vetted in the line of a pastor. We both were called, as the terminology was even used, called to the church by the same process that was used for the pastor, yet we were not permitted to be called pastor and we were excluded from deacon board meetings where all the consequential decisions affecting the church's ministries were made by the pastor and the deacons. According to the church's Baptistic doctrinal statement, there was recognition of only two offices in the New Testament church, pastor and deacon. So, the question was, what were the minister of youth and I in that church? We were not pastors, we're not deacons, but we'd been called to the staff and evaluated according to those standards. It was a bit of a confusion. Where do we fall? We're called minister, but not pastor. And just on a relational note, now, I'm not bitter about this, understand. It was a difficult time in my life, some of the circumstances that surrounded it. But one thing that stands out as to what was going on here, one child, just an innocent little girl one time, passed me in the hallway and said, hi, Pastor Brian. And that pastor heard that. And the very next time that little girl saw me, for the first time ever, she called me just by my first name and said, hi, Brian. Little six-year-old girl. All right, so anyway, that demonstrates something of what was the mentality there, and that it was very intentional. It was very. very determined. According to that, we were kind of confused as to exactly what our position was meant to be. We had both been formally trained for the ministry and evaluated and approved for it by our schools and by this church. We were called ministers but not pastors. We were not deacons, not trustees, an office that doesn't even appear in scripture but doesn't mean it can't happen in a church. We were not permitted to speak up in congregational meetings. as we were to demonstrate a united front as part of the leadership of the church. So what exactly were we? What are the numerous other men who have given their lives to Christ in the service of the church, but who are not the pastor or the senior pastor? What are these men who studied for years to be properly equipped to handle the word of God and to effectively minister to the local church, but who are excluded from voting on the critical decisions of the church, even though they may be called assistant pastors. So this is not the case here, but if you've had experience in other churches, you have probably seen things like this. So you can probably relate to the situation. Maybe you haven't thought so deeply about it if you weren't actually in that position of being on the pastoral staff or the church staff. But whether it is the single pastor model of so many Baptist churches or the typical elder rule, as it's sometimes referred to, model of many Bible churches, especially in America, and some other non-denominational churches, there appears to be this dichotomy between the stated ecclesiastical theology, you know, ecclesiology is the study of the church and church things, of these evangelical churches and their actual practice. In the former model, the single pastor, there are often trained and biblically qualified people on staff who find themselves marginalized while the pastor or the senior pastor works closely with the deacons to provide directional leadership of the church body. In the latter model, the elder rule, as some call it. There is often little difference except that the group of decision makers is called elders rather than deacons and the senior pastor and likely the congregation as a whole may have less input. And in the former model complaints are commonly heard that the pastor is abusive or at least too unilateral in his leadership and or that of the other members of the pastoral staff do not seem to stick around very long. And in the second model, complaints are commonly heard that the elder board fails to listen to the concerns or wishes of the congregation, and maybe even those of the senior pastor at times, because they stand apart. In both models, there are often overlooked men who are both called by God and qualified to lead the church than those who are actually given the responsibility to do so. So something in these popular models of church government has gone awry, and I want to put forward what we believe is the biblical model. And I say we because I know that Pastor Mike and I are agreed on these things, we have discussed these things. So in order to understand properly the context in which the earliest church, we're going to, sorry, that's a leap ahead. I want to look at the early church model as a pattern. In order to understand properly the context in which the earliest churches established their leadership structure, we need to look briefly at their cultural experience prior to their conversion to Christ. Since Jesus never gave explicit instructions regarding the organization of church leadership. It's not outlined in dot points or anything like that. The apostles acted on their experience and conventional wisdom, although I'm convinced that even this happened under the leadership of the Holy Spirit. Their upbringing and knowledge of the Old Testament scriptures led them very naturally to the establishment of a group of elders as the practical and spiritual leaders of the local church. The Jewish civic and religious leadership structure of plural elders went all the way back to the time of Israel's enslavement in Egypt. The Hebrew word for elder is tzakin. It's used in the masculine plural form to indicate the leaders of the Israelites to whom Moses spoke in Exodus 3.16. Remember, God told him, go talk to Pharaoh, tell him, let my