Priesthood - Old to New

[Pressing-On]

I was reading an interesting article in a pdf and wanted to share it here for comment. Coming from the Catholic Church, I can see his point.

I will post his points and then ask a question, specifically of what I highlighted in bold:

The early Church understood that the Levitical priesthood was dead. If there was any doubt, God resolved it with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD just as Jesus prophesied. However, as time moved on and the teachings of the early Church were corrupted the idea of a Levitical style priesthood was introduced into the Church during the time of Constantine. While patterned after the Roman ruling hierarchy, elements of Levitical procedure and heathen concepts were added to what was to become the Roman Catholic priest system. The people of God were divided into two groups—those who were priests and those who were not. This was a step backward to the Law and the Scriptures tell us that grace becomes ineffective to those under the Law (Galatians 5:4), which is why so much abuse of God's people has occurred under the Catholic priest system.

The Protestant Reformation sought to correct the wrongs of the Catholic system and restore Truth that had been lost to those walking under the Catholic legal system. The goal of the Reformation was not to eliminate the priests but to eliminate the laity because we are all priests to our God. The desired result was only partially achieved. The Protestant Reformation established our modern Pastoral model of leadership, which is actually a slightly modified priest hierarchy of Roman Catholic origin. Although different titles are used, in functional application our pastor system is styled like the Levitical system with the “pastors” doing the praying, the teaching, the care of the “house”, and the other priestly functions. With the Catholics the people of God are divided into priests or not priests; whereas, with the Protestants the people are divided into clergy or not clergy. We need to continue the Reformation by eliminating the Levitical style of priest and restoring the Melchizedek style of priest.

The Scriptures make it clear that there are no priest mediators anymore. There is one and only one mediator. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.
(1 Timothy 2:5-6 NASB)

http://www.lifestreamteaching.com/Pr...%20Priests.pdf

I started out reading this file first, for anyone interested.

http://www.lifestreamteaching.com/Te...0Functions.pdf

I agree with his view that the pastor is styling himself after a priest in the Catholic Church, after the Levitical Priesthood. It might just be me, but it still feels, in many ways, like the Catholic Church.

However, I also find that the Bible does delegate specific functions for the church, i.e., apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, Ephesians 4:11-12.

I am for these offices as they are for the perfecting of the saints. The church would be weak without being perfected.

I guess I just wonder how a pastor could function and not style himself as the writer of the article describes as " doing the praying, the teaching, the care of the “house”, and the other priestly functions."

I have watched for over 30 years and these various congregations, seem to be largely paralyzed unless the leadership instructions them on how to respond. That doesn't mean there hasn't been free worship, gifts in operation. It is just that overall, it seems people allow him to do almost all of the thinking for them.

This isn't a bashing of any specific organization as I have seen that to be true in other's organizations - Baptist, etc.

I am sure the simple answer is in the knowledge of the leadership, but if I had to lead, I am not sure I would do anything different.

Just rambling after reading a comment that stuck a chord....

[Pressing-On]

Also, on that same note, I was thinking of forgiveness. If a pastor were to sin, but sincerely repented, the church doesn't forgive as quickly as God would.

I heard Jeff Arnold say that God would forgive in a moment, but we won't. I wish I could remember his exact words. It was very powerful.

Anyway, that is another element of the Catholic Church we have - paying penance in the Catholic Church. After you go into the Confessional and repent, you have to say a million prayers (it felt that way, lol) and your Rosary.

But, the thing is, you never really feel forgiven because of the price you have to pay for it. It isn't as simple as saying, "I am truly sorry." You have to receive your punishment.

I think we do that in the church. We linger on the judgment and mental punishment. We aren't that ready to forgive. Just my observation.

Musing again...

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I was reading an interesting article in a pdf and wanted to share it here for comment. Coming from the Catholic Church, I can see his point.

I will post his points and then ask a question, specifically of what I highlighted in bold:


I started out reading this file first, for anyone interested.



