Church Government

There seems to be a "concern" in many people about a single pastor being in charge. In truth I have no understanding of this.

We spend way to much time inour churches worrying about who is the boss. Fearful that we may not have control or be subject to being in submission to someone else.

The bylaws and constitution are not the real authority for the pastor. The word bishop means "superintendent", "overseer". Pastormark has layed out the verses for our acccountability. The pastor is the undershepherd and is to be the mountain man that Moses was. We are to go to the mountain top and seek Gods' face and bring his word, his vision back to his people. God has never in the history of the world lead through the congregation, but instead he provides his leader that he has prepared to lead his people. the church needs to get back to trusting God and get away from commitees and congregational surveys.

When the church runs the church instead of God then the church always dies spiritually.

Revmitchell posts:
When the church runs the church instead of God then the church always dies spiritually.

Sounds like you are assuming the pastor is God. That is one reason why the constitution and bylaws are needed.

As shown in previous posts, the N.T. church was organized different than today, such as no senior pastor. Suggest you review my previous posts pertaining to the many scriptural warnings about not following bad leaders within the church.

The constitution and bylaws are the agreed upon procedures under which the church is supposed to be run. If you do not agree with the agreed upon procedures, then you should get them changed. Christians should live up to their agreements.

No sense in continuing this over and over again.
I have made my case. There is an old adage: A person convinced against their will, remains unconvinced still.

drfuss signing off on this issue.

Sounds like you are assuming the pastor is God. That is one reason why the constitution and bylaws are needed.

Click to expand...

revmitchell made no such claim. The Bible is clear that there needs to be elders (plural) who oversee the church. Church constitution and bylaws are man made doctrine, and if they go against the model for church organization found in Scripture, they are wrong.

Originally posted by drfuss:
webdog writes"
The troops do have personal relationships with their sargeants, though.

Yes, troops serve by taking direct orders form the sargeants who are their bosses and with whom they personally have contact with.
Christians serve the Lord through their personal relationship and communion with their Commander-in-chief. The pastor should be the leader in the church as per the constitution and bylaws, but not the boss.
Since these relationships are very different, the operation of the church should not be compared with that of the military.

Click to expand...

The leader of the church is Christ. The Bible is clear that overseers should run the church, not the "under-seers". This is the Scriptural model. If the congregation has just as much power and authority in the church (congregationally ran churches) as leadership, they are not a church ran biblically, period. My father's church which is a congregationally ran church, just ran out the pastor because they didn't like his apperance, teaching "style", and speaking tone. Nothing had to do with teaching false doctrine, or doing his duties as a pastor. Tell me this model is the one found in Scripture!

The reason that chruches have a constitution and by laws has to do with being incorporated. If the church incorporates than they are required under the incorporation laws.

Incorporating is a wise decision these days with all the liability laws. it protects the officers and counselers of the church from personal lawsuits.

Incproration laws are a necessary evil. There are some churches that will not incorporate and have no constution or by-laws. But in either case they are man made and should not be the deciding factor in any church.

The bible should guide us, the Holy Ghost should guide us, but not constution and by-laws.

The pastor is directly accountable to God for his leadership. PastorMark has shown some very good verses that cover that. The congregation has no such accountability in scripture.

In todays churches in America congregants do not like to hear that they are not in charge. The truth is neither is the pastor. Christ is(Ephesians 5)the head of the church. The pastors role is the Superintendent(Timothy3) the undershepherd, the one who gets the marching orders from God for the church.

I will also say that this is a large responsibility, that can be burdensome at times.

Heb 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.

Are we making our pastors responsibilities grievious or joyful?

I am so thankful that the Pastor and leaders of our church conduct the programs and business in accordance with the church constitution and bylaws.

As shown in my previous posts, the constitution and bylaws are the agreed upon procedures for the operation of the church.

In our growing church of over 2000 in attendance, we are so fortunate to have leaders that live up to their agreements.

PTL

drfuss

I am so thankful that the Pastor and leaders of our church conduct the programs and business in accordance with the church constitution and bylaws.

Click to expand...

You should rather be concerned they are following God's Word!

Are the leaders supposed to abide by bylaws and constitution inspired by men, or Scriptrue inspired by God? What happens when the bylaws are not biblical?