people go. And before he did that, he went and spoke to the elders of the people. They were an enslaved group of people, and yet there was this established group that were known as the elders, who were the leaders to whom he appealed and wanted to cooperate with them and have their cooperation. So he went to tell them that he was sent by God to declare this deliverance. This was perhaps the natural order of things in a patristic society. The patriarchs of each major family, group, or clan gathered to form a practical council of representative or federal, you might use that technical word, leadership, to the nation as a whole. And this structure took on a more formal nature later when Jethro, remember who Jethro is? He's not a clampet. Say it again? It's a name you don't get to talk about a whole lot in the Bible. But Jethro, Sean. Moses' father-in-law, right? Showing how important fathers-in-law are. He took a very significant role here. Jethro stepped up to Moses as he was beginning to lead the people of Israel. They're out in the wilderness. They're wandering. A massive group of people, everybody was coming to him with their problems. And Jethro came to him and said, this is going to kill you. You need to appoint wise men to be the elders, the leaders of the group who can handle most of the matters, and then the most extreme things can come to you, Moses. And so he did that. He selected a group of older men from among all the tribes of Israel who were soon established as a formal body of 70 leading elders. They acted as judges for the people, and we see that in Exodus chapter 18, verses 17 through 26. And they were taken into close counsel when God had a message to deliver to the nation. Very often we see those references, Exodus 27, and Numbers, we've been there recently, Numbers 11, where God said, tell the people this, and Moses went and spoke to the elders first to help kind of in the rollout of the message to the people of Israel. Well, by the time of Christ, the 70 elders who guided the civic and religious lives of Israel were known as the Sanhedrin. We see them referred to in a number of places, particularly Acts chapter 4. Now, this form of leadership was normal to the Jewish people and also was used for local communities as well. There were elders in the city of Capernaum that are mentioned in Luke chapter 7 and so on. So it just became the standard way that you had a group of elders, a group of the older, wiser men in a place who stood together as the governing council. And it was not normal for there to be just one person. As we look into the New Testament for guidance on the issue of local church leadership, then we find four words that describe leaders and or their roles. And the first significant word is the one commonly translated elder. Now, the Greek word is presbyteros. And of course, you can hear where that comes, you know, people have gotten the word Presbyterian or Presbytery from that, because it's the Greek word for elders. Now, this word was commonly used to indicate an older man or woman, but it was also frequently carried the meaning of someone who was a community or spiritual leader. We see them referred to in Matthew chapter 15, verse 2. Now, guys, if you'll watch the slides here and there, I've got some of the key verses, but not all of them, so you'll just kind of have to be really alert. Look at the slides there, and when I refer to certain passages, if you've got the slide, maybe you'll pop it up. There's some coming. This is the most frequently used word in reference to the local church officials in the New Testament, Presbyteros, right? Elders. Another important word used in reference to local church leaders is the one translated either overseer or bishop. depending on your English translation, which one you have. But the word from which either of those English words comes is episkopos. Of course, you're familiar with episcopalian that came off of that word as well. But remember, we don't read backwards into the Bible whatever meaning words have taken on today that may have their root in a biblical word. We don't read today's meaning back into the biblical meaning, right? So just the fact that something has come from that word doesn't mean that that's necessarily what was intended when it was written in this place in scripture. The word is episkopos and it's translated overseer or bishop. Now it indicates a guardian, a supervisor, or even it's a word used for a shepherd, for a keeper of sheep or goats. And in all five instances where it's used in a noun form in the New Testament, episkopos refers to church leaders. In two of the five instances, Acts 20, verse 28, we will read that passage in a minute, and 1 Peter 2, verse 25, it is closely associated with the verb meaning to shepherd. And that word is poimano if you're interested in the Greek. Confirming the type of oversight that was meant to be exercised by the overseer where they were to shepherd. So it was taking on that connotation of that word. In 1 Peter chapter 5, episkopos appears in a verb form, and it follows that verb of shepherding. And so together, it's quite clear that that's the idea. They're in charge of the response. It was the charge of the responsibility given to the elders of the church to shepherd the flock, exercising oversight. These are the words that Paul used to the elders of the church in Ephesus. These two words, their meaning and close association with the occupation of a shepherd, are the basis for our word pastor, describing a person who fills the role of an overseer of a church. You see, the word pastor itself doesn't occur in the Bible at all. There's no Greek word for pastor, except episkopos and poimono, these