In general I am coming to believe that most Pastors today are not will

[Guest shiloh357]

Firestorm,

 

Maybe it is not that people are not hearing from God.   Maybe God never set up a particular model and said, "this is what church services and structures are to look like."   There are different views on how church is done and you have no right to say that any one model is wrong, since there is no "doctrine" that governs it.

 

That's why it is not about false doctrine.

 

You know what I find rather ironic???   We have people running around saying that we need to only listen  to the Holy Spirit and not the words of men, and then turn around and act as if we are supposed to listen to THEM when they presume to sit in judgment on how everyone else conducts worship or structures their church.   They violate their own theology by claiming that we should not listen to men, but then make themselves the exception to that rule, as if they are the only ones hearing from God.

[carlos123]

Hi everyone, 

 

There are a few things people have said that I would like to comment on if I might. I have bolded those statements that I am commenting about in the quotes below.  

 

And of course it goes without being said that the Holy Spirit is the one leading those he put into position to lead the flock of God and is ultimately the one in charge of the leading into all truth.

 

The Pastor is NOT, NOT, NOT the only one being led by the Spirit in any give body of believers Openly Curious.  He leads every single member of the Body (Romans 8:14) though you would think by modern day practice that He ONLY leads THROUGH the Pastor.  If a person is not led by the Spirit they are not a Christian.  

 

This goes to the modern view of pastoral leadership (as opposed to a scriptural view).  The modern day Pastor has become in practice if not in theology the new Catholic Priest.  The man in the middle between God and man or in the case of the church between God and the members of the body.  God leads but he leads through the Pastor the view goes.  God's Spirit inhabits every single believer but few if any are able to express God's gifting through the Spirit other than the Pastor who may expound at will on what he thinks truth is about.  

 

All I am reading in this thread is, "if everyone would just do church the I think it should be done according to MY reading of Scripture, then everyone would be doing it the right way."

 

You have hit on the core problem I think Shiloh.  Namely the belief that no one can read the Scriptures and interpret them accurately enough to hold everyone accountable to do what it says!  

 

It's as if you are saying that we should all live and let live respecting correct biblical interpretation.  

 

If that is indeed your view...I find it hard to believe it is so by all means if it is not please correct me...the following verses completely negates that view.  

 

2 Peter 1:20-21 (HCSB)

 

First of all, you should know this: No prophecy of Scripture comes from one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

 

1 Corinthians 4:6 (ESV)

 

I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers,[a] that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.

 

 

Nothing in the Scriptures is a matter of personal opinion or interpretation.  For the words written were penned under inspiration to express the thoughts of God.  Specific words having a specific meaning.  A meaning that CAN be understood and rightly divivided and to which we can be held accountable.  

 

Admittedly there are countless different interpretations of this or that set of verses floating around.  Even in this thread there are various interpretations of various verses being brought out.  But having these different interpretations does not negate what the Word says.  That there is ONE correct interpretation.  Perhaps many different applications but there is a definite something that God meant to say through some set of verses when he inspired the writer to pen the words that they did.

 

To say that we understand a set of verses and what the Lord meant to say through them is not arrogance or presumption if we are correctly dividing the Word of truth and accurately interpreting what it says in the plain meaning of the words used.  

 

To hold others accountable to obey that interpretation and calling out other interpretations as being innacurate and in error is not judgemental.  It is godly in that we are called to speak the truth in love to one another and to judge and correct innacurate interpretations which can lead to all kinds of problems within the body. 

 

The Bible doesn't lay out for us what a church service is supposed to look like.   It gives us the qualifications for deacons and bishops (pastors) but it doesn't lay out what an actual service is supposed to be.

 

There is room for different churches to have their own set of traditions.

 

 

I completely disagree Shiloh.  

 

What do you think 1 Cor 14 is talking about?  

 

You have mentioned in the past that Paul was correcting faulty practice in the life of the Corinthian church.  Quite true.  But you have then concluded by that...that 1 Cor 14 doesn't apply all that much today as a result (if I am understanding your responses correctly). 

 

But a correction of something in error does not lead automatically to the negation of the prescribed solution. 

 

If you go to a nutritionist to advice you on a better diet and the nutritionist tells you that you should eat more vegetables and fruits...does the fact that you were faulty in your diet automatically mean the the nutritionist's advice to you about eating more vegetables and fruits does not apply to every single person on the face of this Earth?  

 

Of course not!