There is no where in scripture that mandates mutiple elders. I am not against that but it is not a mandate. How they organized things in the church is not automaticly a "thus saith the Lord".

Deacons are not scritpually leaders of the church. They are set up to assist the elders, but are not elders themselves. Acts 6 makes this clear.

A plurality of elders is a wonderful asset to the church. But elders are those who labor in the word for the benefit of the church. Major decisions in the church should lead by elders who labor in the word.

Churches today have set the Deacons up in the church much like Union Representatives. They are looked upon as those who will protect the congregation from a wayward pastor. And in turn the pastor is always looked upon with suspicion and mistrust. In short alot of congregations are fearful of the pastor.

But we know that God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love, and power, and of a sound mind. So our fear is not a Holy Ghost inspired fear but it comes from the enemy, Satan. And it causes division and contentions in the church.

These divisions distort the character of
God to a lost and dying world. Repent and be free from your sin, as well as a godly witness.

Webdog writes:
You should rather be concerned they are following God's Word!
Are the leaders supposed to abide by bylaws and constitution inspired by men, or Scriptrue inspired by God? What happens when the bylaws are not biblical?

Yes, the agreements should be in accordance with the scripture taken in its proper context. As shown in my previous posts, church government today is very different than the N.T. church making the direct application of some scriptures certainly questionable. Rather than rehash my previous posts which had supporting scriptures, I will summarize them here.

1. The N.T. church was governed by a significant group of elders with various ministries. There was no senior elder. The "obey those" scriptures were always plural and pertained to the group of elders that were doing good. Applying the "obey those" scriptures to a pastor government rather than a group of elders government is certainly questionable.

2. There are many more scriptures warning us against following bad leaders than the few that admonish us to follow good leaders. The warnings against following bad leaders usually refer to individuals while the scriptures telling us to follow good leaders always refer to the group of elders governing the church.

3. Considering the uncertainies of the above, there is a need for agreed upon procedures for conducting the programs and business of the church, i.e. the constitution and bylaws. Following the constitution and bylaws in no way disagrees with the scriptures since the scriptures involve a different type of church government as well as cautions against following bad leaders.

If a pastor believes the constitution and bylaws are not biblical, then he should not have accepted the pastorate in the first place. Once he accepted the pastorate, he agreed to follow the agreed upon procedures. If the pastor objects to the constitution and bylaws, He should have them changed to agree with his beliefs.

According to Revmitchell's posts, his revised constitution and bylaws could include something like this:
Pastor - The Pastor shall make all the decisions in the church.
Members - The members shall follow and support all of the Pastor's decisions without questions or comments.
Trustees must also be included since the state requires them for owning property.

Such an arrangement would have the advantage of not needing any business meetings, budgets, etc. Also, members would have no basis for questioning the integrity of the pastor as he runs the church in accordance with his church government beliefs.

Wouldn't that be great.

(There was no senior elder.)

You did ot get that from the bible.


(According to Revmitchell's posts, his revised constitution and bylaws could include something like this:
Pastor - The Pastor shall make all the decisions in the church.
Members - The members shall follow and support all of the Pastor's decisions without questions or comments.
Trustees must also be included since the state requires them for owning property.)


I never said that, What I have said is, Niether the congregation nor the pastor is the head of the church. Christ is.(ephesians 5:22-33) God speaks to the church through the pastor.(Revelation 2:1,8,12,18, 3:1,7,14.

God calls the pastor to the church. (Acts 20:28) Since God called him and has faith in his preparation of the man he placed in that church then why dont we?

We do not need Deacons and constitutions to protect us from bad pastors. We need the Holy Ghost. Everything else is in the flesh.

Revmitchell writes:
I never said that, What I have said is, Niether the congregation nor the pastor is the head of the church. Christ is.(ephesians 5:22-33) God speaks to the church through the pastor.(Revelation 2:1,8,12,18, 3:1,7,14.

WOW! God speaks to the church through the pastor? Therefore it follows that anyone that questions the pastor, questions God. You just verified my suggestion of your type of constitution and bylaws.

BTW, Ephesians 5:22-33 is about relationships between husbands and wives.

Concerning your revelation scriptures, are you saying that the pastor is an angel? In the N.T. church, I wonder which elder would be the angel. Again, you verify my suggestions of your type of constitution and bylaws. IMHO, The angel is just what it says it is, an angel that watches over the church.