words that refer to shepherding and guiding of a flock, giving leadership and protection in that way. And so because... you know, the transition of languages, it became known as a pastoral scene, right, where you have sheep on the hillside and you've got the shepherd out there watching over the sheep, over the flock and things like that. You know, that word pastor came, I think, out of Latin that has to do with the idea of the watching over of a flock. And so that's how we got the word that we use commonly today in English, pastor. It actually goes back to episkopos. All right. It is widely agreed among evangelical scholars that both labels, elder and overseer or bishop, depending on your translation, are used in reference to men in the same office. They're used interchangeably. The label elder indicates the type or maturity of the men chosen to lead, consistent with the Jewish tradition. And the label overseer or bishop indicates the nature of their responsibility. So it's the kind of person and what the person does. These words. indicates the responsibilities which is made all the clearer by its close association with the verb meaning to shepherd. In Titus 1 verses 5 through 9, the terms elder and overseer are clearly applied to the same men. The same is true in Acts chapter 20 verses 17 through 28, we will read these passages in a moment, where the apostle Paul spoke to the elders, plural, of the church of Ephesus and urged them to be faithful in their role as overseers. There's the shepherding to the flock. uh he that those put under their care and to shepherd the church of god so peter also addresses elders in first peter chapter five verse one and as mentioned above instructs them in verse two to shepherd the flock of god thus it is apparent that elders and overseers or bishops Pastors, these are all the same. So if you hear any of these words used, they're interchangeable. Elder, pastor, our English word, overseer, shepherd, they all have the same root. in the scripture to the same person, same office or role. Now, the fourth term in the New Testament in reference to church leaders is the one translated deacon or sometimes minister or servant or even attendant, though we don't see attendant really in the New Testament, but it is in extra-biblical literature. And that word is diakonos. Can you guess what we get from that? We get our deacons, right. So its literal meaning is minister or servant or attendant. While this term is used frequently in the New Testament to simply indicate one who serves or attends to the needs of others, we see that even in the Gospels prior to the offices being established in the New Testament churches. So it's a common meaning of the word. or the one who has demonstrated the qualities of servanthood by assisting others in practical ways. We see that as well in a few places. But there are a number of occasions in which it distinctly indicates an individual who serves the local church in a formal capacity. We see that in Philippians 1 and 1 Timothy 3 and in Romans 16 verse 1. Most scholars agree that Acts 6, 1 through 6 narrates the beginning of the local church office commonly referred to as a deacon. The context of these verses provides us with an understanding of the role deacons were meant to assume in the local church. Now let's take the time to read some of these key passages. Before I keep referring to them any further, let's just pause and read the passages if we can, all right? So if you would bring up, what's the first slide there of the first reference that we have? Okay, so in Acts, we see the use and the reference of the, you know what, I'm sorry, I am coming to that in a little bit. I'm jumping the gun. Just stay with me, okay? We'll read that in a moment. But here in Acts chapter, if you recall, or you can simply look it up and we'll read it a little bit, Acts chapter 6 verses 1 through 6, we have the apostles still were around at the time, and they were acting as the elders of the church, and they said, we're becoming overwhelmed by all the practical ins and outs of ministry. We need to be able, it's making our time of studying God's Word and prayer teaching, you know, it's being compromised, and so we need some other helpers. And that's when the first deacons were appointed at that point. And they were nominated by the congregation and appointed by the apostles for the task of managing and distributing the practical resources, especially the food of the local assembly for the care of individuals with real needs. And we see in verse 2 of Acts chapter 6, it is clear that their primary responsibility was to serve tables. This must be understood literally and without shame unless we are to assume that the apostles meant to demean people, of course they didn't, whom they described in the same context as men of good repute, full of the spirit and of wisdom. The reality is that the care for the resources of the church and the needs of its members was understood to be a responsibility both demanding and deserving of honor. The deacons were the hands of the apostles reaching out to meet the practical needs of the church family. They were not rulers, but they were highly respected servant leaders with significant ministries in their own right. And even if you consider, if you read the book of Acts, you see Stephen, just before his stoning, before his execution, he preached an amazing sermon. Just a wonderful sermon defending the messiahship of Jesus Christ and demonstrating the fulfillment of Old Testament scriptures. He was obviously a capable, very godly capable man who knew the word. Philip, you remember, is used. He was one of the first deacons. You remember that he was