 

Paul's instructions in 1 Cor 14 were indeed correcting faulty practice in the Corinthian church but his instructions, in so far as they lay out how a meeting of the church is supposed to be conducted, was applicable (see 1 Corinthians 14:33-37) to all other New Testament churches and is still applicable to us today.  

 

To say otherwise is to discount the value of instructions just because they are given to deal with a specific problem.  

 

Someone isn't using a hammer correctly so we all can ignore instructions given to someone on how to use the hammer correcty because...well...they were given to someone who didn't know how to use a hammer. 

 

Someone isn't driving correctly so we can all ignore instructions given on which traffic signals mean what, when to stop and go, how to maneuver a car, and all manner of other instructions on correct vehicle operation because...well...they were given to someone who didn't know how to drive. 

 

Such a perspective is ludricous and leads either to incorrect interpretation of the instructions given in the Word or to disobedience in ignoring clear instructions given for how a church meeting is supposed to be conducted.  

 

1 Cor 14 means something.  Something definite.  Concrete. 

 

Paul did not waste his time and the Holy Spirit did not inspire him to pen meaningless nonsense.  I believe what he said is clear.  Very clear. 

 

And that those who do not see clearly what it says are resistant to God and his ways.  Perhaps not in a blatant rebellious manner but resistant in some way. 

 

Unwilling to do the will of God. 

 

For Jesus said that if ANYONE is willing that they will know whether something that is being taught is of God or whether it is nothing more than personal opinion which can safely be ignored.  

 

Paul even went so far as to say this about his instructions in 1 Cor 14. 

 

1 Cor 14:37 (ESV)

 

If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. 38 If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.

 

 

That's how important Paul thought his instructions were!  

 

That's pretty important if you ask me.  

 

That anyone who does not recognize and acknowledge his instructions as being the commands of the Lord himself is to be ignored.  

 

He would not have said such a thing if those instructions could not be understood.  

 

I believe that they can be understood and that we are to apply them.  

 

To shape our modern day church meetings around them. 

 

I began this thread to get input on why Pastors seem so unwilling to me.  To apply what Paul said.  

 

After talking with the Pastor I did yesterday it is becoming rather clear to me that there is a blindness over the hearts of many.  Where they simply do not see what is written in 1 Cor 14.  

 

Can I say that such men have evil hearts?  I have thought that in the past and still do to some degree.  

 

I still don't know what to make of that entirely but it seems clear to me that there is a blindness among many who profess the name of Christ that is caused by pride, selfish ambition, an unwillingness to yield to what is plainly said in the Word.  No amount of discussion will remove the blinders anymore than Jesus was able through what he said to remove the blinders on the hearts of the Pharisees and Saducees.  

 

Giving sight to those who are blind is a matter where the Lord must extend mercy and open the eyes of the blind through the power of his Spirit.  

 

I cannot force those who are blind to see no matter how much I might wish at times to beat them over the head with a 2x4 of truth.  

 

What is becoming evident to me is that I must continue to speak truth to anyone willing to listen but that I must also continue to love - even those who are blind.  

 

That is a tough thing to do.  In my natural self I want to write off those who are blind and have nothing more to do with them.  

 

Jesus did not do that and we must follow his example in that I think. 

 

Still...there is a blindness in the church of today regarding these issues that I can do little about.  It would be best I think to find others who are able to see and join with them somehow but I am somewhat clueless as to how to find such Christians in my local area. 

 

Carlos

[ayin jade]

Carlos, in Acts we see that the first century church sold all they had and combined it with one another. If you think that the first century church in Acts is the way the church is supposed to be, then shouldnt you do that part too?

[Ezra]

The sad truth is that most evangelical and fundamentalist churches have adopted and implemented so many man-made teachings and ideas, that it would be impossible for them to repent and go back to the scriptural pattern.  You will not find a single church admitting that they have been wrong and need to repent.

 

Those churches with one pastor will never accept the biblical teaching concerning a plurality of elders, with the pastor as just one among several elders who shepherd the flock.  Instead they will relegate other men to being deacons, when the office of a deacon is not the same as that of an elder.

 

We should keep in mind that the seminaries and Bible schools indoctrinate men attending them, not necessarily in biblical principles but in denominational practices and traditions.  But the elders and apostles in Scripture never went to the rabbinic colleges and "seminaries", and indeed would be looked upon contemptuously by the rabbis, just as Peter and John were "unlearned" in their sight. 

