors DO NOT have authority (1st definition) over any of the people in their church.

    LikeLike

59. JoeJoe,
    You define authority in your own example of a man who goes to another country to teach the word of God and is allowed to. Basically, they agree he’s allowed to talk. They lend him their ear. That is a stretch to say he is now in authority over them, just because they will listen to what he has to say. Nor does it mean they should trust him.

    If he is a man of God he will not come as the authority but as a humble servant to them. He will not impress them with his achievements. He will not ask for trust, he will want to earn it. They will understand the value of trust. He will teach them how to discern scripture for themselves. He will teach them not to look to him, but to God. He will not think or teach he is “over them”. You are straining so hard, doing loop-de-loops to define this as authority.

    Many years ago, our dog got very sick. We drove him to the emergency vet around midnight. On the highway, we saw a car pulled over, then barely made out a woman walking ahead with a baby in her arms. I told my husband to pull over & walk to her while I stayed in the car (It could’ve been a trap & if it was he could defend himself better than I, while I could call 911). She was sobbing, it was cold, her car died, she didn’t have a cell phone. She used my husband’s phone to call her family. She was grateful. But I didn’t let her into the car, my husband stayed with her outside & her family member picked her up within the 1/2 hour. Why didn’t I let her in the car? Because even though we were trustworthy, she didn’t know that. It would not be wise on her part to trust us to get in our car & not appropriate on our part to ask her to trust us. Her next encounter may not be with a trustworthy person. Now, did we have any sort of authority over her because we were helping her & she agreed? No.

    Our dog was fine. We decided that inconvenient trip in the middle of the night wasn’t for our dog, but for the woman & her baby.

    The point is we don’t need to trust or assign a position of authority to someone before we will hear them.

    JoeJoe, I am trying really hard to communicate in different ways, examples, with you. I hope you will ponder these things over the next few days.

    LikeLike

60. A Mom, I believe you are still changing around the definition of authority that I have given (which is not one I have made up, but is an actual dictionary definition. You can google it!) The group in Africa does not give the pastor authority simply by allowing him to talk, but by affirming that what he is teaching is worthwhile and continuing to learn from his teaching, acknowledging that the teaching is worthwhile. It is not an authority automatically given. Nor is he teaching that he has authority “over them.” We are assuming that he is teachign them to look to God, follow after Him, accept Christ’s sacrifice for their sin, and is helping them discover how they can serve God with the talents and gifts that they have been given. He shows that he does indeed to have the right to act as their pastor by his words and actions. The group affirms this. They have given him the authorization to act as such.

    In your story, no, you did not have any kind of authority over this woman. She did however, give you the right to act in a certain way. She authorized your husband to stand there with her until help arrived. If somebody were to come by and ask him what right he had to stand there and wait with the woman, he could rightly say that she had authorized him to wait with her. Had she said she was not comfortable with him there, for whatever reason, he would not have that right to act in that way. He would not be authorized.

    LikeLike

61. Joe Joe-

    Do you mean that authority simply means…giving permission?

    LikeLike

62. “Authority is important in the body of Christ, because a pastor should show that they do indeed have the right to pastor a group of Christians (using the second definition of authority, they have the right to act in a certain way, that is to use the gift that the Holy Spirit has bestowed upon them). Should they abuse this right to act as a pastor, then the church should have the authority (1st definition) to remove the authority (2nd defintion) of the person to act as pastor”

    Why do you assume that once people have affirmed and accepted another’s authority over them they will then recognize problems and remove that authority? If the authority tells them it is not a problem and they are wrong, well, he IS the authority. The authority has been given the power to influence thinking and beliefs!.

    Just look at Piper….he is quoted more than just about any other pastor/guru I have ever seen by the young men. More than Christ! Or, Can you say “SGM”. Do you expect people at some point to stop believing the authority and think for themselves without their being some sort of huge crisis or major communication dump like the survivors blogs? Even then the gurus (who are authorities to many young men) said Mahaney was right and defended him.