used. God sent him out to meet the Ethiopian on the road and climbed up in the chariot with him and explained the gospel and explained, once again, the Old Testament prophecies and how they were fulfilled in Jesus Christ and led this man to salvation, to decision of faith, and baptized him. You can see that the deacons were significant spiritual leaders that God used in powerful ways. In the same passage, we see the role of the apostles who were eventually replaced by elders, and their primary responsibilities were to devote themselves, quote, to prayer and to the ministry of the word. They were the spiritual teachers, preachers, and guides of the local assembly. that these responsibilities were transferred to non-apostolic elders of the local church can be seen in several references to the work of the elders in Acts and in the epistles, and I won't take all those passages just yet. That apostles and elders are not the same can also be seen in the way that they are distinguished from each other in their participation in the councils of the Church of Jerusalem, where it refers to the apostles and the elders and all the other people of the church. And so that should set aside some of the confusion, for instance, in the Catholic Church about apostolic succession with the handing down of the position of being an apostle. The apostles were the apostles, and when they died, that was the end of the apostles. But they were replaced by the elders, by the leaders that got appointed to the churches. Having established the existence of the two distinct offices of leadership of the local churches in the apostolic age, namely the offices of elder and deacon, we must also note the structural pattern within which they operated. Three observations are particularly critical to our understanding of the model of the church leadership established by the apostles. Number one, the autonomy of local churches Number two, the plurality of leaders in both offices, elders and deacons, in each church. And three, the distribution of responsibilities among the church leaders. These are the things to take from Scripture. First, we notice that, aside from the general oversight that was unique and terminal to the founding apostles, local churches in the New Testament were autonomous. While there is evidence enough that a few of the apostles were involved in the establishment and subsequent oversight of several of the earliest churches, it cannot be demonstrated that they transferred any lasting authority over to those churches, to any kind of apostolic successors, as I mentioned. Rather, the pattern was to see the appointment of local elders who assumed the responsibilities of leadership within each of the separate churches. Second, it is important to observe the plurality of both elders and deacons within each local church. And to begin, we can note that elders and deacons are always referred to in the plural throughout Acts and the Epistles. Though some have argued for a singular overseer or bishop or pastor, based on 1 Timothy 3, the arguments do not stand up to closer exegesis. The first clue, exegesis, you know, is the fancy word for explaining what the text says based on the words, the grammar, the structure of the argument. The first clue that this is not indicating singularity of the pastor is the reference to overseer as an office in verse one, because it says those who consider serving in the office of overseer. So it's referring, when it's in the singular, it's referring to an office, not a person. The second clue is that this office is apparently open to anyone who senses the call to that office and who is qualified on the basis of the description that follows. Also within the same book, Paul makes reference to the plural elders already at the church at Ephesus to which he was writing. 1 Timothy 5, verse 17. Finally, Paul uses similarly singular language in his list of qualifications for an overseer in the parallel passage in Titus chapter 1 verses 6 through 9 in reference to the plural elders that he refers to in verse 5. So we might say the overseer must, but he's already in the same context referred to the overseers in plural in that one church. So you can see he's describing the office when he says it in the singular, not indicating how many there are meant to be. So the singular language in both passages, certainly a description of qualifications for one office and not a prescription for the number of individuals who may fill that office. All other references to the people serving in the office of overseer or bishops or elder in a local church indicate plurality. Now we're gonna read some of these key passages, right? So Acts chapter 11, verses 29 through 30, put up on the screen here. So the disciples determined everyone according to his ability to send relief to the brothers living in Judea. These are the disciples in Jerusalem. They wanted to send elsewhere. And as they did so, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul. I'm sorry, from Antioch to Jerusalem. And so here you have in that church, in that local church, you have the elders in plural who are appointing these people to take his gift, right? Moving on, Acts chapter 14, let's see if we have that, 14 verse 23. It says, when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed. As Paul and Barnabas established new churches throughout Asia Minor, they appointed elders, plural, for them in every church. Acts 16.4, is that one there? No? Okay. A quick reference to it then. It's in the letter from the council in Jerusalem that was distributed to the new Gentile churches. It was composed by, it says, by the apostles and elders who are in Jerusalem. So you have morality