Qualifications for a deacon

[Salty]

I found these qualifications on the net for Faith Bap:

What are the qualifications required to serve as a Deacon at Faith Baptist Church?​

All potential Deacons must meet the biblical requirements for the office of Deacon in Acts 6:1-6 and 1 Timothy 3:8-13. Moreover, Deacons must be church members of a church of like doctrine and practice to Faith Baptist Church for at least two years, and members of Faith Baptist Church for at least six months prior to their ordination to the office of Deacon. Deacons are nominated by the congregation, examined by the Lead Pastor/Elders, and are subsequently affirmed by the congregation.

Note: the reason for the 2 year previously - is that Faith, is a "military church" ie -most members are family members of a US serviceman.
This church is overseas - the normal tour of duty is 3 years, so families are constantly coming and going. - Some who get assigned may only have a year or so left on their tour.

 

[Reynolds]

I found these qualifications on the net for Faith Bap:

What are the qualifications required to serve as a Deacon at Faith Baptist Church?​

All potential Deacons must meet the biblical requirements for the office of Deacon in Acts 6:1-6 and 1 Timothy 3:8-13. Moreover, Deacons must be church members of a church of like doctrine and practice to Faith Baptist Church for at least two years, and members of Faith Baptist Church for at least six months prior to their ordination to the office of Deacon. Deacons are nominated by the congregation, examined by the Lead Pastor/Elders, and are subsequently affirmed by the congregation.

Note: the reason for the 2 year previously - is that Faith, is a "military church" ie -most members are family members of a US serviceman.
This church is overseas - the normal tour of duty is 3 years, so families are constantly coming and going. - Some who get assigned may only have a year or so left on their tour.

I see no problems with the statement other than it does not specify deacon must be male.

 

[JonC]

I would prefer simply that deacons meet the biblical requirements.

 

[Salty]

as far as being male - that is covered in I Timothy
as far as the 6 months - probally want to make sure that a (military newbie) individual is worthy.
In the NT times - you would have know the individuals for quite some time - as they were all local
but in a military church -very few people have not know each other for very long.

 

[canadyjd]

as far as being male - that is covered in I Timothy
as far as the 6 months - probally want to make sure that a (military newbie) individual is worthy.
In the NT times - you would have know the individuals for quite some time - as they were all local
but in a military church -very few people have not know each other for very long.

The 1 Timothy passage says “likewise the women” which is wrongly translated as wives of the deacons. Women can be, have been deacons throughout church history.

Deacons are servants with no biblical authority over men, unlike the pastor/elders.

The statement is fine as written.

Peace to you

 

[Salty]

Deacons are servants with no biblical authority over men, unlike the pastor/elders.

Fully agree with "no biblical authority"

 

[JonC]

The 1 Timothy passage says “likewise the women” which is wrongly translated as wives of the deacons. Women can be, have been deacons throughout church history.

Deacons are servants with no biblical authority over men, unlike the pastor/elders.

The statement is fine as written.

Peace to you

I think sometimes deacons are made to be an office of authority over the congregation.

But you are right, as deacons were to serve (specifically to serve the "tables", that is, to give out the daily serving as Hellenistic Jews were being overlooked by native Hebrews). And women were included (per 1 Timothy).

BUT what about deacons today? I do not see a need in most churches to make sure everybody regardless of whether a Jew or Hellenstic Jew (or....for the sake of principle, a Gentile) receives the proper daily serving.

The Deacon we have now is not what was in the Bible, obviously. That dies not mean it is unneeded. But today it is more an office of authority, in many ways representing the congregation as a whole. They look for new pastors (exclude some, recommend others). They negotiate real-estate deals to present choices to the congregation changing locations.

It seems that we apply qualifications from one thing no longer used to another thing.

 

[canadyjd]

I think sometimes deacons are made to be an office of authority over the congregation.

But you are right, as deacons were to serve (specifically to serve the "tables", that is, to give out the daily serving as Hellenistic Jews were being overlooked by native Hebrews). And women were included (per 1 Timothy).

BUT what about deacons today? I do not see a need in most churches to make sure everybody regardless of whether a Jew or Hellenstic Jew (or....for the sake of principle, a Gentile) receives the proper daily serving.

The Deacon we have now is not what was in the Bible, obviously. That dies not mean it is unneeded. But today it is more an office of authority, in many ways representing the congregation as a whole. They look for new pastors (exclude some, recommend others). They negotiate real-estate deals to present choices to the congregation changing locations.

It seems that we apply qualifications from one thing no longer used to another thing.

Then I would argue the obvious… the modern view of “deacon” is not the biblical view and therefore an invalid view.

All the roles you described are biblical roles for elders.

Peace to you

 

[Reynolds]

as far as being male - that is covered in I Timothy
as far as the 6 months - probally want to make sure that a (military newbie) individual is worthy.
In the NT times - you would have know the individuals for quite some time - as they were all local
but in a military church -very few people have not know each other for very long.

You and me agree male is covered in I Timothy, but unfortunately, many do not hold our interpretation. Their carefully not using the word “he” makes me question their interpretation.

 

[JonC]

Then I would argue the obvious… the modern view of “deacon” is not the biblical view and therefore an invalid view.

All the roles you described are biblical roles for elders.

Peace to you

I agree that the m9dern view of deacon is not the deacon of Scripture....or perhaps is used today in a different way ti meet the needs of a congregation.

I would argue that this is not the role of elder (overseer or pastor) but of the congregation.

I do not have a problem with what we call "deacons". Just pointing out that our deacon is different.

Elders (overseers pastors) were chosen from among the congregation, but interestingly we use them in a different role as well. Some "baptist" churches actually have elders as an office. Others have pastors who are not overseers but the preacher-teacher of the congregation.