    To remove an “authority” takes a lot of divisiveness and power politicking because the authority believed he was the authority!. You have done him no favors to affirm such a thing but set up a sin trap for him. You are acting like it is some sort of unity agreement that is no big deal. The reason it becomes a big deal is because people viewed them as “the authority”!!! Look at what it took at SGM to even get people to question anything. If you go to some of their survivor blogs you will see that even after all of this people are still talking about finding another authority figure to follow that is a good one. It boggles my mind that so many learned nothing from such heinous behavior when one is set up as an authority over others. The thinking is that ingrained. That is why I won’t concede the concept of authority in the Body. you have not responded to my urgings at being a lowly servant, instead. That is where REAL spiritual influence comes in to play.

    There are those who take metaphors way too far and one of them is the shepherd/sheep metaphor.

    So it is not that I don’t understand you, it is that I do not agree with you even with all your qualifications on the word/concept. I think you are reading scripture through the wrong filter. The world loves authority, power, etc. The world loves to follow their favorite celebrity and hang on every word. We are not to be like that.

    But, it is perfectly ok for us to disagree. It is when the “authorities” have power and can punish us for disagreeing that it becomes a real problem. And these days we are seeing church discipline used for such things as disagreement with the “authority”. Never forget that you could be enabling evil when you give someone authority over you such as many did at SGM.

    LikeLike

63. Great question.

    JoeJoe, Authority: Are you talking about permission to speak only or rights held by position of pastor?

    LikeLike

64. “TETE is a good motto to live by. Test Everything and Test Everybody. Simple. Test everything you read or hear by the Word of God, and test every single person by the Bible as well. That is how you journey your way through life without falling into unbiblical potholes. TETE will save you a lot of heartache.” Mark Cahill

    Who’s he? Another one who tells us to think for ourselves. And another one that Tony Miano speaks out against. Tony Miano says he wanted to know what church he goes to because he wanted to speak to his elders. Hmmm.

    Notice the pattern? “Are you submitting?” “Who are your elders?”

    Big difference between that & our discussions (which can be passionate at times). There is no authority structure of who’s submitting to whom here. We are free.

    Which do you prefer?

    LikeLike

65. JoeJoe,

    You had said:
    ” It can be said that Plato “sat under” Socrates’ teaching. ”

    Sat under? Hmmm. Is that like sitting under a tree? We give the tree authority to shade us, to cool us from the blistering sun?

    Well, I have a biblical term.

    Acts 22:3
    I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.

    At the feet of is the proper phrase from the Bible.

    Imagine, all the little children at the feet of Jesus. Imagine all of us at the foot of the cross.

    Ed

    LikeLike

66. “Notice the pattern? “Are you submitting?” “Who are your elders?””

    I”m glad someone else finally spoke up in calling that “i’m just trying to figure out what you believe” nonsense exactly what it is, just another intimidation tactic.

    LikeLike

67. JoeJoe said:
    “One definition of authority does have to do with control or power over another person. A parent has this type of authority over their child within reason. If a parent tells a child to do something, they should do it (within reason).

    Another definition of authority is (from using the google search “define authority”):
    “The right to act in a specified way, delegated from one person or organization to another.”

    This is the type of authority a pastor is supposed to have, not the first kind. A pastor has been given the right by a group of people to teach them. This right should be able to be removed by the church body should the pastor abuse this right. THIS is the definition I am using when I speak of a pastor having authority.”

    My response:
    JoeJoe, have you not read this thread completely thru? You are using google as a means to define the word authority?

    Why not use the Strong’s Concordance, and evidence that with each and every use of the word authority as it pertains in the NT?

    We did that already many moons ago in this thread, defining many uses of the Greek word. There are MANY MANY Greek words used for ONE English word in this case. Please use the Strong’s Concordance rather than Google.

    Ed

    LikeLike

68. “Big difference between that & our discussions (which can be passionate at times). There is no authority structure of who’s submitting to whom here. We are free.

    Which do you prefer?’

    Great question and great quote!

    What the authoritarians do the most of is censor. And they have a ton of ways they do this from calling negative truths, gossip, to deleting blog comments that ask questions they do not like. It is considered pious and they are being “godly”. . They also do this by constantly trying to frame the conversations to only their premises being considered. The truth is they are controlling the information flow and using what is essentially one way communication as thought reform. There are many unwritten rules in authoritarian churches that one picks up on and if you want to be accepted, you go along. Once you concede their “authority” the rest is simple. That is why we see so much push back on that word here. Without it, the rest crumbles.