there. Acts chapter 20, verses 17 through 28. This is an extended passage here. Here we have the occasion where, and I've got excerpts here, but this is Paul who wrote to the elders of the church of Ephesus. He wanted them to come and meet him so he could speak to them, and he charges them with the responsibility of being the overseers of the shepherds of the church. So we'll read the selected verses here. Now, from Miletus, he sent to Ephesus and called the elders, plural, of the church, singular, to come to him. And when they came to him, he said to them, And we jump forward a little bit to verse 25. And now behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again. This is when Paul knew that he was going to be in prison once he got to Jerusalem. So he challenges them, verse 28 and on, pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flocks, here with the pastoral reference, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. And that's that word for shepherd. to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. So there you see reference to he's talking to these elders, presbyteros, refers to them as shepherds to oversee the flock. Okay, moving on. In Acts chapter 21, I think we're onto that, yep, verse 18, Paul met with James and all the elders were present, we see there in Jerusalem. Philippians 1, when Paul is writing to the church there, he addresses plural overseers and deacons in the church of of Philippi as well. You can see that. 1 Timothy chapter 5, Paul urged giving honor to plural elders at the church of Ephesus. You can see that. Let the elders who rule well. There's interesting distinctions even here amongst the elders. Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching, which tells us that not every elder is necessarily a preacher. But the scripture says, you shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain, and the laborer deserves its wages. So it's a challenge to the church to provide for their elders so that they can dedicate their lives to ministry, at least to make sure that their needs are met. Going on, Titus, I believe. 1 verse 5, Paul instructed Titus to appoint plural elders in every town. You can see that. James, do we have any more of that? Yeah, James chapter five verse 14. James urged sick persons to call for the elders of the church. Okay, now I know I'm driving this hammer hard, but I just wanted to demonstrate the consistency, right? You see in passage after passage, context after context, that this was very clearly the established pattern of the New Testament, that you have the shared leadership of elders, multiple elders, pastors, as well as deacons. If anyone is among you, let him call for the elders of the church. 1 Peter chapter 5. Now this is Peter himself calls himself elder and speaks to other elders. So he's kind of senior elder talking to other elders at other churches and giving them this charge. And I want to read these verses for you. We'll read verses 1 through 5. So, I exhort the elders among you, he says, as a fellow elder. and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed. Shepherd, there's that same kind of charge that Paul gave, right? Shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, there's that overseer reference, episkopos, not under compulsion, but willingly as God would have you, not for shameful gain, but eagerly, not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And next slide. When the chief shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, all of you, with humility toward one another. That includes the elders, right? or God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. We see Peter urging church members to be submissive to the elders and charging the elders to lead in a godly and humble and faithful fashion. Some have argued that references to plural elders in one location of a church may indicate the sum of singular pastors from several churches in several house churches, perhaps in the area, and that James represents a singular spiritual leader over the local church in Jerusalem. However, a closer observation reveals several holes in these arguments. I was presented with this before. I had someone very strongly saying to me, any reference to the plural elders or pastors? It's just talking about, they run house churches, and so it's talking about all the different singular pastors and all the different little house churches in the area. But there's nothing textual to support that. purely speculative. Mark Deaver has written on this, and by the way, he is a Baptist Bible scholar, and he has written an article and then later a book as well, but his article, Baptist and Elders, he writes this. I'm going to read his paragraph. Mark Deaver says, Never are churches, plural in Jerusalem, referred to, only the congregation, singular. On the other hand, the elders are referred to, always in the plural. Therefore, any Baptist making an argument for one group of elders leading many house congregations is making a good argument for Presbyterianism, but not for historic Baptist Congregationalism. should the argument be sharpened to one individual leading all of those house churches, then it is more an argument for divine right Episcopalianism, and even the Episcopalians don't make that argument. So all of that to say there have been people who have said, oh, if you talk about elder rule or elder leadership, then you're being Presbyterian. And there again, they're just trying, they're kind of reading one tradition back onto the text, and that wasn't what was intended. And that's kind of what he's indicating here. James did have a prominent leadership role in Jerusalem, but that was probably due to the fact that