Pastor vote

[Repairman Jack]

Maybe you're right.

I never thought much about it.

Thanks for the resource. I'll check it out.

 

[Tom Butler]

As a general rule, if the best vote a pastor-candidate can get is a bare plurality, there's a big problem there. Even two-thirds sends some bad signals.

I'm not a pastor, but if a vote was less than 90%, I'd have to think long and hard about accepting. At the very least, I'd have to ask the pastor search committee to explain and interpret the No votes.

And the search committee which brings a candidate who can't command a big Yes vote should wonder if it really sought the Holy Spirit's leadership, or failed to do its homework on the candidate.

 

[saturneptune]

As a general rule, if the best vote a pastor-candidate can get is a bare plurality, there's a big problem there. Even two-thirds sends some bad signals.

I'm not a pastor, but if a vote was less than 90%, I'd have to think long and hard about accepting. At the very least, I'd have to ask the pastor search committee to explain and interpret the No votes.

And the search committee which brings a candidate who can't command a big Yes vote should wonder if it really sought the Holy Spirit's leadership, or failed to do its homework on the candidate.

Brother Tom has served on several pastoral search committees, and that figure seems to be pretty solid from history. I have never voted against a pastoral candidate before, but any more than one or two votes against means something is up.

 

[gb93433]

I'm not a pastor, but if a vote was less than 90%, I'd have to think long and hard about accepting. At the very least, I'd have to ask the pastor search committee to explain and interpret the No votes.

I interviewed at a church and the search committee told me that the vote was unanimous. Later I found out that there was some arm twisting by one man on the committee to get a unanimopus vote. What I felt when I found out was exactly what I encountered during my time there. The two deacons who counted the attendance were liars until I confronted them. Their excuse was that they did not want the numbers to go down. Apparently they had inflated the numbers for a long time before me. One Sunday I decided to count for myself. When I got a different number, confronted them and told them to stop that practice the numbers only went dowen for one Sunday and not one person said anything about the drop. One of the deacons who worked with the youth had an altercation with a youth and later committed suicide. Another deacons lied about wehat had happened. So four of the six deacons were liars. It was like walking into a snake pit. I would have never thought to ask for exact numbers. Looking back I had requested to field questions in an open forum and they discouraged me against that. Now I know why.

 

[Jack Matthews]

Our bylaws state that a pastor can be considered called to serve the church when an "overwhelmingly affirmative vote that can be interpreted as the spirit of the unity of the body," has taken place in a venue where at least 80% of the active membership of the church is present. In the case of our current pastor, that was 230 yes, 1 no, out of 231 members present. That number represented 95% of our active membership. Since he's the only pastor we've ever called, the system hasn't been tested again.

I think our personnel team would instruct the elder who is their chairman to discuss the feasibility of a pastor serving the church who received less than 95% of the votes.

 

[AAA]

Actually, it was the case. Those listening to God accepted him.

At first this was not the case (read ACTS). Then he later on became accepted.

Well, first you say God has the only vote then you say He does not vote. Which is it?

God not have a vote, but it is not a true vote in the sense that we use the word...
Lets say that every one voted that GOD did not exist, and GOD says (votes)that HE does exist. Who is right? GOD...

I agree fully with you that God speaks and churches should hear and obey. However, it is not as simple as that. The voting process was started as an implementation of this idea. People put forth what they heard from God. Its been corrupted by politics within our churches, but if you have a better way to practice what you put forth, by all means, let's hear it.

Remember the spys that went inot the promise land. Two of them came back with a good report and the rest cam back with a bad report. If this had been a voting church, then the VOTE would be: GOD is a lier and we can't take the land. The majority is NOT always correct. It cost His chosen nation alot. It says that those who dies in unbelief will NOT have eternal life.

Instead of voting we neewd to be lead of the HOLY GHOST and HE will never steer us wrong as in some cases of voting.

Who would you rather trust?

The votes of men?
or the HOLY GHOST?

Paul was never voted in, nor MOSES, NOr mary, nor Joseph...These were al APPOINTED and ordianed by GOD. This is the betetr way......

 

[Tom Butler]

AAA, it sounds really nice say that we should let the HS lead us, not the votes of men. I remind you that the disciples cast lots to determine Judas' replacement. That's not voting as we do it, but it is a method of selection. They prayed for God's guidance and asked Him to show them which of the two nominees He wanted. Then they gave the lot and Matthias was chosen.