    It is very instructive to read Lifton’s Thought Reform tactics as they are universally used in many movements

    http://changingminds.org/techniques/conversion/lifton_thought_reform.htm

    LikeLike

69. chapmaned24 said, “Sat under? Hmmm. Is that like sitting under a tree? We give the tree authority to shade us, to cool us from the blistering sun?”

    Yes! Thank you, Ed. You get it. This is exactly it. The tree now has authority. Hmmm.

    JoeJoe has attempted to redefined authority. The stranded woman? We were doing her a favor. It could have been the other way around, she could have been helping us. Authority/authorization does not accurately describe helping someone else and vice versa. Authority is a one-way street, not a two-way street. Do not let anyone convince you otherwise.

    LikeLike

70. A Mom wrote~

    “Who’s he? Another one who tells us to think for ourselves. And another one that Tony Miano speaks out against. Tony Miano says he wanted to know what church he goes to because he wanted to speak to his elders. Hmmm.”

    It’s funny you brought him up. I have had the displeasure of doing a bit of investigating about Tony Miano. I hope everyone does the same. For one thing, I wonder why he asks for money…just last week the plea for $1000,00 for un-named expenses. And this plea last March for grocery money?

    “Dear Friends,

    Presently, we have enough resources in our ministry account to allow us to draw our two-week family needs on March 15. What reserves we had are now gone as living expenses continue to far-exceed the support we receive.

    We know that God is faithful even when we are faithless, for He cannot deny Himself. And while this present season has brought with it a level of financial uncertainty, we remain steadfast to where the Lord has us as a family and to where he has me as a herald of the gospel.

    Please pray with us that the Lord will continue to meet our needs.

    One dear friend and supporter sent us a $500 gift card to Walmart. This provided the majority of our groceries for almost three months.

    Might you consider sending us a gift card of any size to Walmart for groceries and other daily household supplies? If so, please mail your gift cards to:

    Revival-USA
    P.O. Box 220087
    Newhall, CA 91322

    Thank you, in advance, for your prayerful and physical support.”

    Surely he has some sort of retirement pension from the LA County Sheriffs, albeit it an early (20 years) pension to provide groceries for his family? And his three adult daughters who live at home, the oldest being 26 I believe, can’t she work?

    Revival USA in Newhall CA? Good luck finding that.

    LikeLike

71. Just for us wimmins! Tony Miano has set it all straight for us.

    http://www.crossencounters.us/2013/08/is-open-air-preaching-community-in-down_13.html

    LikeLike

72. Diane, Since I’m a “wimmin”, I obediently read Tony Miano’s “women are part of the Down-Grade” article. Thanks for the link in your 6:52 comment, I think. 😉

    Miano says, “”Why do I include women open-air preachers as part of what I believe is the current “Down-Grade” in the open-air preaching community? One reason and one reason only: the practice is unbiblical….
    And there are ways Christian women can do that without violating God’s dignified design He has given them, and without undermining the ever-so-important role He has given them in His Church. Two ways in which Christian women can fulfill the God-given desire to reach the lost with the gospel is through tract distribution and one-to-one conversations.””

    He basically argues the case that women didn’t & shouldn’t proclaim the gospel to men. Not the woman at the well, nor the women at the empty tomb. He argues the “separate but one is not better than the other” Complementarian roles. Sigh.

    Ya’ll can read it for yourself & decide. I’m just a part of the down-grade & have no right or authority to tell you what I think. 😉

    LikeLike

73. “And his three adult daughters who live at home, the oldest being 26 I believe, can’t she work?”

    How about he gets off of his lazy duff and gets a job to support his family like a real man does?

    LikeLike

74. You wimmin-folk best heed his words lest ye end up in hell…which I am convinced would be having to listen to preachers like him for eternity…

    LikeLike

75. Eric…I don’t know!? How much are we as Christians supposed to support itinerant “preachers of the gospel” …I mean, do we support a family of 5? I guess he views himself as a missionary?? and that is why he asks for support? Does his wife work? Will we ever find out? I can’t even find out where Revival USA in Newhall is.
    I don’t think there is one. It’s based in Georgia. Why does he want his donation checks made out to them with nothing written on the memo portion?

    Where does he live and in what kind of home? What if he lived in a condo on a golf course– should he still ask for Walmart gift cards? Should he plan go to Scotland in 2014…twice…if he cannot feed his family without begging for online donations? Aren’t there enough people to whom he can open air preach in CA, or does Scotland need him so badly?

