Apostolic Friends Forum

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   Fellowship Hall (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$ (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=54417)

Nicodemus1968 03-18-2021 08:16 AM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601916)
Many of the right wingers put pastors on such a high pedestal to where the individual saints will not have a word to say for themselves in judgement. Only the pastor will "give an account."

There was a fairly recent sermon preached by a now unnamed individual who said "there is a not a place in the Bible where the people chose their pastor."

WHOA!

This is a strange doctrine even within the UPCI ranks.

Some of these folks will point to the election of Judas' replacement and how the apostilles cast lots. This pretty much confirms that other Bishops will vote among themselves for the pastoral replacement at another church?

When did the church become the House of Representatives to where the average person does not have a voice? The is the primary issue with unlearned men joining the clergy and correlates to my original point. Various offshoots of the UPCI have become a good ole boys club void of true leadership.

Acts 1:23-26
[23] And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
[24] And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men , shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
[25] That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
[26] And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.


Who are the “they” in this portion of scripture?

Was it everyone in the upper room? I personally don’t believe so. I believe it was the apostles. This is a good reference that each Pastor should hold dear when he is coming to the end of his Pastorship.

aegsm76 03-18-2021 08:53 AM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by leftcoast1 (Post 1601916)
Many of the right wingers put pastors on such a high pedestal to where the individual saints will not have a word to say for themselves in judgement. Only the pastor will "give an account."

There was a fairly recent sermon preached by a now unnamed individual who said "there is a not a place in the Bible where the people chose their pastor."

WHOA!

This is a strange doctrine even within the UPCI ranks.

Some of these folks will point to the election of Judas' replacement and how the apostilles cast lots. This pretty much confirms that other Bishops will vote among themselves for the pastoral replacement at another church?

When did the church become the House of Representatives to where the average person does not have a voice? The is the primary issue with unlearned men joining the clergy and correlates to my original point. Various offshoots of the UPCI have become a good ole boys club void of true leadership.

If you think it is just limited to right wing UPC/WPF/GOIB churches you need to expand your views.
Just look to any group and you will see this.
I have some past in the PAW and COGIC and believe me it is there as well.

leftcoast1 03-18-2021 10:07 AM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
I could see this happening in the COGIC and AMEC

Originalist 03-18-2021 11:18 AM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968 (Post 1601921)
Acts 1:23-26
[23] And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
[24] And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men , shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
[25] That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
[26] And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.


Who are the “they” in this portion of scripture?

Was it everyone in the upper room? I personally don’t believe so. I believe it was the apostles. This is a good reference that each Pastor should hold dear when he is coming to the end of his Pastorship.

This was to replace an apostle, not to choose a pastor for a local church.

votivesoul 03-18-2021 07:30 PM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Honestly, if an argument is going to be made against nepotism in the church, particularly against ministers raising up their sons to replace them after they are gone, I think some Scriptures needs to be looked at, namely these:

Philippians 2:19-22,

Quote:

19. But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you, that I also may be of good comfort, when I know your state.
20. For I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state.
21. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's.
22. But ye know the proof of him, that, as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the gospel.
Here, Paul acknowledges Timothy before the Philippians as someone who ministered with him as closely as if Timothy had been his own biological offspring, thus suggesting that if Timothy had indeed been born of Paul's flesh, and not just of the Spirit, Paul would have used Timothy in ministry in a way that suggests dads are expected to raise up their sons to work with them and perhaps even replace them after they are gone.

See also: 1 Timothy 1:2, 1 Timothy 1:18, 2 Timothy 1:2

Likewise, take a look at Titus:

Titus 1:4,

Quote:

4. To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
5. For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee...
Paul thought of Titus as his particular son. Again, not by biological descent, but through the Spirit. Yet, Paul, who raised and nurtured Titus in the things of the Spirit and the common faith of Christ, made use of him as a son, by sending him throughout the Mediterranean.

See also: 2 Corinthians 8:23

Do these verses then speak of nepotism? If not of biological offspring, but then perhaps of spiritual fellowship and ministry?

The people Paul entrusted the most to carry on after him once he was gone he considered his sons. He passed on to them the responsibility of his ministry.