I agree with his view that the pastor is styling himself after a priest in the Catholic Church, after the Levitical Priesthood. It might just be me, but it still feels, in many ways, like the Catholic Church.

However, I also find that the Bible does delegate specific functions for the church, i.e., apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, Ephesians 4:11-12.

I am for these offices as they are for the perfecting of the saints. The church would be weak without being perfected.

I guess I just wonder how a pastor could function and not style himself as the writer of the article describes as " doing the praying, the teaching, the care of the “house”, and the other priestly functions."

I have watched for over 30 years and these various congregations, seem to be largely paralyzed unless the leadership instructions them on how to respond. That doesn't mean there hasn't been free worship, gifts in operation. It is just that overall, it seems people allow him to do almost all of the thinking for them.

This isn't a bashing of any specific organization as I have seen that to be true in other's organizations - Baptist, etc.

I am sure the simple answer is in the knowledge of the leadership, but if I had to lead, I am not sure I would do anything different.

Just rambling after reading a comment that stuck a chord....

All this is due to churches modeling themselves on the catholic model.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

All this is due to churches modeling themselves on the catholic model.

Right. I understand that. I see it. But, what is the answer? How do you have order, which is certainly the idea behind the 5-fold ministry and avoid that?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Right. I understand that. I see it. But, what is the answer? How do you have order, which is certainly the idea behind the 5-fold ministry and avoid that?

Be the church instead of go to church, serve instead of command, everyone contributes what God has given them, and let God be in charge via His Word. And all the little wanna be Diotrepheses have to be corrected or removed.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Be the church instead of go to church, serve instead of command, everyone contributes what God has given them, and let God be in charge via His Word. And all the little wanna be Diotrepheses have to be corrected or removed.

Agreed!

I was listening to Chester Wright, who said that pastors read and get their words from other people instead of from God. He said we are missing the Rhema of the Word. I agree with that as well and that could be the crux of the matter.

If I come to you with enticing words of men's wisdom, we have a huge problem. We are not then being guided by the Spirit.

It is Jesus that people want to see.

Wright talked about some young guy that used to jump on the pulpit. He instructed him that he needed to be careful with that because at some point, people will want the circus and they won't be listening to his words. He said that is exactly what happened to the guy. Sad.

I am remembering Bro. Billy Cole at BOTT. He simply said, "God is doing great things." No response. He then yelled it really loud - "GOD IS DOING GREAT THINGS!!!!" Everyone came unglued shouting and clapping.

He said, "Do you see what you did? You didn't respond to what I said, you responded to how I said it."

We keep doing that - looking for smoke and lights. It is a path and opens a door to becoming deceived, I'm afraid.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Right. I understand that. I see it. But, what is the answer? How do you have order, which is certainly the idea behind the 5-fold ministry and avoid that?

Speaking of "order"...

EVERY church has a liturgy. A liturgy is, simply put, an "order of service", which is nothing else than "what we do and how we do it when we get together."

Some churches have extensive, complicated, highly formalised, detailed liturgy. Some churches have a stripped down bare bones extremely flexible liturgy. Most are in between. There is no church that has NO order of service, however.

The goal I would think would be to have a BIBLICAL order of service. Now, the Bible contains no strictly laid out order of service with everything spelled out. But that doesn't mean there is no order of service!

The church is designed to last across time, to transcend any one local region, language, culture, or time period. There must be allowance for variety of expressions of the faith across nations, tongues, tribes, lands, and times. Yet there must also be some basic structures, or "essentials" that are universal to all true churches, regardless of where or when they might exist.

And the Bible provides exactly that!

For example, churches are to teach one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. That is universally essential. But the language, melody, the individual particular songs, and how many, and when in the meeting they occur, are variable factors that will be different from assembly to assembly.

Corporate prayer likewise is a universal constant, but when in the meeting, the particular form of words used, volume, length of time spent, etc are going vary from church to church and even perhaps from meeting to meeting.