    LikeLike

76. A Mom~

    A+ for obedience, submission to your authority (all definitions included), compliance, and all those kinds of words we need to know.

    “Ya’ll can read it for yourself & decide. I’m just a part of the down-grade & have no right or authority to tell you what I think.”

    That is quite correct, A Mom. Please just write it on a tract and silently pass it out. A wimmins is better seen than heard. Or was that children? Oh well, same difference.

    Since we have been given permission to share the gospel one on one…can we do a one on one gospel share in the open air, or must it be inside? If yes, do you need to shut down the open air gospel share (I rhymed) if someone else joins you? After all, it would then be a two on one gospel share. Thoughts?

    LikeLike

77. Maybe one of these? http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/dvdreviews27/a%20get%20smart/a%20get%20smart%20GET_SMART_SEASON1_DISC4-1.jpg

    LikeLike

78. Diane, Two on one gospel share. Sounds scandalous. Wait, I’ve heard about this. Piper’s scandalous gospel. Hmmm.

    Did Miano get these marching orders for us wimmims in the 576 page whopper of a rulebook written by Piper & Grudem, published by Crossway, titled “Recovering Biblical Manhood & Wimminshood?”

    Church authority comes with so many detailed ad nauseum rules for wimmins. Will any ever get to heaven? Probably not, we wimmins will just down-grade it.

    LikeLike

79. A Mom–

    We have to make it to heaven…we just have to. Who will be eternally submitted to the men if we are not there???

    LikeLike

80. Of course you wimmins will make it to heaven. Who will make the manna sammiches if y’all aren’t there?

    LikeLike

81. Eric said:

    Of course you wimmins will make it to heaven. Who will make the manna sammiches if y’all aren’t there?

    Ok, my emotions are completely whacked. I just read an e-mail that had me in a bucket of tears and now I read this! You are hilarious, Eric! I think I need to take the kids for a late-night swim (co-ed in my immodest BGBC unapproved swimsuit).

    LikeLike

82. Thanks Eric. I just knew a man could set me straight!

    LikeLike

83. Well, it’s good to see that you’re being submissive enough for me to set you straight, Diane!

    LikeLike

84. I think I need to confer with Fiat Pax about banning Eric from the site.

    LikeLike

85. Well, that doesn’t sound very submissive, JA.

    LikeLike

86. I’m sure CON would agree with you.

    LikeLike

87. good guy Eric Fry,

    I’m gonna stuff your manna sammich with lots of jalapenos! Hee, hee!

    LikeLike

88. Guys, I am not redefining anything. Grab a dictionary and look up the definition for the English word “authority.” I don’t have a printed desk dictionary available at hand, so I used the dictionary function found in Google. It is the same thing. I am not talking about the meaning of the Greek word in the Bible, I’m not talking about how other people use it, I’m not even talking about how you are using it. I am using a valid dictionary definition of the English word in how I MYSELF am using that has NOTHING to do with control and power, and have explained in detail what it means and how I am using it. I keep expressing over and over and OVER that pastors DO NOT have power or control over other members of the church. Here is the definition of the word authorize (sounds like the word authority doesn’t it?): Give official permission for or approval to. The only authority a pastor has, the only authority a pastor should realize they have, is that they have the OFFICIAL permission and APPROVAL to ACT in the CAPACITY as a pastor who’s biblically defined role is to help equip and encourage other saints for their service in the body of Christ, as delegated by a person or persons. So long as the pastor continues to serve in a manor that is both loving and biblically truthful, nobody else can come and claim to to serve in that EXACT same role at that particular local church body, because they have not been officialy given approval to act in such manner.

    LikeLike

89. Ed said: Sat under? Hmmm. Is that like sitting under a tree? We give the tree authority to shade us, to cool us from the blistering sun?

    No. Now it sounds like you are trying to ridicule me. Not cool Ed, not cool at all. I don’t appreciate it. Can you not acknowledge that a phrase does not have to be literal in meaning? I have explained that if I were sitting under the teaching of another it means that I am the one who is learning from the person with greater knowledge or insight than I have, and I believe it is worth learning. It is an expression.

    LikeLike

90. “I’m gonna stuff your manna sammich with lots of jalapenos! Hee, hee!”

    That’s great! You already know I like hot stuff on my food!