he was the half-brother of Jesus and was therefore viewed as almost apostolic. In the first and early second centuries, a certain informal priority was given to those who had been closest to Jesus and or his apostles. Even so, the record of Acts makes it clear that James always acted in concert with the other elders in the church of Jerusalem. James set a fine example for all leading elders by serving as the first among equals. That term is used by many scholars who study this. The third observation that will help understand the model of church leadership established by the apostles is the distribution of responsibilities among church leaders. To begin, elders and deacons had distinctly different functions. Well, both kinds of church officers shared many of the same qualifications, and you can see those all in 1 Timothy 3, verses 1-13, and in Titus 1, verses 5-9. If you want to read all those out in detail, I will refer to some of them as we go. It was the work of deacons to care for the temporal and physical needs of the church family while the elders put their efforts toward the spiritual care. We see that also in Acts chapter 6 as we looked at that. This difference in roles can be seen in the fact that the elders or overseers were expected to guard, to care for, to shepherd, to rule, to oversee. These are all the words that are used in those contexts of the local church. But nowhere in the New Testament is there any mention of deacons bearing these particular types of responsibilities of guarding, caring for, shepherding, ruling, or overseeing. Another key difference between elders and overseers and deacons. was that the former, the elders, overseers, were the defenders of the truth with the ability to, quote, give instruction and sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it, Acts chapter 20, verses 29 through 32, also in Titus 1.9. It is significant to note, though, that not all elders had the regular responsibility of preaching or teaching. There is a distinction made among elders over this function in 1 Timothy 5.17, which we looked at. All overseers are required, however, to be able to teach. However, and that can be seen in the list of qualifications of 1 Timothy chapter 3 verse 2. This one requirement is conspicuously absent from the list of qualifications for deacons. They are not required to be able to teach, though we have seen, as I mentioned, examples of those who certainly were. Well, so, I'm not going to read all this next section here, but to summarize it, we talk about elders further as it developed in the early church, and going into the second century, there became certain priorities because there were churches whose elders would come together as councils over a region, I'm being very paraphrasing here, summarizing, to deal with doctrinal issues that came up, things that challenged the church. And so councils were sometimes held together. And then among those men who gathered, there would sometimes be those who kind of arose as demonstrating greater knowledge, greater understanding of Scripture, who were excellent at explaining these things. And they kind of became revered amongst the elders, leaders of these different churches from the region as being a leader amongst their group. And then unfortunately, some of that began to kind of devolve into some of them taking on the sense of entitlement because pastor so-and-so, elder so-and-so in this location became kind of the leading voice among all of the others when it came to settling matters of concern and doctrine and things like that. And then this person succeeded that person in that position, and then they felt like that then they were owed the same deference, that they were supposed to be the one that everybody would listen to. And so then you started having these bishops and archbishops and everything, eventually leading to a pope. Because the, you know, the leading pastor in Rome became kind of the leading voice, and then started claiming, you know, apostolic succession. from Peter and so on and so forth. And so there are letters that I, in my paper, referred to and quoted various letters of people kind of flexing their muscles a little bit over the other churches and leaders around the region to the point of trying to establish, you know, who's really the number one guy and that's how we ended up with the papacy and the Catholic Church and so many distortions, I would say, of what God intended there through that. So, but we need to be careful that we don't, you know, use a Funny southern phrase, you know, throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because there are things that went wrong there doesn't mean that everything that happened there, if we see some little hint of terminology or structure or something like that, that we reject it outright. We need to always go back to what is our authority? Church tradition? No. What? What's our authority? God's Word. sola scriptura, right? So we're always going back, and so that's why we've done this particular study. Well, various forms of this have taken place then even as the Reformation came along and Protestant movements moved away from the abuses of the Catholic Church, and yet many of the structures remained where there's hierarchical structure. You're familiar with that, and so you have, you know, still these rankings where churches kind of have pastors sent to them and taken away from them at the will of whatever higher councils. We believe that is inconsistent. We see nothing in Scripture indicating that type of hierarchical structure over groups of churches. We see letters written to individual churches about their local leadership with elders and deacons. And so we