 

Most churches today believe that without a Master of Divinity a man is not qualified to preach and teach the Word.  Furthemore, they have no qualms about using titles such as "Doctor" and "Reverend" even though the Lord expressly forbade the use of these titles, and said "all ye are BRETHREN".  That's how far we have come from Scripture.

[Ezra]

Carlos, in Acts we see that the first century church sold all they had and combined it with one another. If you think that the first century church in Acts is the way the church is supposed to be, then shouldnt you do that part too?

That's a reasonable suggestion and in fact that was the ideal.  It followed the Lord and His apostles, who had forsaken everything and had a "common purse".

[firestormx]

The sad truth is that most evangelical and fundamentalist churches have adopted and implemented so many man-made teachings and ideas, that it would be impossible for them to repent and go back to the scriptural pattern.  You will not find a single church admitting that they have been wrong and need to repent.

 

Those churches with one pastor will never accept the biblical teaching concerning a plurality of elders, with the pastor as just one among several elders who shepherd the flock.  Instead they will relegate other men to being deacons, when the office of a deacon is not the same as that of an elder.

 

We should keep in mind that the seminaries and Bible schools indoctrinate men attending them, not necessarily in biblical principles but in denominational practices and traditions.  But the elders and apostles in Scripture never went to the rabbinic colleges and "seminaries", and indeed would be looked upon contemptuously by the rabbis, just as Peter and John were "unlearned" in their sight. 

 

Most churches today believe that without a Master of Divinity a man is not qualified to preach and teach the Word.  Furthemore, they have no qualms about using titles such as "Doctor" and "Reverend" even though the Lord expressly forbade the use of these titles, and said "all ye are BRETHREN".  That's how far we have come from Scripture.

I would endorse this post twice if I could. This is exactly what I have been trying to say.

[carlos123]

Howdy Ayin Jade, 

 

Carlos, in Acts we see that the first century church sold all they had and combined it with one another. If you think that the first century church in Acts is the way the church is supposed to be, then shouldnt you do that part too?

 

Just so you know (though it might be a bit confusing trying to follow this thread and who said what I have to admit) I was not the one who brought up the idea that we should imitate the church of Jerusalem in Acts as a model for how churches ought to be. 

 

But I do believe that what they did, in so far as it was done because of their devotion to and faith in God, is an example for us to imitate.  

 

In other words if they did what they did out of devotion to God then it stands to reason that if we are likewise devoted that we also will do some of what they did out of that same devotion. 

 

So with respect to selling all that they had and combining their income to meet needs in one another's lives...

 

Why did they do that?  

 

Here are some clues I think. 

 

Jesus said...

 

John 17:22-23 (KJV) 

 

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 

 

John 17:11 (KJV) 

 

Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

 

 

 

Jesus talked of us being one as he and the Father were one.  And he connected that oneness as being extremely important as a visible demonstration of the love that God has for each of us.  

 

Oneness connected with love. 

 

And why is there such a connection?  

 

Well...if you and I are one...what does that mean?  

 

Let's see what it meant between Jesus and the Father. 

 

John 16:15 (KJV) 

 

15 All things that the Father hath are mine: 

 

John 17:10 (KJV) 

 

10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; 

 

 

I get the sense that oneness between Jesus and the Father, at least the oneness that Jesus spoke of as something that we too needed to be, involved a kind of unselfish oneness where what caused you to rejoice caused me to rejoice.  Where what caused you sadness made me sad.  Where what hurt you hurt me.  And where your need was taken on by me as my own. 

 

So if I was indeed one with you where what was mine was yours and what was yours was mine, as members of one body in Christ, then it stands to reason that I would sell anything I had to meet needs in your life at the time of your need and that you would in turn do the same for me when there was unmet need in my life. 

 

Doesn't that make sense?  

 

I mean if we take the oneness of Jesus and the Father as our example. 

 

We are members of the same body.  

 

What do I do when a member of my body hurts?  I nurse it and nurture it and do what I can to meet it's need for care.  We should do no less than that for one another. 

 

Just because people who profess to be Christians today don't generally do that doesn't mean anything at all.  That's just the way it is today.  

 

The Christians in the Jerusalem church were simply applying what Jesus had spoken about and what the Apostles in turn taught out of what Jesus taught them.  Nothing strange or unusual about it at all in my mind. 

 

And something we need to imitate today if we are going to lay claim to wanting to be one as Jesus spoke of and to being members of the same body. 

 

If I love you and you love me as members of the same body with a love like that of Jesus Christ we can do no less.  