    LikeLike

91. JoeJoe,

    I am not ridiculing you, just the context in which is being used by you in regards to the word “authority”.

    You admit that you are not looking at the Greek, but at the dictionary.

    That is not always a good idea. Take for example, in the KJV:

    Suffer the little children.

    What does the dictionary say about suffer?

    Did I make a point? I hope so.

    Dictionary definitions don’t always work. I advised that you use the Strong’s Concordance, which can be widely used on the internet, if you don’t have a hard copy of it. I do.

    At 7:58 am on August 11, I posted the following:

    My response to his question would have been not only no, but hell no, and not only hell no, but **** NO. They don’t have ANY authority over ME. The job of a teacher is to teach. The job of a bishop (which is defined as SUPERINTENDENT) is to be in charge of a task, such as Stephen, who was IN CHARGE of making sure that the widows were fed, because the apostles were NOT GOING TO WAIT ON TABLES, while they spread the gospel. They don’t have authority OVER anyone, period.

    As you can see, from that perspective, the superintendent, or Bishop, was in the area of serving others, and that was his authority.

    Matthew 7:29
    For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

    Mark 1:22
    And they were astonished at his doctrine: for he taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes.

    Do you see how the word authority is used there?

    Next, look at the word “BUT”, and MINISTER in verse 26

    Matthew 20:24-26
    24 And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.
    25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
    26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

    Next, look at the word, “BUT” and “MINISTER” in verse 43

    Mark 10:41-43
    41 And when the ten heard it, they began to be much displeased with James and John.
    42 But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them.
    43 But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister:

    Next, notice the word “BUT” AND the word “SERVE”.

    Luke 22:25-26
    25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.
    26 But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth SERVE.

    MINISTER: Strong’s Concordance Greek Ref #1249
    diakonos
    An attendent, i.e., a waiter (at table or in other menial duties; specially a Christian teacher and pastor (techn. a dedacon or deaconess)
    Other English words used for diakonos: deacon, minister, SERVANT.

    SERVE: Strong’s Concordance Greek Ref #1247
    diakoneo (from 1249 (above)
    To be an attendent, i.e. WAIT UPON (mentally, or as a host, friend, or [figurative] teacher); techn. to act as a Christian deacon.
    Other English words used for diakoneo: (ad-)minister (unto), SERVE, use the office of a deacon.

    And, it might surprise people to know that there are more than one Greek definition to the word authority.

    What is the purpose of Authority here: To Edify, NOT FOR DESTRUCTION.

    What does edify mean? To UPLIFT.

    2 Corinthians 10:8 (AUTHORITY Greek Ref #1849)
    For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed:

    Luke 22:25 (AUTHORITY: Greek Ref #1850)
    25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.

    1849 IS MUCH DIFFERENT THAN 1850.

    1849:
    privilege, delegated influence

    As in the use of 2 Cor 10:8, Authority delegated to Paul from God to UPLIFT the people.

    1850:
    to control

    It’s funny how people like Brian has no knowledge of what authority the church leaders really have. They only authority that they have is to SERVE us, to FEED us, not to rule OVER us.

    Now, based on THAT authority, delegated by God to uplift, let’s look at the following:

    Hebrews 13:17
    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.

    Obey 3982 (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH 3980, WHICH BRIAN DOES) to convince (by argument, true or false); by anal. to pacify or conciliate (by other fair means); reflex. or pass. to assent (to evidence or authority), to rely (by inward certainty).
    Other English words used: agree, assure, believe, have confidence, be (wax) confient, make friend, obey, persuade, trust, yield.

    Rule 2233 To lead; fig. to deem
    Other English words used: account, (be) chief, count, esteem, governor, judge, have the rule over (but we know the rule based on the above), suppose, think.

    Submit 5226
    TO SURRENDER

    This form of surrender is meant as a “relax”, or in other words, “YOU DON’T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT… I WILL TAKE CARE OF IT. I have authority to take care of you, and don’t worry…I am accountable to God.

    From dictionary.com

    verb (used without object)
    6. to give oneself up, as into the power of another; submit or yield.

    Noticing the alternate English words used, we can surmise that Hebrews 13:17 also states,

    Trust those who are accountable, because they must give an account. They are accountable to God, the final authority. God gave them authority over you to edify (UPLIFT) you, not for your destruction.

    Hebrews 13:7
    7 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.

