00:00
00:00
00:01
Transcript
1/0
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...
Biblical Eldership
| Sermon ID | 11142241054878 |
| Duration | 48:21 |
| Date | |
| Category | Sunday Service |
| Language | English |
© Copyright
2026 SermonAudio.