Tithesmeister 03-18-2021 08:05 PM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by votivesoul (Post 1601927)
Honestly, if an argument is going to be made against nepotism in the church, particularly against ministers raising up their sons to replace them after they are gone, I think some Scriptures needs to be looked at, namely these:

Philippians 2:19-22,



Here, Paul acknowledges Timothy before the Philippians as someone who ministered with him as closely as if Timothy had been his own biological offspring, thus suggesting that if Timothy had indeed been born of Paul's flesh, and not just of the Spirit, Paul would have used Timothy in ministry in a way that suggests dads are expected to raise up their sons to work with them and perhaps even replace them after they are gone.

See also: 1 Timothy 1:2, 1 Timothy 1:18, 2 Timothy 1:2

Likewise, take a look at Titus:

Titus 1:4,



Paul thought of Titus as his particular son. Again, not by biological descent, but through the Spirit. Yet, Paul, who raised and nurtured Titus in the things of the Spirit and the common faith of Christ, made use of him as a son, by sending him throughout the Mediterranean.

See also: 2 Corinthians 8:23

Do these verses then speak of nepotism? If not of biological offspring, but then perhaps of spiritual fellowship and ministry?

The people Paul entrusted the most to carry on after him once he was gone he considered his sons. He passed on to them the responsibility of his ministry.

No brother. This is not nepotism. It is in fact, the opposite of nepotism.

You’re way smarter than that.

votivesoul 03-18-2021 08:30 PM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister (Post 1601932)
No brother. This is not nepotism. It is in fact, the opposite of nepotism.

You’re way smarter than that.

I am not saying it is or it is not, but that those verses needed to be entered into the discussion. And please do not presume upon my intelligence! :D

However, I will say this:

Definitionally, this is nepotism:

From: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/nepotism

- favouritism shown to relatives or close friends by those with power or influence

Paul definitely showed favoritism to close friends, those he considered fellow laborers and sons in the Gospel. Just because they were not biological relatives of the flesh, doesn't mean nepotism wasn't at play.

Doesn't mean it was, either. I am leaving it up to the members to hash it out. I am merely bringing up what seems to be unconsidered issues. So, you are welcome to make the case, one way or the other.

leftcoast1 03-18-2021 10:04 PM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by votivesoul (Post 1601934)
I am not saying it is or it is not, but that those verses needed to be entered into the discussion. And please do not presume upon my intelligence! :D

However, I will say this:

Definitionally, this is nepotism:

From: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/nepotism

- favouritism shown to relatives or close friends by those with power or influence

Paul definitely showed favoritism to close friends, those he considered fellow laborers and sons in the Gospel. Just because they were not biological relatives of the flesh, doesn't mean nepotism wasn't at play.

Doesn't mean it was, either. I am leaving it up to the members to hash it out. I am merely bringing up what seems to be unconsidered issues. So, you are welcome to make the case, one way or the other.

In addition, just because Paul did it does not make it right.

votivesoul 03-18-2021 11:02 PM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
The issue of nepotism in and of itself is not a moral one. It becomes moral when unqualified and undeserving family and friends are chosen over and before other more qualified and deserving people, on account of the connection. But if the family member or friend is the person best suited for the task, it would not be wrong, in my opinion, to go that route.

For example, if someone from your assembly was moving to another state and was looking for church recommendations and it happened that the city they were heading to was pastored by say, your brother or a good friend from Bible college, would you not recommend that church over another one?

Parochial concern is normal and natural.

loran adkins 03-19-2021 06:50 AM

Re: Sons Inheriting Churches from Fathers $$$
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by returnman (Post 1601899)
I can appreciate your loyalty to whomever you serve under and also a man's labor should be recognized and rewarded but principles are either followed or not. Are we building earthly kingdoms or heavenly? The way some of this operates you'd very likely have these churches stay in single family control for 150 years.

First off I don't serve under anyone. And when you say family control, I think you go a little over board in your estimation. Even with the most controlling pastor, the saints have to believe in what they are told or they would leave. In my whole life I have seen many transfer of pastors and in all of them the former pastor had some say in who took the church. But ultimately the church family also had some say. This accusation of nepotism is unfounded It should not matter if a son takes over the work or in coming pastor, what should matter is that the work of God goes on without the most hitch.

I personally know of another pastor that built a very large church from the very beginning that left the first church to another and took another large church in a neighboring state. The fit seemed to be out of the will of God, yet about a year latter the man moved on because the church was behind the son in law of the former pastor.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.