see autonomy taking place there. Everyone's subject to the teaching of the apostles, the revelation of God's Word in Scripture as they received it. That is always the standard. But let me talk about eldership among evangelicals because there are some who have kind of assumed that that was only in the, you know, the elders only belonged to those other structures that are not like us. But among the earliest separatists from the Anglican Church in England were the Baptists. Now they rejected the Episcopal structure of the Anglican Church and returned to a scripturally-based recognition of congregational elder leadership. Not all English Baptists recognized plural elders, but it does appear to have been the majority position. Unlike the Presbyterians, Baptists in England rejected the idea of ruling elders versus teaching elders. According to Phil Newton, who wrote Elders in the Congregational Life, Phil Newton wrote, the Devonshire Square Church in London, where William Kiffin was pastor, recognized, quote, a parity within the eldership. That is, each elder shared responsibility and authority within the church. In 1646, seven Baptist congregations in London drew up a confessional statement containing 52 articles that defined their doctrinal distinctives as separatists from Anglicanism and from Catholicism. In the first confession, they preserved the two offices of elder and deacon and defend the authority of each congregation to elect members to those positions. They also indicate plurality in both offices, quoting, Being thus joined, every church hath power given to them from Christ for their well-being to choose among themselves, meet persons for elders and deacons, and none have power to impose on them either these or the other. The English Baptist and the Second Confession was published in 1677, republished again later, with the endorsement of more than 100 congregations. And in it, they reaffirmed the two offices and their plurality, saying, the officers appointed by Christ to be chosen and set apart by the church are bishops or elders and deacons. In the meantime, the independents, in other words, the dissenting brethren as they were called, in England drew up the Savoy Declaration of Faith and Order in which they affirmed the existence of the two offices and outlined the process of congregational election of plural members to the office of the elder. They say, the way appointed by Christ for the calling of any person fitted and gifted by the Holy Ghost unto the office of pastor, teacher, or elder in a church is that he be chosen thereunto by the suffrage of the church itself. And she loved the old English. and solemnly set apart by fasting and prayer with the imposition of hands of the eldership of that church, if there be any before constituted therein." So in other words, if they're already elders, they appoint new elders. And they bring them before the congregation for affirmation of that decision, and then they officially install them by the laying on of hands and prayer. translation of the Old English there, and as of a deacon, that he also be chosen by like suffrage, in other words, by the cooperation and input of the church family, and set apart by prayer and the like imposition of hands, installation by the elders. The Philadelphia Baptist Association was the leading association of Baptists in America during the colonial period, and in the minutes of their association in 1700s, the question of whether a person already ordained by the laying on of hands as a ruling elder, who was later called by the church by reason of gifts to the word and doctrine, must be ordained again by the laying on of hands. And the answer was resolved in the affirmative. They said yes. So it seems that it was common among early colonial Baptists to have plural elders and to make distinctions between ruling elders and teaching elders, something that doesn't appear in scripture. This is just referring to some of the patterns that were established historically amongst Baptists. But according to Phil Newton, again, this distinction was a common pattern in America among Baptists in that time. Ruling elders focused on the administrative and governing issues of church life, while the teaching elders exercised pastoral responsibilities, including administering ordinances. So in other words, to sum up, you had amongst the elders those, as we saw in the first Timothy 5 reference, not all were necessarily the primary preachers and teachers. Some were elders in other forms of leadership, helping with administrative things more. That's the weighting of their responsibility was towards some of the practical administrative things. So there's room for different giftedness within the group of elders. Not everyone is supposed to be necessarily upfront all the time preaching pastor, though they are to be able to teach. So in conclusion from this, the record of church history, both biblical and extra-biblical, outside of the Bible, demonstrates a great precedence for elder-led congregational church government. New Testament scripture illustrates the existence of the two offices in the church. Number one, elders, based on presbyteros, or overseers, based on episkopos, commonly referred to as either bishops or pastors in our English translations. And secondly, deacons, based on the word diakonos. And the pattern for both seems to be plurality, multiple references we've looked at. Now, the elders slash overseers slash pastors, same people. should be men who demonstrate the qualities described in 1 Timothy 3, verses 1-7, and in Titus 1, 5-9. I will refer to these in a moment in more detail. They should also be capable teachers and defenders of God's word, humble