Ephesians 4

[Godsdrummer]

I realized that I did not address the apostles, Peter was given the keys to the kingdom, this did not place him as lead apostle. All we find is that Peter was called to be in attendance when the spirit was poured upon each new group. From that point we don't find Peter in a place of being over the rest of the apostles rather the opposite. Paul even corrected Peter when he would not eat with the Gentiles in the presence of the Jews. Even in the counsel in Jerusalem it was not Peter that gave the direction the church took it was James.

[HRea]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

What you seem to be missing in these examples, is that none of these were called to dictate in the place of God. They were called to lead.

This is the problem I am trying to drive home, God did not call dictators, he called leaders. BIG differance.

And God did not put one man at the top!!!

If I could jump in and express my opinion (acknowledging that I'm cherry-picking a portion of your response):

God didn't choose leaders either. Leaders have followers, and God never intended for His people to be relegated to a permanent "follower class".

My opinion (born from my personal study) is that the 5-fold ministry are not leaders nor lords. They have very specific goals in which God intended for them to have: perfecting the saints, bringing the errant into the unity of the faith, and carefully guiding the saints to become like Jesus.

In this, the 5-fold ministry must be like a parent or a mentor. At times, the ministry needs to be more forceful or adamant, but never dictatorial. The goal is and must remain the cultivation of the saints to discover, grow into, and prove the perfect will of God for them.

[Michael The Disciple]

One should not assume the dictator thing is the status quo. I dont remember having a Pastor that way. I had one who preached what he considered holiness (outward standards) but he certainly did not try to micro manage my life.

Now I do agree with multiple eldership opposed to a one Pator set up. My problem is just that even there in todays Churches it seems the more Preachers the more error. We need to get understanding of sound doctrine.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

What you seem to be missing in these examples, is that none of these were called to dictate in the place of God. They were called to lead.

No I did not miss that. That was my point. You can have a single leader and not have a dictator

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

No I did not miss that. That was my point. You can have a single leader and not have a dictator

Ok I will admit I Missed that, as my wife would say I was to wrapped up in preaching my view I missed what you said. Sorry, You may have a single leader and not a dictatorship, but is that the perfect will or permisive will of God?

As I was bringing out, Moses was to lead Isreal out of captivity. That is what God told him to do. Moses was to lead Isreal out of Egypt to a place where they would serve God. That was God's will and desire.

HRea
In this, the 5-fold ministry must be like a parent or a mentor. At times, the ministry needs to be more forceful or adamant, but never dictatorial. The goal is and must remain the cultivation of the saints to discover, grow into, and prove the perfect will of God for them.

This brings me to another point, where do we get the term "ministry"? As a seperate group of people. Ephesians I again repeat that Paul tells them that God gave gifts, some apostles, some prophets,... for the complete furnishing of the saints, (now here is where believe we get it wrong) we make the words, "for the work of the ministry" we read it in such a way that the work of the ministry as a seperate office from the saints". I read it as "the saints are given the tools to do the work of ministry".

Paul in his letter to the Romans repeats this message in Romans 12, Rom 12:5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
Rom 12:6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, according to the proportion of faith;
Rom 12:7 Or ministry, on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;
Rom 12:8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness.

Now you may say Paul did not list apostles, or evangelist, that does not mean they were not one of the gifts, rather, Paul did not need to address the Romans for whatever reason, about apostles. The context of both passages are the same though. We are the body and within the body God gave gifts to each of us. wherin we are to minister.

And again Paul speaks of this to the church at Corinth, in the 12th chapter of I Corinthians.
Now many take this portion of scripture to say, "see God set" the ministry in the church but not the gifts.
1Co 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1Co 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
1Co 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
I put the rest of the chapter in so you can see what Paul says. Too many times teachers only want to quote those parts of scripture that say what they want to get accross. In this case that God set offices. Notice though that Paul does not stop with the apostles, teachers, but includes in the "setting" other gifts, healings, tongues, workers of miracles.

Also reading from the begining of this chapter Paul refers to the church as a body with many members fit together.

Putting this all together, we have what is a hierarcy in the church, and Paul or any of the apostles discribe this type of leadership in the church. The church is discribed as the body and Christ is the head. If God had intended there to be one spokesman to the individual church between him and the saints he would not have called 12. Again in each instance that the writters speak of leadership in the individual churchs, they speak of plural pastors, teachers ect.

I wrap this up with a little history I came accross several years ago, reading a Roman Caticism hand book. It was the church that decided that the saints could not interpret scripture and that only those in high positions should be the ones that interpret scritpure and then pass this down the what them became the layity. This decision plunged the church into the dark ages, where the only ones allowed to have access to scripture where those trained according to the church. The yes men.

While many protestant churches have pulled away from Catholisism, we still hold many of the traditions, philosophys, and empty deciets formed under this dark period of time.

To all of this please understand, while it may seem that I am teaching a doctrine of rebelion, and individualism. That is not my intent, I still believe we need each other, we need to submit to one another, we must be in proper postion in the kingdom of God. We are not to become an island to ourselves. I know I don't have all the answers, I am studying and putting this out looking for answers.

I do know I am not alone, others are being led down this same road, as Martin Luther saw one verse that changed Christianity and began the reformation, others are asking God is there more to the kingdom of God.