I believe the Bible provides some structure, and some hints as to the Divine Pattern of a new covenant "order of service", but much is variable and depends on the church, culture, and the occasion. Our goal, then, in my opinion, is to be as Biblical as possible in all we do. Recognizing of course that being Biblical includes the Biblical instruction to allow for some variation, and especially allowing for the leading of the Spirit, all within the boundaries set by the Word.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Speaking of "order"...

EVERY church has a liturgy. A liturgy is, simply put, an "order of service", which is nothing else than "what we do and how we do it when we get together."

Some churches have extensive, complicated, highly formalised, detailed liturgy. Some churches have a stripped down bare bones extremely flexible liturgy. Most are in between. There is no church that has NO order of service, however.

The goal I would think would be to have a BIBLICAL order of service. Now, the Bible contains no strictly laid out order of service with everything spelled out. But that doesn't mean there is no order of service!

The church is designed to last across time, to transcend any one local region, language, culture, or time period. There must be allowance for variety of expressions of the faith across nations, tongues, tribes, lands, and times. Yet there must also be some basic structures, or "essentials" that are universal to all true churches, regardless of where or when they might exist.

And the Bible provides exactly that!

For example, churches are to teach one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. That is universally essential. But the language, melody, the individual particular songs, and how many, and when in the meeting they occur, are variable factors that will be different from assembly to assembly.

Corporate prayer likewise is a universal constant, but when in the meeting, the particular form of words used, volume, length of time spent, etc are going vary from church to church and even perhaps from meeting to meeting.

I believe the Bible provides some structure, and some hints as to the Divine Pattern of a new covenant "order of service", but much is variable and depends on the church, culture, and the occasion. Our goal, then, in my opinion, is to be as Biblical as possible in all we do. Recognizing of course that being Biblical includes the Biblical instruction to allow for some variation, and especially allowing for the leading of the Spirit, all within the boundaries set by the Word.

I like all of your points.

I have a few additional thoughts, which aren't fully organized. When I get a bit more time, I will add more.

Good discussion! Thanks!

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I like all of your points.

I have a few additional thoughts, which aren't fully organized. When I get a bit more time, I will add more.

Good discussion! Thanks!

This is an excellent topic, and one that is very needful of discussion and vetting. The article has it right and Esaias has made some good points as well.

The Levitical priesthood is dead.

The pulpit, supposedly sacred, is making division in the church, as is the platform. The pulpit is only mentioned once in the Bible, and is certainly not referred to as sacred. It reminds me of the brazen serpent in the OT. Before it was over with the Israelites were worshiping the brazen serpent. Instead of the physical serpent of brass serving as a reminder of the wondrous works of God, wrought on behalf of His people, the Israelites skipped the memorial part and went straight into idolatry. Think about the pulpit being sacred in this context, How is it sacred? What makes it sacred? The same for the platform.

I think the truth is that proclaiming the pulpit to be sacred fosters a hope that the message that comes forth from the pulpit will be regarded as sacred. The only thing that makes the message sacred, is if it is the pure, unadulterated (therefore true) word of God. It makes no difference if there is a pulpit, or if it is delivered on a street corner, or at someone's dinner table or living room. The pure Gospel delivered in a foxhole or a bar, is much more sacred than false doctrine delivered from a fancy pulpit, with seven columns (God's perfect number) in a gorgeous edifice, worthy of royalty and the upper crust of society.

The Apostolic Church is susceptible to the same temptations as the Roman Catholic Church. We are making the very same mistakes that they made hundreds of years ago. They aren't mistakes because the Roman Catholic Church made them. They are mistakes because they are based on false doctrine. False doctrine doesn't care where it is taught.

We are not supposed to base our "priest system" on the Old Covenant. We are supposed to be "founded" on the "foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone". As long as we adhere to the "Old Covenant", instead of the superior "New Covenant", we will very likely get results that are NOT optimal.

Pressing On, you are musing.

I am musing back.

Good subject!

[Amanah]

Pastor Raymond Woodward - I will build my church
A study on the book of acts.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...294B6D6CAB683D