Also, remember that Paul was not immediately accecpted into the church at Jerusalem until Barnabas vouched for him. (Acts 9:24-26)

Can the Lord not speak through a vote of his people? When the last pastor search committee I served on prayed earnestly for Holy Spirit leading, the committee members affirmed that leadership in its votes.

Another thing: we five members had agreed that we would not act unless all five of us agreed. That meant one member could stop anything the committee wanted to do. But we felt that the Holy Spirit would reveal his will to all of us, not just some of us. When we voted, we were in one accord, unified in mind and spirit. The entire congregation affirmed our recommendations (with the exception of 3 or 4 people, as I remember. That's about as close to unanimous you can get in a Baptist church.

 

[Lagardo]

Instead of voting we neewd to be lead of the HOLY GHOST and HE will never steer us wrong as in some cases of voting.

Once again, you point out the theological concept with no indication of how you would apply it.

We are in agreement that we should be lead by the Holy Spirit. We have firmly established this. When a desicion must be made in a church, how do you think that body of believes should be lead of the Holy Spirit?

 

[AAA]

AAA,

The aspotles had an interesting method of seeking God's choice. They cast losts.

I have actually heard of a church casting lots to call a pastor, but I am not sure most churches have the faith to try this.

Of course, in bringing in all sides of a debate, I have heard one interpretation (not one I agree with) that says the apostles were impatient in selecting Judas' replacement and God's choice was clearly Saul of Tarsus, not Mattias.

I am not saying that voting is wrong, but it is not fool proof, and as far as casting lots...is that even biblical? Did the apostles do the right thing? The people that was on the ship with Jonah cast lots and in their eyes one of the "gods" answered them. Is casting lots an occult practice and why is it that this seems to be from my memory the only place that the apostles did this (choosing Matthis by lots)? The Amish seems to practice the same thing when choosing a minister.

I have heard some churches voting on what color of carpet to put in their new building or some other minior issue, but they could not decide it by vote even though they tried to do so, and it lead to a church split.............

 

[rbell]

Remember the spys that went inot the promise land. Two of them came back with a good report and the rest cam back with a bad report. If this had been a voting church, then the VOTE would be: GOD is a lier and we can't take the land. The majority is NOT always correct. It cost His chosen nation alot. It says that those who dies in unbelief will NOT have eternal life.

Instead of voting we neewd to be lead of the HOLY GHOST and HE will never steer us wrong as in some cases of voting.

Who would you rather trust?

The votes of men?
or the HOLY GHOST?

Paul was never voted in, nor MOSES, NOr mary, nor Joseph...These were al APPOINTED and ordianed by GOD. This is the betetr way......

um...

• If there are dissenting voices, whose voice will be representative of the Holy Spirit?
• Paul is the only person you mentioned that even comes in the area code of "local church pastor." I doubt anyone will be voting on the mother of the Messiah anytime soon. I heard that job was filled quite a while back.

Once again, you point out the theological concept with no indication of how you would apply it.

We are in agreement that we should be lead by the Holy Spirit. We have firmly established this. When a desicion must be made in a church, how do you think that body of believes should be lead of the Holy Spirit?

good points. And yes, I see a tension in all this. I'm not in favor of "pure democracy" when it comes to church polity (I'm also not in favor of its polar opposite--a dictatorship). But there's got to be a way a church makes decisions. Granted...seeking God's face is the method. But when we gather, after praying and seeking God, how do we come to resolution?

 

[rbell]

"Pure democracy" (everything is voted on; nothing is done without a vote) eventually paralyzes a church.

"Total dictatorship" (one man/entity (we're talking HUMAN here) decides everything) causes a church to become unhealthy, and ultimately might become cult-like if the leader is not a Godly one.

Both extremes IMO are problematic.

 

[AAA]

AAA, it sounds really nice say that we should let the HS lead us, not the votes of men. I remind you that the disciples cast lots to determine Judas' replacement. That's not voting as we do it, but it is a method of selection. They prayed for God's guidance and asked Him to show them which of the two nominees He wanted. Then they gave the lot and Matthias was chosen.

