Biblical basis for "professional" pastors

Not according to 1 Cor 9. Paul is "crystal clear" (to use your requested phrase) when he says that those who preach the gospel have a right to live of the gospel. All the examples he uses refer to those who make their physical living from their occupation (soldiers, farmers, etc.). In Gal 6, he says that those who minister in spiritual things should be ministered in material things.

That is enough evidence for me.

 

One thing the bible is not crystal clear on is that the local church should have one pastor!
Scripture repeatedly stresses that elders (plural) should rule the local church, feed the flock, govern the body, guard the sheep etc. It does indicate that the elders have different functions or tasks but appear equal on all accounts and do not report to a "senior pastor".(1Tim. 5:17, 1Pet.5:1-4, Acts 14:23, 20:17, Titus 1:5 etc.)
What a novel idea to eliminate pastoral burnout, power issues, pedestal syndrome, and better guard against heresy.
As has already been established, those who teach and preach are permitted to live of the gospel.

 

I agree Sola, and while we talk about it, where do we get the titles"Senior Pastor" "Associate Pastor" "Assistant Pastor" "Youth Pastor" "Small group Pastor" et.al. from?

On my reading of scripture (admitidly only in English translation) I see Elders, I see Deacons, I see amongst the gifts, Pastors and Teachers, but none of the others.

Those gifted to be Pastors do deserve the support of the church where they work, the size and wealth of the church will ave an influence on just how much finance can be given. A church should remember if it pays part-time salary it can only expect part-time pastoring. The crime many churches commit is to pay part time and expect full time work.

Surely the best for churches is a plurality of elders, that includes those gifted as pastors, that can care for the church collectively. This does not mean no payments, or that all will be payed, it means the church taking care of its congregation in different ways, using the gifts and talents God has provided.

Regards
Bob

 

Without jumping too hard on my poor beat-up soapbox...(again)

First I have to put the disclaimer: The following does not apply to Pastor Larry or Dr Bob (or most other Pastors on BB) Larry, Bob, et al are fair dinkum blokes from what I have seen on BB

Now back to the rant: I am not a great fan of "professionalism". There are too many quoting "do not muzzle the ox" that do not go further in 1 Cor 9 and see Paul did not use that right at that stage. Add into the mix the handful of bad eggs (turn on TV for examples) that are teaching all sorts of garbage and making enough money to run a small country doing so...

A much bigger problem than 'professionalism' ever will be is the number of people sitting warming pews in Church. Wether 'professional' or not, my Bible says we are all a "royal priesthood". It seems only 10-20% of people in most Churches take that seriously though.

Really it's a good thing that I wouldn't think of turning professional. I wouldn't last long at it if I did. Would be poking so many lay(zee)men pew-warmers with sticks and stomping on so many toes they would excommunicate me in a week

Pete

 

I do not have a problem with professional pastors.I do think it is better if a pastor works outside the chuch to provide for his livehood.This gives the pastor a lot more freedom and removes any appearance of catering to the top donors in the congregation.

I have taught Sunday School before on a regular basis and I personally would not ever dream of accepting money for the service.[After all it is service to the Lord Jesus]The pastor does a similar task on a larger scale.

[ July 03, 2003, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: fgm ]

 

This problem of appearance is easily handled by keeping "donor" receipts away from the pastor, and letting it be known that the pastor is not privy to that data.

I too have taught Sunday School on a regular basis, but I would never compare that to the responsibilities of a pastor. A pastor does a whole lot more than stand up and preach a sermon on Sunday mornings. At least in the churches I've been a part of.

I have no problem paying for a full time pastor, as long as he's pastoring full time.

 

This problem of appearance is easily handled by keeping "donor" receipts away from the pastor, and letting it be known that the pastor is not privy to that data.

I too have taught Sunday School on a regular basis, but I would never compare that to the responsibilities of a pastor. A pastor does a whole lot more than stand up and preach a sermon on Sunday mornings. At least in the churches I've been a part of.

I have no problem paying for a full time pastor, as long as he's pastoring full time. </font>[/QUOTE]A sunday school teacher also does a whole lot more than teach a lesson on Sunday morning.Like visiting the sick in the hospital or at home at all hours of the day or night.Like going to someones home to minister to them when their spouse has just ran off and left them with 4 children.Like attending funerals of family members in the S/S class.Like standing next to someone in a hospital room while their loved on passes from this life into eternity.These are just a few of my experiences as a Sunday School teacher.Not to mention all the hours of study for the lesson and prayer time just for the lesson.A servant of Jesus Christ is a servant, paid or not paid.

 

Then, it should be rather easy for you to understand. If you, as a Sunday School teacher, spent a lot of time on your ministry, then a pastor with a much larger ministry (including overlapping your own) would need to spend much, much more time. The time necessary for this ministry goes beyond that which could be provided on a part-time basis (for most churches).

Of course, in addition to the items you listed as a Sunday School teacher, the pastor often finds himself on a lot of committees and involved in decsion-making for the church as a whole. The "world" of a Sunday School teacher is just a fraction of the pastor's "world".

 

I am still looking for Scripture to support the claim of "a plurality of elders".

 

EXXONMOBIL said:

Acts 14:23
So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.

Acts 20:17
From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of the church.

Acts 21:18
On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.

Titus 1:5
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you--

James 5:14
Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.

 

The word church is often used to denote the churches in the region of a particular area. Most of the churches met in homes. Homes can only hold so many people. But one thing I do see is that each elder/pastor was reproducing himslef in the lives of others. One could not leave discipleship up to the pulpit ministry alone. Each of those pastors were mentored by another. Therefore each of those pastors were pouring their life into the lives of others who would reproduce themselves.

2 Timothy 2:2, " The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also."

 

Good question SALTCITYBAPTIST, I don't think it would be a problem if everyone in the Church realised they were all priests though. If everybody knew the Pastor was feeding the 5,000 at Burger King in the morning, but knew there were other people in Church they could call on that time of the day it wouldn't be a problem....

Well, it doesn't cost anything to dream huh?

Pete

 

I have no problem with supporting the needs of pastors so that they can devote whatever time is necessary to care for the spiritual needs of the flock. They should NEVER have to worry about not fulfilling their scriptural responsibilities because the wate bill is due. Full time effort deserves full time support.

 

(Me and my big mouth...)

Every man who stands before a congregation as a pastor is a professional. At least if he is called of God he is. He is to make that his profession, and no man has the authority to lead a group of believers otherwise.

As to the plurity of elders, Dr. Bob is right in that the Bible does not thunder from Sinai, "Thou shalt have a plurity of elders." Even though many congregations in the early (Acts) church did, it is not a mandate from Scripture. Personally, I can see how having several who can stand as pastor could be a good thing, but I can also see how the same thing could be very detrimental.

Pastoral dictatorships do happen, and always will. Demanding to have a group of leaders may not change that. Besides, as Baptists, we know how one or two individuals can bring ANY ministry to a grinding halt...multiply that by the number of proposed elders. As long as men live in this sin-darkened world, the flesh will have its say (whether we like it or not).

In Christ,
Trotter