One at a time?

I like Major B's line of thought If God can't move em your direction, why bother!

Have seen men that candidate at numerous churches then decide on where to go on which pay package is the best.

One at a time is the best way in my mind both for men and churches. Have run into churches that have three or four in and pick their choice.

Just had a thought. Since the average pastor lasts 18 or so months in a pastorate, can you imagine how soon after accepting a position they have to start looking!

Personal opinion there is a lot to be said for tent making

 

For some time now, I have been urging all young men who surrender for ministry to develop a readily marketable and mobile trade (math teacher, engineer, licensed electrician, RN, lab tech, etc.).

Bivocational ministry prevents the pastor and his family from being economic hostages to the whims of churches.

 

Major,
I have beat my head against a brick wall (the traditional Baptist church) for 40 years trying to at least dialog in this subject. I feel that if we could get past salary and paying pastors and move to the concept of providing pastors' needs, we could at least build from that. But, who am I kidding, won't happen. That's why were're seeing a proliferation of underground Nondom, even postmodern churches. That's why 75% of population remains unchurched. If you can't be pidgeon-holed into their fit, you are discarded. Or they will try to force your square peg into their round hole. Let me get off this soapbox.

 

A chance at what?? I am a pastor of a small church, and to be honest, this is a great chance. Too many pastors (not specifically you) are not willing to do the hard work of bulding a church. Every church at one time was 10-12 people, and someone got a "chance" ... a chance to build it up by ministering, loving, evangelizing and sticking with it. Too many people are too eager to leave. I have people beg me to leave this church for a great situation, but I am not interested. I have spent too much time here to throw it away. People think churches of 200 or 300 are ready made. But they aren't. They get that way because someone takes the "chance" and runs with it. Personally, I think my skill sets would be much better suited to a larger congregation. But that is not where God has me right now ... So my "chance" is here and I am trying to make the most of it. Be faithful in teh little things ...

So I would encourage you to see the "chance" that is before you. I wonder how you "know it is time to leave." That seems curious to me ... My belief is that we grow where we are planted. Put in the time and effort.

But to the point of the thread, I don't think it is the same both directions. When a guy "candidates" at a church, typically it is with the understanding that both are committed to saying "Yes" is everyone agrees. By that time, the process on both ends has narrowed down sufficiently. By the time a man preaches for a congregation, the understanding is that you are up for a vote, yes or no. You don't bring in two or three guys to preach and then choose between them. Bad all teh way around on that one.

By the same token, if a man preaches a church as an official candidate (as i have described above), he should not preach at another church under the same idea. Then he would have two commitments.

As far as floating resumes or having someone recommend you, that is a different story.

 

Greg Linscott,
**The same way the church in Ephesus could call a man from Derbe and Lystra, with previous ministry experience in Philippi, Corinth, and Thessalonica to become its pastor. **

I find it quite shocking how many well-educated Christianswho read the Bible think that Timothy was some kind of conventional pastor. While I do believe Timothy probably tended sheep in the Biblical sense, I don't see any evidence of the idea that he was a stationary bishop or elder of a local church when I Timothy was wrritten. Timothy is given instructions on how to appoint bishops.

If we look at Timothy in the New Testament, his ministry was that of helping Paul preach the Gospel in new areas, and then travelling back to those areas to encourage, teach and train. In Ephesus, he was appointing the local overseers who would be responsible for pastoring the flock.

The Bible indicates that Timothy was an apostle of Christ! (I Thes. 1:1, 2:6.) It doesn't say he was a stationary bishop. There is a tradition that he did settle down in Ephesus and 'pastor' there, but when I Timothy was written, he was apparently supposed to be appointing local pastors.

Similarly, Titus is instructed to appoint the elders in every city. He is not told to be a local one-man clergy team.

Titus was to appoint elders in every city. It is apparent taht Titus was supposed to appoint men from within these cities-- men who were already a part of the congregation. Paul and Barnabas appoitned elders from within the very churches they started. These wer ethe men who were supposed to 'pastor' the flock of God.

If seven or eight churches Paul and Barnabas left alone to the Holy Spirit for a few months up to two years could produce elders, why can't our modern churches produce elders? Can't God do this in our midst?

The word 'elder' ahs gotten watered down in meaning. The word 'priest' actually comes from the Greek word for elder, but it got messed up because translators used it to refer to Old Testament kohen.

Reformed Protestants messed up the meaning of the word 'elder.' by using that word to describe community leaders who weren't originally intended to be viewed as Biblical elders. Now we end up with non-pastoial elders who are good businessmen who vote on church committees. And we end up with this sort of new office of 'pastor' as well, which doesn't always quite fit either the Biblical role of apostle or elder.