Pastors and degrees

Great info gentlemen! I value the information from both of you!

 

Regarding my edu....I got a BS in BS :laugh:

 

I go to a small SBC church pretty much because it is the only church in my area that is not some form of Pentecostal or non-denominational. The pastor does not have a seminary degree and I am not sure if he completed university. Unfortunately, it shows.
We have seriously look at driving the miles to go to a better church, but we would only be able to attend A.M. services due to the miles.

 

I will say this (and I don't know if it applies to you).

I know educated people who just flat out can't preach (that have the degree). While they feel God is calling them to the ministry, that absolutely stink at public speaking. Communcation and rhetoric were things they never really mastered.

My dad (who preached for a while) did not have a degree, but was a wonderful public speaker. he was well educated in the scriptures and spent much time studying.

But my dad's career was a factory worker. He filled in at our church on two different occasions that lasted about 5 months and 9 months, respectively. He'd also preach when our pastor was gone. He did always wish he had received a degree, but obtaining it at that point wasn't really an option (this would've been probably 15 years ago). He's since gone on to be with the Lord.

So degree or not, if a pastor can't effectively communicate with someone, I'd say it becomes a bit of a moot point.

Sidenote: I do hope that you find a church that is right for you.

 

That is one of the qualifications found in scripture for being a pastor. The pastor is not to just be able to teach but he must be one who is particularly skilled at teaching. Everyone should be able to teach their children at home, but being a pastor is different in that he must be able to teach everyone in such a way that they understand.

 

I think this day in age, it seems that maybe fewer and fewer people are effectively able to master that skill.

 

Both Moses and Paul were not good speakers. So, speaking ability cannot be the issue. I agree that being able to teach is a different animal altogether.

 

I know that Paul said he did not come with persuasive words of wisdom but I do not know where you got the ideas that Paul was a poor speaker. How did you come to that conclusion?

Moses had a physical problem speaking but it seems to me that he did not have a problem in organizing thoughts.

 

II Cor. 10:10

 

Paul communicated better as a writer than a speaker. In modern terms we would probably say that he lacked stage presence and was unsophisticated not eloquent of speech.

2Co 10:10 For they say, "His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is unimpressive and his speech contemptible."

 

I always had the impression that Paul could have used persuasive words of wisdom but chose not to and instead chose to communicate with straight talk.

 

We know that Paul was well educateda and would have studied rhetoric. In his day it was common to imitate your teacher. From the Greek I read I find it to be better than most of what is written today in terms of structure, thought, etc. So I would think that he chose not to use persuasive words of wisdom and imitate the orators of the day who would have sought to sound fanciful. God does not need a an orator who only has oratory skills. The Holy Spirit takes care of a lot of things. While people can be manipulated Paul chose not to (C.) The gospel does not need a lawyer. The gospel is powerful and does not need addition help from man's wisdom and brilliance (Heb. 4:12). That is one of the problems I see with so many canned methods. What method did Jesus use with the simple and philosophers?

 

I would not agree with the statement. I believe Jesus was a master. There is an excellent book "The Debate Strategies of Jesus Christ' that is excellent. I have only seen it as a download online which I purchased from Ages and have not seen in a few years.

I see Jesus as knowing what to do and when to do it. His exchanges with children were different than with the Pharisees and different with the Sadducees and Pharisees. With the Sadducees he only appealed from the Torah whereas with the Pharissees he used the entire OT. He used wisdom in dealing with people. I tend to think that he worked from the point of a common ground plus the fact that he knew their heart.

I do not see the gospel needing a skilled orator who can manipulate people but rather a man filled with wisdom. I think Paul and Jesus were probably quite skilled and could have manipulated people but rather appealed to their hearts.

Prov. 11:30, "The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and he who is wise wins souls."

 

I agree with you. It is very useful. Rhetoric is throughout the NT.

My point was not at all about rhetoric. I was thinking more of manipulation through argumentation to lead someone to a point where they lose the argument. The truth is not important but winning the argument is the focus. I am confident that Paul was very skilled and could have done that but chose not to. The gospel is not about manipulation someone but the good news and power of God at work.

 

I'm more concern about pastors who are seeking doctorates to impress.

 

Who would they impress?