 

This is not a legalistic thing where you MUST sell your house to meet my need and I must sell mine.  No less than it is not a legalistic thing where we MUST worship God, or read our bible's, or do any other such thing. 

 

If we love God, truly love the Lord, we will follow his example of sacrificial love because we WANT to.  Not because we HAVE to or else.  

 

The fact that we don't generally love one another that way today is nothing less than an indication that our love for the Lord (as expressed in our love for one another) is incredibly superficial and wanting.  It is no wonder to me that the world takes note of this superficiality and calls us hypocrites.  

 

We claim to love one another in Christ while clinging to our own lives, living for ourselves, and otherwise looking out for our own self-interests as if this life was all there was.  

 

As for whether I am doing that in my relationships with others.  I would love to do that Ayin Jade.  I once did do that (within a fellowship the Lord began through me in the apartment complex that I lived in).  But I can't even find believers around me here who are willing to do whatever the Bible says to do no matter what the cost or the consequences to our lives is - never mind moving into oneness as an expression of Christ-like love. 

 

I am not to squander what I have and sell it or give it away to sacrifically meet needs in any Tom, Dick, or Jane.  Even the Christians in Acts didn't do that.  

 

But if I don't have an immediate need in my life for something in my possession and a true believer crosses my path who is in genuine need - a need that must be met sooner rather than later, then yes...I am to make available whatever I have had and can bring to bear to meet their need trusting God to provide for my own needs in the future.  

 

That is one aspect of what living by faith in a living God is all about.  Just as Jesus did.  

 

But it would be so much better and more all encompassing if I could be a part of a group of believers willing to love each other that way instead of dealing with believers in isolated instances of meeting one here or there where most all the one's I meet are so much richer than me that there is hardly ever any opportunity for me to love other believers through what I possess or can bring to bear to meet needs in their lives.  Materially speaking I mean. 

 

Carlos

[carlos123]

The sad truth is that most evangelical and fundamentalist churches have adopted and implemented so many man-made teachings and ideas, that it would be impossible for them to repent and go back to the scriptural pattern.  You will not find a single church admitting that they have been wrong and need to repent.

 

Those churches with one pastor will never accept the biblical teaching concerning a plurality of elders, with the pastor as just one among several elders who shepherd the flock.  Instead they will relegate other men to being deacons, when the office of a deacon is not the same as that of an elder.

 

We should keep in mind that the seminaries and Bible schools indoctrinate men attending them, not necessarily in biblical principles but in denominational practices and traditions.  But the elders and apostles in Scripture never went to the rabbinic colleges and "seminaries", and indeed would be looked upon contemptuously by the rabbis, just as Peter and John were "unlearned" in their sight. 

 

Most churches today believe that without a Master of Divinity a man is not qualified to preach and teach the Word.  Furthemore, they have no qualms about using titles such as "Doctor" and "Reverend" even though the Lord expressly forbade the use of these titles, and said "all ye are BRETHREN".  That's how far we have come from Scripture.

 

Well put Ezra!!  

 

And I completely agree. 

 

What that says about present day Pastors is not very positive.  

 

If a man who is a Pastor claims to be willing to do WHATEVER the Word says but doesn't do it (assuming he at least understands what it says)...that man is a hypocrite if not worse.  Akin to the religious leaders whom the Lord called a lot of other choice words.  If a Pastor doesn't understand how far the church of today has strayed from what the Lord intended that man is, at the very least, blind.  

 

We are not called to defend and uphold the status quo.  To defend positions of power, influence, or authority that we might enjoy.  We are called to be obedient to the will of another.  The Lord!  

Carlos

[bob2]

Actually the church order has been considered to be broken hundreds of years ago , and many sought to get back to scriptural meetings , the brethren movement in the early 1800s in England , is worth a study , but the devil managed to confuse that movement with false doctrine and divisions . So the churches have not really gotten it all together as they did in the Acts with some problems of Jews that sought to bring them back to the law , but the Apostle s fought them  with much trouble . Apostle Paul warned that after his departure , grevious wolves would come in and not spare the flock .   That has really happened the church is considered to be in ruins since , but Christians have sought to seek the Lord as best they can . But all there is now is the Apostles doctrine , the NT, and if that is not followed then where will it be known ? 

 

A great man of practise and Doctrine that sought to follow only the Bible ," George Muller of Bristol ", was of the early brethren movement in the 1800 s . a worthy study with amazing testimony , just google his name , if you can read his Journal .  But beware the brethren movement is not what is was then , so Im not advocating them at all of what they are now .