Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

Or it could just be that there are not enough members in the church to have a board of church members. Which is most likely the case.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

No. That’s not the case. Not even close.

That’s really pretty ridiculous when you think about it. The board doesn’t have to have any certain number of members. If there aren’t seven members, have a board with three members. Surely there are three members in a church who can sit on the board.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

Churches that I have been in that did not have a board conducted church business meetings. Either way the church was party to all major decisions, including choosing a new pastor.

Any way I for one cannot see brother Parker installing his son as pastor without church approval.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

"This [is] a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work." - 1 Timothy 3:1 KJV

1. Want to be a bishop? meet this requirements first, go through this training, etc...
2. Ready? Let's meet with the presbytery for approval.
3. Let's present you to the congregation.
4. Let's assign some tasks to you, so you can demonstrate your service to the congregation for a time.
5. Let's see if there is any serious complain against you from the congregation after that time.
6. No?, OK, join our presbytery of elders of this congregation.

"Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." - 1 Timothy 3:6-7 KJV


Wait... I'm in the wrong model...

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

Concerning the highlighted portions of the two aforementioned posts. I recently heard Bro. Terry Shock teach a lesson about how humanity, with no ill will or bad intention, will often put people in “the God zone” through the best of intentions. We honor and support men and ladies who we admire, but sometimes to a very bad degree, to where they are suddenly lifted up (in our eyes) much higher than they should be. There is nothing wrong with honoring your pastor/leadership. I believe that we should give honor where it is due. But I also acknowledge that their are indeed people who have no idea about anything that the scripture teaches and are 100% believing what their pastor says is indeed scriptural. That is, in my opinion, dangerous waters. You risk following a blind man into the ditch if you don’t study to show thyself approved. Trust is a wonderful thing...but it’s a very dangerous thing when done blindly

I could say so much about a circumstance happening at this time with a gentleman that I dearly love...but I’ll simply say that you are dead on with this assessment

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

This is a familiar situation. If you’ve been around Apostolic/Pentecostal churches very many years, you have likely experienced this first hand or know someone who has. Many times people “vote with their feet” to at least some extent. Some move along, sometimes the church recuperates and moves past it, sometimes not so much.

I have seen a thriving church slowly wither away to a shell of its former self. You mention TS. He has experienced being on the wrong side of nepotism himself. Often the assistant pastor gets looked over even after being promised to be the successor. I’ve seen it several times. When it comes to relinquishing money and power, and power over money plans are made and promises given that are often not honored.

Of course the proper way to handle the situation would be to try out maybe three prospects and let the membership vote. One option on the SECRET ballot should be none of the above. I have seen this option receive as many votes and in some cases more votes than the prospects did. If none of the prospects carry a simple majority at least, they probably shouldn’t be considered. Find three more prospects and rinse and repeat.

I’ve seen a church that I know well go for two years without a pastor in the sense that is commonly understood and they did just fine. The elders tended to business and either preached and taught themselves or scheduled someone to do so. It worked very well. And the church was a desirable church and a healthy one. In my opinion, if they had someone forced on them, they would have resented it, and rightfully so.

Every reasonable effort should be made in consideration of the church family imho.

Roberts Rules of Order is a valuable resource in these situations. Preachers and pastors often disagree with me on this.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

Well said.
I don't know the whole TS situation but I can imagine seeing another blood related rookie being promoted would rub someone that talented the wrong way.

I stand by the suggestion of at least sending your son off to an accredited seminary/Bible school assuming they are ready to lead your church.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

It’s not about if they’ve been to seminary. At least it isn’t to me. I’ve been around so many that have been to seminary that have buyers remorse. I can’t tell you how many have told me that the most valuable thing they got at Bible college was their spouse. And many didn’t even get a spouse. That’s why IBC is known as Indiana Bridal College.

To pretend that young, dedicated, devout young apostolics have to have seminary to be qualified is perhaps not the best idea at all. I think it can be a good thing but it certainly isn’t a cure all. The Bible says that a bishop shouldn’t be a novice. He should rule his house well. Some of these young preachers don’t have a house or barely do. And they are novices. Therefore they are not qualified, regardless of whether they’ve been to seminary. But often these rules are thrown out the window when the pastors son is up for consideration.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

Just some "generic" comments here.
I grew up in a church where most of the young people went to Bible School.
And almost all those that did are still heavily involved in the work of God, today.
However, my home church was also a very much Bible TEACHING church.
Which I feel we have somewhat lost today and have become more focused on the "emotional" side of Pentecost.
I would say that if someone who is a "novice" or very young is involved in ministry/preaching/pastoring, they need a good system of mentorship from some seasoned saints/pastors.

Just one more random thought.
I have seen church boards "ruin" as many churches as I have seen pastors.
Maybe more.

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 

There is a right way to take care of church decisions. It doesn’t mean that it’s perfect or that there will not be mistakes. I think there should always be a board. I think that board should make recommendations to the church body. I think that the membership should vote by secret ballot. It may not be a perfect system, but it is a good system.

And I would have to disagree with you on the question of whether church boards ruin as many churches as pastors. I’ve seen many churches protected by a good board of deacons.

And there’s this . . .

1Cor.6

[1] Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
[2] Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
[3] Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
[4] If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

Basically every decision is a judgement call. Paul says who should make the judgement. I don’t think anyone would believe that the pastor is the least esteemed in the church.

Generally the single pastor being in charge of a church is not biblical church government anyway. So there’s that.