servants, and tender shepherds of the flock. We see that challenged by Peter as well. Deacons should display similar qualities as described in these passages and in Acts chapter 6. One key distinction is that deacons are not required to be capable as teachers of scripture, though they may be. The church is instructed to let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner as well, right? First Corinthians 1440. It was my conviction, therefore, and of Pastor Mike as well, I believe, that there's wisdom in having a senior pastor or a leading elder. who is a spiritual leader amongst his peers, the other elders. His authority does not come from his title, but from his quality of leadership as a spiritual example and as a preacher and a teacher of the word. It should be recognized, however, that the leading elder is susceptible to the same temptations that accompany a position of leadership. Peter warns there in 1 Peter chapter 5. against, you know, potential greed or the tendency to begin to enjoy your rule too much, lording it over people, as he says. So, they must be protected. Any pastor must be protected from himself. So, it is preferable for him to serve with other elders, as we see these patterns throughout the New Testament. He should serve as, if he's the lead elder, he should serve as first among equals. not as the boss over the pastoral staff who work for him, but just captain of the team. He should have no unilateral authority over the other elders or over the church as a whole. It should not be his responsibility or his right to just hire or fire other pastors or elders. He is not the head of the church, as that role belongs to Christ alone. Lead elders should function as the point man or the chairman of the elders and as the primary representative of the elders to the congregation. He should rightly be honored above other elders for his special skill and responsibility as primary preacher or teacher of the word in 1 Timothy 5. But his colleagues should indeed be honored with him, and we see that also in that passage, Hebrews 13, 17, and in 1 Peter 5. Thus, in my conviction, the structure of the local church leadership should consist of these two offices, elders and deacons in the plural, both. The first should be a group of men who will be responsible for the spiritual leadership of the church, and although equal in authority, one among them should lead as the first among equals. The second group should be a group of individuals who assist the elders in caring for the temporal and physical needs of the church, as we see in Act VI, but who do not function as a ruling body. And so we have this structure in our church, and I hope I didn't bore you to tears, but that was to affirm that this is based on careful, thoughtful biblical study and conviction that we are following this model. It's not a matter of convenience or preference or anything like that. We believe this is consistently what's demonstrated throughout Scripture. And so we embrace it fully and wholly. And so this is our structure. If you're someone, maybe we have someone who are newer to our church, Pastor Mike is our lead elder. He's the captain of the team. He bears the primary responsibility to see to the faithful preaching and teaching of God's Word and the overall oversight of the spiritual leadership of the church. And he shares that responsibility with myself and with Pastor Paul, who, as you know, is away right now, which leaves us a little bit shorthanded in the leadership department. And so that kind of precipitates for us something we've been talking and praying about for a very long time, and that is that we should perhaps consider another elder be part of our leadership team. I understand that while Scripture talks about making sure that elders are provided for, there is in practicality, there are some elders and those with the greater responsibility and take on the greater burden of responsibility for the church who are, as you might say, pedantically paid staff or paid elders who are supported largely or primarily by the church's support. Then there's a term that we use that is just kind of a human distinction, a practical distinction that we call lay elders. And those are those who are not necessarily staff elders. They may not be the ones who do the primary preaching and teaching, but they meet these qualifications, and there's a sense of calling to that kind of a role, and it's recognized by the elders that exist. And this is what we're talking about. We're talking about recognizing someone within the church family who we believe satisfy those characteristics of a church elder, and that we have prayerfully considered, we believe that God would have us install this person as part of our elder leadership. So please understand, as I have described, a lay elder or any kind of elder is not a promotion from a deacon. Right? Because there's not a superiority between elders and deacons. There's a difference of role. There's a sense of what a calling is for the type of work that God has led someone to do. So while we have many, actually we are blessed with a number of great and godly and faithful men, many of which would fill most if not all of these qualifications for both roles, for one or the other at least. This comes down to the responsibility, as described already, of the elders existing in the church to sense and pray about God's leading or who else should be appointed to this particular role. And so it is, again, it doesn't make a person in any way superior to others. We just feel like we're acknowledging something that God has done in someone's life and in our church. And so that's what we want to put before you. I'm going to...