Featured Constitution changes at my IFB church:

I've been invited to participate in the committee to revise and update our church's constitution, and there are some significant issues that we must address.

The first is that we are establishing the position of "elder", and we wish to do so in accordance with biblical guidance. Currently, our deacons, of which I am one serve in many of the capacities that are prescribed for elders particularly in Titus. Currently serving deacons are not precluded from being nominated and selected to serve as elders once, if and when the change is approved by the congregation. I do not anticipate much if any pushback from the congregation on this matter.

Second, the constitution as currently written requires that all men who serve be the husband of only one wife, and our church defines that as never having been divorced, before or after salvation, and for any reason (1 Titus 3:2). On the surface, I don't take issue with this directive, because I too am wary of so-called pastors who have been divorced multiple times while in the pulpit. No go!

The flip side of that coin is that I am uncomfortable with any point of view that implies that the blood of Christ was insufficient to address sin.

There will be push back from within the committee, I expect, and certainly from within the congregation, and while I believe their concerns to be valid, I do not think that our current standard is in accordance with biblical guidance. I am certainly willing to be convinced otherwise.

Third: our constitution currently prohibits everyone who performs any sort of official duties within the church from all consumption of alcoholic (and tobacco) products. While there is much biblical guidance, both explicit and implicit regarding drunkenness, a do not see a strict prohibition as being in line with what the Bible teaches us.

I'd very much like to hear your opinions on any or all of the three points.

 

I was less than clear.
Elders: lay and vocational and deacons.

Two offices.

Currently our deacons operate outside of the biblical mandate and also--as is specified in our constitution--assist with the administration and governance of the church. Not biblical.

Elders, lay and vocational, are directed to do those functions, and most importantly, be able to teach.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Elders who get paid = vocational = pastors

Elders who don't = laymen.

Were all the men who taught in the NT "professional" preachers? Were any?

Yet in the church today we have professional credentialled pastors and they are, generally, paid.

As part of how our congregation wishes to operate, we wish to have teachers of the word who are not compensated. Already we have Sunday School teachers who are not pastoral staff; we wish to adjust our constitution to reflect this and articulate the duties and responsibilities inherent.

 

The word "pastor" is found precisely one time in the KJV. In Jeremiah.

The words "trinity" and "rapture" are not found either, but we use them.

I have no idea where the wording came from in the original constitution from 51 years ago this week. My parents weren't even dating 51 years ago, and I certainly wasn't a Christian. Depending on how one feels about predestination of course.

 

Yes I have.

And you can take my word that our deacons operate beyond the scope mandated by the Bible, or you may continue to snipe.

I'd rather you didn't seeing as how we're brothers in Christ, but it is, clearly, your prerogative.

 

Already did that!

Had to get ahead of that one.

 

Thank you very much. The link to the Nazarite vow article was particularly informative and contained much that I hadn't considered.

 

The concept is this: we have elders, some of them are paid staff (vocational). Currently we have a pastoral staff of four men, the Senior Pastor, the Executive Pastor, the Youth and Children's Pastors. We had two more fantastic teachers but in 2016 and again 2017, each was called away to lead his own congregation.

The Senior and Executive Pastor would comprise the vocational elders; the plurality of elders would then be filled by three laymen, and continue in such a manner that the laymen always maintain a majority over the vocational staff.

 

This is like some old Baptist version of a koan isn't it?

Do you feel that the position of elder is extra- or counter-biblical? Is the position of deacon extra- or counter-biblical?

Do you feel that the Bible makes distinction between deacons and elders? If so, what are the distinctions as you see them?

If you see these offices as biblical, and you see distinct differences in their roles in the church, how would you implement them?

To be candid, I'm unclear as to whether you wish to assist other believers, that is, those who have also been washed in the blood of Christ Jesus in working towards being a more effective, more Christ centered, biblically based body, or whether you just wish to bemoan the failings of the RCC, Reformed churches and Presbyterians.

I see great value in the former. Virtually none in the latter.

God bless you brother Jerome.