Must a NT Church have a plurality of Elders??

[Allan]

You have hit what I was taught in school. Back then one church might meet in a larger number of homes due to they didn't have one place that would seat them all. That would add to the number of elders.

It is like when I was in seminary, it was said it would be best if a church when it got up to 300 to 500 at its services each week, the church would build another building and split their church. Today as a friend of mine said, it looks like a lot of pastors are trying to build an empire.

I don't know if either or both are taught today or not.

I know the former (concerning the Acts church) is.

The latter I think is but it isn't very stressed or if it is it isn't something heeded to often it seems.

 

[Allan]

Ok, it took me a bit to read through the posts and figure out where everyone stood thus far.

Here are the result (*** drum roll ***)

The question:
Must a NT Church have a plurality of Elders?


Answers:

No - (14 - with a tenitive 15 from Marcia)
Those who agree are as follows and in no particular order -
..... gb93433; EdSutton; PeterM; rlvaughn; Webdog; Jim1999; Crabtowncowboy; Allan; Tom Butler; Bob Alkire; Jerome; Aaron

Yes - (1)
Those who disagree are as follows and in no particular order -
..... TCGreek

 

[TCGreek]

It seems that is there are plural elders, and they are acting as sharing sheperding of the flock, then a greater degree of spiritual maturity would be required than if the elders are merely acting as a board to take the place of congregational votes.

A board of elders has a part to play in church polity (Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28-32; 1 Tim 3:1-7; 4:14; 5:17; Titus 1:5).

It's the witness of Scripture.

 

[saturneptune]

A board of elders has a part to play in church polity (Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28-32; 1 Tim 3:1-7; 4:14; 5:17; Titus 1:5).

It's the witness of Scripture.

That being true, then each elder should have the qualities of pastor, which is a gift of God for those called, and quite rare. This is a requirement far beyond the churches who use elders merely to govern the church.

 

[Tom Butler]

A board of elders has a part to play in church polity (Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28-32; 1 Tim 3:1-7; 4:14; 5:17; Titus 1:5).

It's the witness of Scripture.

TC, how does the elder system operate in your church? Are they ruling elders, as in the Presbyterian churches? Do they oversee the various ministries of the church?
Do they operate as a "board?" Do they make policy? Does the congregation have a say? Do you have deacons, as well? What is their role?

Others of you who are in elder-led churches, how does it work in your congregation?

No hidden agenda here, just seeking information.

 

[rlvaughn]

So they were actaully one local church which quite logically never or at best very seldom ever met together at the same time due to the lack of facilities to accomodate their gatherings.

Brother Allan, that is your characterization, not mine. I read that they met "continuing daily with one accord in the temple". The fact that they also broke bread from house to house does not negate that they came together daily.

But it appears to me that you are suggesting they were all actually one church body that met in seperate smaller churches. (if they are not churches and very seldom ever comes together, then what are they)

The biblical text calls them a church (singular). Regardless of what difficulties we might have in grasping that, there is no mention of churches (plural). I am not aware of any time in the Bible that the Christians at Jerusalem is referred to in the plural as churches. I do not suggest that they met in smaller churches, only that the members of this church also met privately in addition to their gathering in the temple court. If different members of your church gathered together at different times and places privately would they be "churches", or just members of your church gathering together at different times and places privately?

I'm not sure where you're coming from here - Are you advocating heirarchy? Elders in and over these smaller churches who report to a head elder/Bishop over the larger church body? In order for your suggestion to be a true statement this is the only logical conclusion I can fathom without more information.

No. In fact to me it seemed that your position would ultimately lead to that. For example, when you wrote on page 5 "So here we have an instance of many churches being called one church body."

I guess I might need for you to define your understanding of what constitutes or makes a church a church. (this and the above will help me more in answering your question)

Quickly put together, I'd say a church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers who covenant together to walk in fellowship. They gather for mutual fellowship & edification; to worship God; and to observe the ordinances of Christ. Its officers are pastors (elders/bishops) and deacons. Hope this helps.

 

[rlvaughn]

No - (14 - with a tenitive 15 from Marcia)
Those who agree are as follows and in no particular order -
..... gb93433; EdSutton; PeterM; rlvaughn; Webdog; Jim1999; Crabtowncowboy; Allan; Tom Butler; Bob Alkire; Jerome; Aaron

Brother Allan, I end up the the "no" crowd because of the particular way you have framed this discussion. With Ed Sutton, I agree that the question really should be "Should a NT church have a plurality of elders?" To that question I answer "yes".

I think also your requirement that this be supported by a direct instruction or specific command is untenable and not fully in accord with the Baptist way of interpreting scripture. Does your church operate as an autonomous congregation answerable only to Christ? What direct command do we find to do it that way? Do you baptize in water? What command requires baptism to be in water? Why not baptize in oil or whatever other element might be available? Does your church have two ordinances? What command or instruction is there that there must be only two ordinances?

My point is that perhaps you are requiring more on the elder issue than we Baptists require on several other issues of ecclesiological importance to us.

 

[swaimj]

Add me to those voting "no".

While I think that a plurality of pastors is an ideal, the requirements for a pastor involve the individual person. If a man meets the requirements of a bishop as given in Tim and Titus, he can lead effectively, whether as an individual or on a team.

Patterns of what occurred may differ in different passages. Because they differ, they cannot be absolute requirements. The requirements are those given in the pertinent Tim and Titus passages and they are given in the singular.