Revmitchell writes:
(There was no senior elder.)
You did ot get that from the bible.

Most bible scholars (who have no axe to grind and can be objective) believe there was not a senior elder. A scriptural example is given in Acts 20:17-36. This was discussed in one of my earlier posts. Certainly, if there was a senior elder of that large group of elders, he would have been mentioned.

(WOW! God speaks to the church through the pastor? Therefore it follows that anyone that questions the pastor, questions God. )

Again I didnt say that.


(Most bible scholars (who have no axe to grind and can be objective) believe there was not a senior elder. A scriptural example is given in Acts 20:17-36. This was discussed in one of my earlier posts. Certainly, if there was a senior elder of that large group of elders, he would have been mentioned. )

This is only conjecture. Which bible scholars are you refering too? Any names available? What works did they write in reference to this subject?

Revmitchell writes:
This is only conjecture. Which bible scholars are you refering too? Any names available? What works did they write in reference to this subject?

A very good paper on the New Testament church government was written by Daniel B. Wallace, Ph. D. of Dallas Theological Seminary entitled "Who Should Run the Church? A Case for the Plurality of Elders".

Note that Dr. Wallace also suggests that churches should consider changing to the N.T. type of church government. I do not agree with that suggestion because it would result in too much unheaval within the church. The pastor system is too firmly entrenched to change.

Finally, I intend this to be my last post on this thread. I see no reason to rehash this over and over again.

I pray that my posts make people aware of the problems pastors can cause in churches by acting as though they do not have to live up tho their agreements. Pastors not living up to their agreements (constitution and bylaws) can result in members doubting the pastor's integrity which eventually leads to discord within the church.

Both the pastor and the members are responsible to God to live up to their agreements. They are also responsible to each other.

My prayer is that the church will be in harmony as it reaches souls and glorifies God.


drfuss signing off.

Numbers Chapter 16 gives us a glimpse at what level of authority God gives His men. Look in the book of Numbers at how many times it says, "And the LORD spake unto Moses." Moses was God's man, and those who followed him were blessed. Now look in Numbers 16:32-35 at what happens to the people who question and side against the man of God.

In my experience, among IFB Churches, it is not usually Pastors who cause discord within the Church. It is more often members within the Church, who get mad when the Pastor preaches on their sin or feel they do not have enough control, that cause trouble.

PastorMark.

Amen, PastorMark.

In my 14 years of ministering, I have seen many a family leave a church because of revealed sin. I have seen many a preacher lamblasted because of a sermon given to him by the Lord.

People who claim to be christian should feel shame when the Spirit convicts. Instead, because of liberal views, sin must never be taught in the pulpits for fear of losing members, finances, status quo, etc...

Sad

(Note that the above all assume that the leaders are doing what is good.
On the other hand, there are many scriptures warning us not to follow bad leaders in the church, such as: Acts 20:28-31, Romans 16:17&18, and II Corinthians 11:3,4,12-15, 19&20. There were no other denominations or churches as we have today. These bad leaders were within the local church.)

There is no evidence of "bad leaders" in these verses. In Acts the pastors are encouraged to do the right thing but never did the author name anything "bad". In the other scripture mentioned there is no evidence of these false teachers being "Bad leaders" and it is not necessary to automatically believe the had a leadership position in the church.

(Concerning your revelation scriptures, are you saying that the pastor is an angel? In the N.T. church, I wonder which elder would be the angel. Again, you verify my suggestions of your type of constitution and bylaws. IMHO, The angel is just what it says it is, an angel that watches over the church.)


The word angel simply means "messenger". The pastor is the churches messenger from God. and that is the context of "angel" in revelations2&3.


(Most bible scholars (who have no axe to grind and can be objective) believe there was not a senior elder. A scriptural example is given in Acts 20:17-36. This was discussed in one of my earlier posts. Certainly, if there was a senior elder of that large group of elders, he would have been mentioned.)

Most bible scholars cannot speak to this as it is not spoken of in scripture. You give one example of one author. This is not "most". It is conjecture again to say that if there was a senior elder it would have been mentioned.


Pastormark exactly. Even when Gods' man was doing wrong David refused to mistreat or mishandle Saul. Not because he was king but because he was Gods' anointed.