[Lafon]

Godsdrummer: While many protestant churches have pulled away from Catholisism, we still hold many of the traditions, philosophys, and empty deciets formed under this dark period of time.

It's known as following "precedents" (something done or said that serves as an example or rule to authorize or justify a subsequent act of the same or an analogous kind).

The contemporary Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Church (regardless of the moniker its ministerial licensing agency has assumed), continues to hold sacred the rituals and customs which the "apostolic forefathers" (of the early 20th Century) brought with them from their former denominations that were once a part of the RCC. I call it "Dead Men Still Rule."

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Lafon

It's known as following "precedents" (something done or said that serves as an example or rule to authorize or justify a subsequent act of the same or an analogous kind).

The contemporary Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Church (regardless of the moniker its ministerial licensing agency has assumed), continues to hold sacred the rituals and customs which the "apostolic forefathers" (of the early 20th Century) brought with them from their former denominations that were once a part of the RCC. I call it "Dead Men Still Rule."

And yes Lafon, Dead men still rule. The eldership in many denominations still follow the trend and ideology of a dead religion. One that teaches that the massed still need a man to translate the word, else they cannot understand the word.

Hence we are still in the dark ages in many respects, where one man holds the final say over many individual groups of people as the spokesman of God. What is this man has missed the mark? Even the whole organization has missed the mark and they are teaching a doctrine that binds the individual saint to a place God never intended for his children?

The saint is stuck, if God reviles to them deeper revelation, most times the so called man of God, the (spokesman) religates them the saint to rebelion to his authority, if they do not toe under to his doctrine.
Hence the saint has one option, leave or suppress his understanding. We are seeing this very thing happen in the UPCI with regard to fulfilled escatology. UPCI has gone to the point of calling the teaching hearisy and any pastor must change his/her teaching to conform to UPCI teachings or leave.

This should not be so.

After leaving UPCI 10+ - years ago, I have searched for a church or organization that was, is more to my understanding. I have found two. One was the result of the affirmation legistlation of UPCI in the 90's when many left the organization. They have become what is called the Global Net. The Other is an organization the came out of trinity groups. Both of these groups have grown in the last 10 + years to become growing churches that have left behind the organizations they came out of. By left behind I mean in numbers and the move of the spirit of God.

The organization I attend ICCC has a stronger move of God than I ever experianced in all my years in UPCI. For one thing the gift of prophecy in its proper place is strong in this organization, and allowed to move.

As for the Global net my oldest daughter and younges daughter are members of one, and their spiritual lives have grown in the last several years that they have been in attendance that God has moved them (My oldest daughter and her husband) into leadership positions.

The greatest thing about this trend, and why I see it is of God, is there are no turf wars between churches.

[Godsdrummer]

Reading down through this post I realize that I have come accross in a maner unintended.

first let me humbly appoligize for comming accross as if I have all the answers and I only have the truth. That is not my intent. I know I come accross that way many times. Put it down as occupational hazard of the way I was raised and from my background. Having sat under pastors of all types I have a tendancy to refer to the negative types rather than those that have a right spirit within the wrong setting.

Sam I too am licensed and ordainded to perform marriages in my state, and have pastored, and held several asstiant pastorates and am presently under a pastor of whom I repect in an organization of which the leadership is not dictoral. I feel we are much alike in our theological understanding.

Michael, I do agree, "We need to get understanding of sound doctrine. " while you and I disagree as to the definition of sound doctrine. Sound doctrine must mot be based on traditions, rather sound understanding of the word of God.

Prax while the postion of single pastors is neither scriptural or unscriptural, the authority of the single pastor must be keep in check. As has been expressed they must be a shephard not a dictator. I do not feel the pastors position is to "set the saints straight" rather to teach the word in such a manner that the saints can grow on their own in their own relationship with the spirit of God.

I feel the biggest mistake of religion is the quest for eternal life rather than personal relationship with God in this life. Religion defines salvation as the following of a set of rule as set by said denomination, as to a plan of salvation, then a list of thou shalt nots in order to achieve eternal life, this sets the child of God on a life quest to self achievment in this life.

Relationship with God is to rest in the work of the cross by faith, in love one for another fulfilling the prayer of Christ, "thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven". This comes not by preaching a list of things one must accomplish in order to obatian eternal life. This is just what the religious leaders of Christ day were doing and they were condemed. Rather we are to "love the Lord God with all our heart soul and might, and love our neighbor as ourself", in this can we fulfill Christ prayer to make the kingdom of God real in the world.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Ok I will admit I Missed that, as my wife would say I was to wrapped up in preaching my view I missed what you said. Sorry, You may have a single leader and not a dictatorship, but is that the perfect will or permisive will of God?

As I was bringing out, Moses was to lead Isreal out of captivity. That is what God told him to do. Moses was to lead Isreal out of Egypt to a place where they would serve God. That was God's will and desire.

That wasn't all. Moses brought them the law. Moses instructed them how to do things.
He "shepherded" the people to a place they can worship God and then taught them God's ways

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Prax while the postion of single pastors is neither scriptural or unscriptural, the authority of the single pastor must be keep in check. As has been expressed they must be a shephard not a dictator. I do not feel the pastors position is to "set the saints straight" rather to teach the word in such a manner that the saints can grow on their own in their own relationship with the spirit of God.

Agreed