Ben1445
Well-Known Member
Pardon the levity. I agree with you.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What makes you a Baptist?
- Thread starter easternstar
- Start date
easternstar
Active Member
What online quiz was that? Maybe I need to take it.I took an online test that told me I was a Baptist.... seriously!
[From Atheism] After attending the RCC, Church of God (Anderson Indiana), Evangelical Free Church, Pentecostal Church (independent with Moravian leanings) ... and reading a lot of Bible, I took an extensive online quiz that said my personal beliefs were a 100% match to something called "Reformed Baptist". So I went and checked out the nearest "Southern Baptist" Church and joined them in an extensive study of the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. I stuck around and learned more about Baptists (like the Distinctives and the 1689 Baptist Confession). It just seems like a good fit.
easternstar
Active Member
That's an excellent post.I will have to let Martin answer for Martin (I already stated what I thought his objection was to).
I am qualified to answer for ME (no mind-reading required)
Church government form is almost irrelevant. All forms have inherent strengths and weaknesses. In my experience, the "weak link" always seems to be the need to place "governing power" into the hands of PEOPLE. PEOPLE are innately flawed and (even at their best) prone to both error and corruption (being made more flawed). Jesus was clear that in His kingdom, the leaders were to be servants of the rest (the greatest was to be the slave of the others) ... the Apostles failed to get it in the Gospels and we living today don't do any better.
So, I don't sweat church organization as much as some. When I encounter a pastor that needs to "manage" everything, I step back and look for someplace else to invest my time [The pastor preaches, his wife runs the sound booth, his mother is in charge of ...] I accept that things are just how they are. God changes hearts, I have no power in that area. I accept that he is making things harder for himself and leaving people who want to help with a discouraging number of "naysayers". I once heard someone describe it as "OK, I guess I am just a 'tither'." when all her offers to help were met with "So-and-So does that; we don't need any help".
Once upon a time I was appointed Elder over the Children's Ministry, I had a lot of good teachers that loved the children and wanted to teach them. They didn't need a "boss" to tell them what to do. They needed a "lineman" to play defense. My primary duty was to listen to all the advice from well meaning people about how OTHER PEOPLE should be doing additional work or doing things different (but they had no desire to participate in the actual work) and to smile and ignore their suggestions ... thus protecting those with a heart for children from interference by those wishing to control them. I strove for service to the "deacons" (those doing the work) rather than authority over them. My "authority" was a mandate to protect.
I have observed that the larger the church, the further removed the "Pastor" is from the "least of these". Probably unavoidable, but not the model that Jesus set up in the NT. As Baptists, we claim to desire to follow the NT model ... which is about HEARTS and MINDS more than organizational structures.
[... but what do I know. I am just a former atheist thug trying to figure out this whole GOD among Us thing.]
As independent Baptists, we have no "association" and no headquarters of any kind. As a former missionary, I like this very much, because it means that missionaries are not supported by a group but by individual churches! We had friends in our supporting churches, and were even visited once by a member of a supporting church. We also had many individuals praying for us from the various churches, and an SBC missionary I knew was jealous of this!
Our church is affiliated with the SBC - but we are still an independent fundamental Baptist Church.
IF the association or convention told us we had to do something - that we felt we should not do - either we disfellowship from the group or they would choose to disfellowship us.
And this has happened as some churches left over issues such as woman pastors.
As far as IFB - I would consider those mission boards as an association - as they associate to help support missionaries.
John, let me ask you a question - when a church sent you a certain amount for support (say $100) Did your mission board take a part of that for mission board overhead?'
I know that some mission boards did do that.
At our church in Texas, which had a missionary under (the former) Galliealian Bapitst Missions required 10% of the church non-designated offerings. The missionary pastor did receive 100% of the support sent to him from churches. Later, GBM merged with Fellowship of Baptists for Home Missions.
IF the association or convention told us we had to do something - that we felt we should not do - either we disfellowship from the group or they would choose to disfellowship us.
And this has happened as some churches left over issues such as woman pastors.
As far as IFB - I would consider those mission boards as an association - as they associate to help support missionaries.
John, let me ask you a question - when a church sent you a certain amount for support (say $100) Did your mission board take a part of that for mission board overhead?'