Also, remember that Paul was not immediately accecpted into the church at Jerusalem until Barnabas vouched for him. (Acts 9:24-26)

Can the Lord not speak through a vote of his people? When the last pastor search committee I served on prayed earnestly for Holy Spirit leading, the committee members affirmed that leadership in its votes.

Another thing: we five members had agreed that we would not act unless all five of us agreed. That meant one member could stop anything the committee wanted to do. But we felt that the Holy Spirit would reveal his will to all of us, not just some of us. When we voted, we were in one accord, unified in mind and spirit. The entire congregation affirmed our recommendations (with the exception of 3 or 4 people, as I remember. That's about as close to unanimous you can get in a Baptist church.

I am not saying that voting is wrong, but it is not fool proof, and as far as casting lots...is that even biblical? Did the apostles do the right thing? The people that was on the ship with Jonah cast lots and in their eyes one of the "gods" answered them. Is casting lots an occult practice and why is it that this seems to be from my memory the only place that the apostles did this (choosing Matthis by lots)? The Amish seems to practice the same thing when choosing a minister.

I have heard some churches voting on what color of carpet to put in their new building or some other minior issue, but they could not decide it by vote even though they tried to do so, and it lead to a church split.............

Have you considered in todays time most of the so-called-church is just professing christians and not even saved? I have heard that B. Graham said that number was 75%. This means that 25% are truely saved if this were true. So lets say that 25% (born agian christians) hears from God and votes for the pastor that HE has ordianed, and 20% (professing christians, but not truely saved) votes for the same person. That is 45% that will be overuled by the 55% (professing Christian, but not truely born agian). How many times has this happend? How many church denomination has already voted to try to form a ONE WORLD religion?

It is my prayer that we will all be led to vote the way that GOD will have it be determined, but it is so said that the tares out number the wheat even in the "chuch setting".

As a church how do we safe gaurd agiants the children of satan voting in the one that satan wants as a pastor?

Let God's will be done............Vote or no vote!

 

[AAA]

Once again, you point out the theological concept with no indication of how you would apply it.

We are in agreement that we should be lead by the Holy Spirit. We have firmly established this. When a desicion must be made in a church, how do you think that body of believes should be lead of the Holy Spirit?

In this same thread.............
Please read my reply (AAA -I am not saying that voting...)that I have given to: TOM BUTLER. My reply is right under his reply that he has given ..."Tom Butler- AAA, it sounds really nice..."

Thanks!

 

[AAA]

If the church has a pastor who changes his view of scripture, and starts preaching untruths, how do they get rid of him? Say he converts to Islam, but doesn't want to give up the pastorship of his church, and instead wants to convert them all? Is the church to do nothing or are they all supposed to leave and leave the church in the hands of this man?

The person/s or person must rebuke him in love. Then if he does not repent take one or two with you and rebuke him a 2nd time and if he does not repent then shun him and treat him a you would an unbeliever.

Lets just say the church votes to keep this unrepented pastor who is preaching false doctrine and 75% says keep him and 25% says to get rid of him. Shoud the 25% percent be forced to accept the ungodly pastor?

 

[gb93433]

"Pure democracy" (everything is voted on; nothing is done without a vote) eventually paralyzes a church.

"Total dictatorship" (one man/entity (we're talking HUMAN here) decides everything) causes a church to become unhealthy, and ultimately might become cult-like if the leader is not a Godly one.

Both extremes IMO are problematic.

I agree with you. That is the reason why a team of men who are accountable to each other is so important.

The primary qualification for leadership is the proof of that leadership before he is approved and called a leader. The proof is in the disciple he has already made. He is not to be a new convert. Seat time in a church does not qualify one for leadership. Leaders must be trained and then they must be about training others.

 

[Tom Butler]

Have you considered in todays time most of the so-called-church is just professing christians and not even saved? I have heard that B. Graham said that number was 75%. This means that 25% are truely saved if this were true. So lets say that 25% (born agian christians) hears from God and votes for the pastor that HE has ordianed, and 20% (professing christians, but not truely saved) votes for the same person. That is 45% that will be overuled by the 55% (professing Christian, but not truely born agian). How many times has this happend?

(snip)

Let God's will be done............Vote or no vote!

I couldn't agree more. I think you've put your finger on the cause of a lot of the problems in today' churches--unsaved church members.

The problem, as I see it, is not in using a vote that can be skewed by lost members. It is in the lack of discipling and of church discipline that has allowed many of them to slip in.