Holding back on teaching

I am not a pastor but I get the sense that there are mainly two reasons that pastors stay away from certain things:

1. They don't see them as important.

2. They don't understand them.

I'm sure there are instances where a pastor stays away from a topic because he know it's unpopular, but I believe these are rare.

 

I agree with the 2 you offer and I would add a third... they know the subject matter would bring division. Ephesians 4 (unity) is a high priority and not every pastor is able to cover what some see as controversial from the pulpit well.

While I am not tied to preaching through books all the time, I do believe that doing so helps to avoid "cherry picking" subjects or using the time to stand on my soapbox. I am preaching through Ephesians now and I can say that I love the freedom I have.

 

I do not preach, but rather, the Spirit preaches through me. There is nothing that I will not preach on, if led by the Spirit. W/O Him, I can not preach one word.

 

I believe in preaching expositionally through books. Thus, preaching everything in God's Word will occur.

The goal is to preach the entire counsel of God. That is what a preacher should attempt to accomplish.

 

If God gives it to me then I'll give it away.

 

Agree with you on that approach, but also think to clearly explain while teaching that this is "my interpretation" on the passage, or that there are other valid way to see the scriptures in another light!

Just saying that we cannot give "infallible" our views, and that it is good to show there are other valid positions that can/have been held on these areas in Bible!

 

For me, I believe you have to understand the spiritual maturity level of the people you are preaching to and what the purpose of the opportunity for preaching is. I preach expositionally in every service, btw.

For example, on Sunday morning, I understand that there is a broad cross section of people. There are mature believers, but just as big a number of immature people (either because they have not grown in the Lord or they are newly saved) and unsaved people. So this tempers how deep i will go.

Sunday nights and Wednesday nights are entirely different. This is my opportunity to preach and teach God's Word to more mature people who are able to get into some areas, such as dealing with problem areas like Hebrews 6, for example, and talking about doctrinal areas such as soteriology or eschatology.

Paul kept back some things from various churches because they weren't able to understand them. So a pastor can and ought to understand his audience when he preaches and teaches.

 

What does this have to do with the topic? My response was clearly addressing holding back on theology, I do not see how your post relates to my post in response to the question.

Can I give other views on issues on some doctrine? Yes! However, I should also take strong stands on the Bible in how I interpret the Bible. Because there is debate does not mean I cannot be convinced. I don't surrender my Reformed or Baptist viewpoints because there are those who disagree.

 

No, I think theology has practical implications. There maybe some very debatable issues that you give several positions and your position. However, like with Baptism or church government, you need to be clear on your belief and that should be the stance of the church.

 

I truly think that this pastor was being dishonest with the church no matter how good his sermons sounded. This seems to be a not-so-rare occurrence among Calvinist preachers.

 

19Serving the LORD with all humility of mind, and with many tears, and temptations, which befell me by the lying in wait of the Jews:

20And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house,

21Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.


Paul did not shrink back from declaring all truth. Children were addressed in his letter to the Ephesians....were paul spoke freely of calvinistic teaching..even before Calvin was born.

A true pastor does not shrink back...a hireling will.

 

Would say that the pastor/teacher needs to be with those of like mind on doctrines and stances!

Don't think a reformed baptist would enjoy teaching full time to freewill church!

 

to be homest with you though...

MOST of the time, a pastor/teacher is just teachingthe doctrines that ALL Christians would agree with, as at least in My Church, do not teach just a seperate class for Cal/Arm, or covt/dispy!

 

I think a church should have a very specific and in-depth confession, not one of these "barely covers anything" doctrinal statement that has become famous in the last 100 years. I think the Pastors and Elders should adhere to these statements and any exceptions should be explained. Thus, if someone had a very good doctrinal statement and used this to question the candidate on their beliefs it would limit the number of people in pulpits that don't match up.

There are two sides to this issue. A church whose doctrinal statement which covers bare minimums and if they barely address these important issues in questioning is responsible for not covering important issues. As well, a perspective pastor should be clear on his beliefs too.

If I were interviewing with a church, I would address the reformed issue upfront. Yet, my view on searching for a pastor makes most of these issue moot.

 

Think that it comes back to just how inclusive One sees the local church as being!

can hold to theology of say calvinism, or Arminianism, charasmatic or not, yet can also have a setting where all sides can partake and membership in, as we would agree on the essentials, and allow freedom on the disputables, isn't that one of the cardinal truths of baptuists, that we DO allow for individuals to have own beliefs, as long NOT different than essential core Christian doctrines?

 

I completely agree... the priority of unity should never trump essential doctrine.

 

But John, why did the non-calvinist church appoint a pastor with calvinistic beliefs? Unless you are meaning that he and the other preachers involved in what you describe as "a not-so-rare occurrence " kept those beliefs secret until they got into the pulpit - but even then, surely a church would hear a man preach before appointing him to the pastorate.

A linked question: Did not the church concerned have a statement of faith? If so, surely on his appointment, the pastor would have to indicate his agreement with that statement?

 

Wouldn't the Elder Board be ultimatly responsible in this, as I am sure they line him up to be a canidaye for pastor, and knew how his views lined up against theitr church staement of beliefs?

In a more practicle sense...

is there really that of a difference between teaching/preaching between cals/Arms reformed etc?

If conservative Evangelical, wouldn't a majority of the time all be teaching essentials of the faith that we all would agree to?

growing in Christ/walking in HS, second coming, faith etc?