I know that some mission boards did do that.
At our church in Texas, which had a missionary under (the former) Galliealian Bapitst Missions required 10% of the church non-designated offerings. The missionary pastor did receive 100% of the support sent to him from churches. Later, GBM merged with Fellowship of Baptists for Home Missions.
Last edited:
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
I have always been independent. The church where we are now had not been sending anything to any association for some time. We just made it official on our end. Since then we do support several missionary families directly. It is much better accountability IMO. When you don’t expect an organization to pick up your slack… commitment is irreplaceable.
We don’t “do” faith promise missions, but people give directly to missions separate from tithe. Since we started actively sending missions money out, missions giving has expanded. It’s amazing how much better things work when they are done correctly.
All that said, the association hangs on like they are still waiting for a handout. I have explained it to them. But I think they don’t want to look like they are shrinking.
FPM is a much better program than association.
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
I was born in a Catholic hospital.
That’s not good enough. So, I was born again.
I perfer thugs to hypocrisy.I will have to let Martin answer for Martin (I already stated what I thought his objection was to).
I am qualified to answer for ME (no mind-reading required)
Church government form is almost irrelevant. All forms have inherent strengths and weaknesses. In my experience, the "weak link" always seems to be the need to place "governing power" into the hands of PEOPLE. PEOPLE are innately flawed and (even at their best) prone to both error and corruption (being made more flawed). Jesus was clear that in His kingdom, the leaders were to be servants of the rest (the greatest was to be the slave of the others) ... the Apostles failed to get it in the Gospels and we living today don't do any better.
So, I don't sweat church organization as much as some. When I encounter a pastor that needs to "manage" everything, I step back and look for someplace else to invest my time [The pastor preaches, his wife runs the sound booth, his mother is in charge of ...] I accept that things are just how they are. God changes hearts, I have no power in that area. I accept that he is making things harder for himself and leaving people who want to help with a discouraging number of "naysayers". I once heard someone describe it as "OK, I guess I am just a 'tither'." when all her offers to help were met with "So-and-So does that; we don't need any help".
Once upon a time I was appointed Elder over the Children's Ministry, I had a lot of good teachers that loved the children and wanted to teach them. They didn't need a "boss" to tell them what to do. They needed a "lineman" to play defense. My primary duty was to listen to all the advice from well meaning people about how OTHER PEOPLE should be doing additional work or doing things different (but they had no desire to participate in the actual work) and to smile and ignore their suggestions ... thus protecting those with a heart for children from interference by those wishing to control them. I strove for service to the "deacons" (those doing the work) rather than authority over them. My "authority" was a mandate to protect.
I have observed that the larger the church, the further removed the "Pastor" is from the "least of these". Probably unavoidable, but not the model that Jesus set up in the NT. As Baptists, we claim to desire to follow the NT model ... which is about HEARTS and MINDS more than organizational structures.
[... but what do I know. I am just a former atheist thug trying to figure out this whole GOD among Us thing.]
Amen! Well said.
I can't help the feeling that you are being either a bit dense or unnecessarity argumentative.
However, in case I haven't been clear, This is my understanding: a pastor is an elder/overseer/bishop. I am concerned that there should ideally be more than one of these in every church, so that there is accounability. In my church, there is a pastor (due to step back in April, an assistant pastor (due to take over in April) and two elders, of whom I am one. There are also three deacons. My aim when I became an elder was to support the pastor, to provide a sounding-board for his ideas, to bring my own thoughts to him and to bring any misbehaviour before the church (never happened).
All elders are equal, but IMO the pastor should be primus inter pares (first among equals). Some years ago, I was in a church where there was one pastor/elder. When he retired, I was one of five deacons running the church, and each of us had his own idea about how a church should be run. It was hopeless! I left when two of my colleagues squared up to one another and threatened to beat each other up! There has to be someone with authority, but also a team to support him and to hold him accountable.
Your church has pastors and elders and deacons. That's three, not two offices.
You say the pastor is an elder, but you as an elder are not a pastor! Very confusing.
Not to me.
I will remind you one more and final time
lets talk about the OP
as far as pastor vs elder, ect go to the new thread as indicated above