    So, to sum it all up: NO ONE RULES a man or a woman in the way that Brian wishes to teach us.

    Abused words used by Calvinists are:
    Submit,
    Authority
    Obey
    Rule

    And a whole slew of others.

    Ed

    LikeLike

92. JoeJoe said:
    “Ed said: Sat under? Hmmm. Is that like sitting under a tree? We give the tree authority to shade us, to cool us from the blistering sun?

    No. Now it sounds like you are trying to ridicule me. Not cool Ed, not cool at all. I don’t appreciate it. Can you not acknowledge that a phrase does not have to be literal in meaning? I have explained that if I were sitting under the teaching of another it means that I am the one who is learning from the person with greater knowledge or insight than I have, and I believe it is worth learning. It is an expression.”

    My response:
    So…let me get this straight. Sitting under a tree to shade you from the blistering sun is NOT COOL? I thought that was the whole purpose of sitting under a tree…to get cool.

    I know, I know…don’t quit my day job. LOL.

    LikeLike

93. Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain.
    3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 1Cor.15:1-7 (ESV)

    Just wanted to redirect attention onto what is of FIRST importance, the good news that Christ has done what we sinners could never do for ourselves.

    LikeLike

94. OK, here is the thing. I was not referencing any Bible verses, I was referencing my own sentences. I speak English, not Greek. To go to a Greek dictionary or concordance to understand what I am saying in this particular conversation when I am using the word authority is absurd.

    Here is how I have seen this conversation unfold:

    You guys–Pastors do not have power or control over people in the church or the right to tell them what to do.

    Me–That’s right, I agree.

    You guys–Pastor’s talk too much about them having authority.

    Me–That’sright, I agree. If we are going to talk about a pastor having any kind of authority, it is only to the extent that we have affirmed that they should be in that position, having proven themselves loving and having that gift to teach and equip otheres. They have been authorized to serve in that capacity by such and such local church body. That is the only extent of their authority.

    You guys–NO! Pastors do not have authority! No pastor is over anybody else!

    Me–Exactly, I have agreed with you guys, I am not using that definition of authority in my sentence, I am using the other defintion.

    You guys–But that’s not the defintion that people think of.

    Me–That’s why I made sure to clarify, to make sure that you realize I am not talking about a pastor having control or power. I am using this other valid of definition of the word authority. Here is another example of how we give authoirty to another personto act in a certain capacity. I use an example with the phrase, “sit under.”

    You guys–That implies having power or authority over an individual.

    Me–I explain how I see that it does not necessarily.

    You guys–Sit under, so like “ahh, get off of me, you’re squishing me!”

    Me–That isn’t even remotely what I am talking about. Again, here is what I mean.

    You guys–Haha! that’s a weird expression to use.

    Me–It is an expression, but its meaning is not literal, here is what I mean.

    You guys–Oh, so it’s like sitting under a tree right? Haha!

    Me–Now I feel like you are making light of what I am trying to say and my feelings are hurt, but let me explain again what I am trying to convey.

    You guys–Here is another joke to make light of what you ar saying.

    Me–Apparently you are not wishing to take me seriously or try to understand what I am conveying. Instead I feel like my feelings are being invalidated and I am being bullied into using one and only one definition of a word when I use that word, even though the secondary definition is perfectly applicalble to what I am trying to convey in my own context and in expressing how I AGREE with you that pastors are NOT in a position of power over others in a church.

    LikeLike

95. Now that uplifts. Hope to the hopeless. That is the authority that Pastors have. What Paul states, PERSUADES me, and I will SUBMIT (OBEY) to that persuasion (AUTHORITY). It gives me hope. Christians are blessed…not cursed.

    But, I will not be placed under the authority (rule) of another man in religious matters. I will not submit to dictators. Paul persuades me, he doesn’t rule over me. He persuades me to have faith in Christ Jesus.

    Psalm 118:8
    It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man.

    Psalm 146:3
    Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.

    Jeremiah 17:5
    Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord.

    Jeremiah 17:7
    Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is.

    2 Corinthians 10:7
    …if any man trust to himself that he is Christ’s, let him of himself think this again, that, as he is Christ’s, even so are we Christ’s.

    Ed

    LikeLike

96. Epistemology – the unseen filter that impedes understanding each other…

    LikeLike

97. JoeJoe, I think we understand you’re using a different definition of authority other than the typical meaning. I appreciate your view. What all of us are speaking about here is authority in the context of church & how it actually functions.

    So, for example, you said “sitting under” authority applies to a friend teaching you, but it just doesn’t work. Not the same. The only time “sitting under” is used is in the context of church. And when we examine those phrases, it doesn’t mean your definition of the word authority. Sitting under, preached over. These words mean laity submitting to leadership authority. I hope you would see & admit that.

    Submitting to authority just doesn’t apply in the context of me teaching a friend, a peer, etc. Authority isn’t conveyed there, as you say it is. I think you are trying to describe authority as the teaching learning process. Authority is not necessary for learning to take place. Unless the learner has no choice. This is what I am trying to get across & it seems like we are missing each other.

    Did you read my comment about Julie Anne being asked if she is submitting to her elders? It sounds like she’s been asked that question a lot. And there are others here who have been told to submit to their authority. My comment was that she is repeatedly told to sit back down under, get in line, shut up. I can’t with a straight face now advise JA to “just take the authority back”, as you recommend the laity do when authority is abused. What does that even mean & how do you do that in the real world? Your definition of authority is not real world, IMO.

    Maybe you think authority is a necessary evil, like government? Well then, let’s have a discussion about that. It’s always good to look at differing points of view.

    Maybe you are a goodhearted person, with great intentions. I get that. Sometimes it’s difficult to wrap your head around how others could abuse authority, since you never would. But that is slightly naive. And that was me at one time. We need to take a good look, even if it’s uncomfortable or painful. Instead of looking through the lenses of our own behavior or hoped-for utopia, we need to open our eyes to our brothers & sisters in Christ who have suffered, help them & take down these strongholds of authority by leaving these churches, so they run out of business & can abuse no more. Christ says it shall not be so among us.

    A Mom’s “How to Stay Safe” and “Which Bank Would You Use?” Proverb:
    An honest man working in a bank with no safe will never steal.
    A thief working in a bank with no safe will always steal.
    A thief working in a bank with a safe cannot steal.
    A thief working in a bank with a safe will not be happy.
    An honest man working in a bank with a safe will be happy to do so.

    Why are many pastors pushing a top-down environment? Why are they not happy with an equal, servant to servant relationship?

    LikeLike

98. chapmaned24, your 6:03 comment spoke volumes. Good brain food. I’m saving it. Hope others will read it & do their own wrestling & investigating.

    LikeLike

99. JoeJoe,

    I am sorry that you feel that you are being bullied or picked on. That really is not my intent.

    I think it is extremely important to go to the source of words. After all, the original was not written in English.

    While you seem to agree with what we are saying, your lay out is a little out of sync with the real definition. I know you speak English. So do I. It doesn’t negate that we should be ignorant of the original intent of the original written.

    If we really read the NT the way that we should, the Pastor’s job is to teach (feed) us the WORD OF GOD.

    The Eunuch, reading Isaiah, was taught that what he was reading was about Jesus. That is the kind of teaching that they should do. But all these “authority” figures seem to teach, is about their authority to tell them how to live their lives.

    My goodness, we have bookstores that sell books galore on how to live our lives. The Pastors, teachers, are supposed to teach us Jesus from all of the law and the prophets. Who does that anymore?

    If what they teach does not uplift the congregation, then they are outside of the bounds of their authority…in other words, they don’t have authority to feed us anything that is not nutritious to our soul…

    Even if we sit under them.

    I see and understand your argument. Really.

    LikeLike

100. Ed, I’m glad you copied your old comment again because I forgot to ask you about something the first time around. You said:

     Obey 3982 (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH 3980, WHICH BRIAN DOES) to convince (by argument, true or false); by anal. to pacify or conciliate (by other fair means); reflex. or pass. to assent (to evidence or authority), to rely (by inward certainty).
     Other English words used: agree, assure, believe, have confidence, be (wax) confient, make friend, obey, persuade, trust, yield.

     You mentioned NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH 3980. When you get a chance, can you please tell me what your reference has for 3980? Thx!

     LikeLike

101. A Mom,

     Thank you. I would also like to add that Jesus washed the feet of his own disciples. That shows that Jesus is the servant to his own congregation. I’m quite sure that today’s popular rich preachers would think it beneath them to wash the feet of their congregation.

     Ed

     LikeLike