"Let Us Prey"-Hunter Lundy

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

So people who have fell into sin can again be restored to a ministry of preaching the word?

Also, Paul giving the qualifications for an overseer does not logically mean anything - one way or the other - about a preacher who falls into sin.

Let's face it, preachers fall into sin quite a lot. They may not be 'big sins' - they may be sins of ignorance, or they may be occasions where a person's temper got the better of them and they perhaps answered more rudely than is called for. I don't see where that would result in a disbarment from preaching (unless rebuked and unrepented of, however...)

But in the cases generally considered in this thread, we are talking about things that according to the apostle Paul - if they were committed by a 'lay member' - should result in EXCOMMUNICATION.

Now, can one who has sinned - and been expelled from the church - come back to the church? Sure, if they repent. God's grace demands it be so. Such a one can come back to God, therefore the church must ratify God's decision in heaven here on earth.

But now suppose one has oversight of the church, is a shepherd of the people of God. And suppose they are Biblically excomunicated from the church. Do they come back right into their previous position of oversight? Their proven repentance gets them back into the church, not into the captain's chair.

Grace gets us into fellowship with God and one another. Oversight of the church is not a matter of grace. In fact, neither is preaching the word. It is not a matter of 'forgiveness', or of God 'restoring a backslider into communion with Himself and the brethren.' Oversight of the church is more a matter of divine appointment. It cannot be 'earned', but it does come with Biblical qualifications.

So then, a bishop who commits sin worthy of excommunication, upon their repentance, their record is clean as far as GRACE and FELLOWSHIP is concerned. But as far as QUALIFICATION FOR OVERSIGHT? Not so sure about that.

I would think, under the seriousness of the circumstances involved in the question, we would need a direct, clear, unambiguous command, example, or necessary inference proving that a bishop, excommunicated for sin, repented and restored to the church, can still qualify for oversight of the church.

Of course, most churches do not even follow proper Biblical procedure for dealing with sin anyway, so all this is probably academic for most congregations to begin with.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Bro, they are ministers, you do have a church government in the New Testament. Overseer covers all from the pastor, to the evangelist. Peter was an apostle but called himself an elder. Ordination was instructed to Titus. He was to ordain ministers "elders" in every city. Diakonos means one who serves. In 1st Timothy we are shown that these individuals weren't just anyone, but those who filled a qualification outlined by Paul to serve in the church. The Apostle Peter instructed that Deacons would help in serving the church families while the office of apostle would dedicate themselves to prayer, and study Acts 6:1-15. This is where Philip the Evangelist comes from the 7 appointed deacons.

No, Sorry that is not what I believe scripture is teaching. There were not offices of ministry, there were offices of overseers. We are all given a gift or gifts of ministry. Ephesians 4. These gifts were not pulpit ministries, as we define them today. they worked among the saints for the purpose of equipping each other for the work of ministry, and the edifying of the body of Christ.

While one ordained as an overseer, had a gift of ministry, as we all should have. That was not what they were ordained to or for. They were chosen for administrative duties of the fledgling church. And the very example of this is found in the very passage you directed me to, Acts 6. These men were not chosen for anything other than to direct and oversee the care of the widows in the church.

Which should make us understand the qualifications in Timothy, as a Bishop or deacon was not spiritual but administrative, hence the need to be an elder, in control of his home, he/they held the purse strings and controlled the finances of the local assembly. They held the same responsibility as those that were chosen in Acts 6.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Well, that was (one of) my original question(s) on this thread!

Lot's of answers given, but I had asked for what the Bible says about that subject.

I see an interesting statement:

But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.
(1 Corinthians 9:27)

castaway: G96

ἀδόκιμος
adokimos
ad-ok'-ee-mos
From G1 (as a negative particle) and G1384; unapproved, that is, rejected; by implication worthless (literally or morally): - castaway, rejected, reprobate.
Total KJV occurrences: 8

Paul didn't seem to have the attitude that he maintained self control so he wouldn't sin and have to go through an apostolic restoration process. Rather, he feared that if he didn't keep his body under subjection he would wind up being a REPROBATE. And a reprobate is not 'an incorrigible pervert', but one who is REJECTED. One who is CAST OFF. He feared that God would CAST HIM OFF as REJECTED, as WORTHLESS for the ministry of preaching, and (likely) lost and consigned to a lake of fire.

Paul seemed to have a different take on preaching and ministry than perhaps we do today.

[good samaritan]

Deacons and bishops where administrative offices not 5 fold ministry. There are people with a pastoral calling, but it may never lead them to take oversight of a congregation. Just like all evangelists don't have to pull behind a trailer and stay on the road. There isn't anything wrong with these things, but our misconception many times causes people trouble when pursuing the ministry they are gifted to work in. If people operate where God places them and then wait (with contentment) on God to direct them further. I have struggled with this in my own personal life. Our pursuits can become vain and for personal thrones. God help us all to stay humble and focused on the main thing.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Also, Paul giving the qualifications for an overseer does not logically mean anything - one way or the other - about a preacher who falls into sin.

Let's face it, preachers fall into sin quite a lot. They may not be 'big sins' - they may be sins of ignorance, or they may be occasions where a person's temper got the better of them and they perhaps answered more rudely than is called for. I don't see where that would result in a disbarment from preaching (unless rebuked and unrepented of, however...)

But in the cases generally considered in this thread, we are talking about things that according to the apostle Paul - if they were committed by a 'lay member' - should result in EXCOMMUNICATION.

Now, can one who has sinned - and been expelled from the church - come back to the church? Sure, if they repent. God's grace demands it be so. Such a one can come back to God, therefore the church must ratify God's decision in heaven here on earth.

But now suppose one has oversight of the church, is a shepherd of the people of God. And suppose they are Biblically excomunicated from the church. Do they come back right into their previous position of oversight? Their proven repentance gets them back into the church, not into the captain's chair.

Grace gets us into fellowship with God and one another. Oversight of the church is not a matter of grace. In fact, neither is preaching the word. It is not a matter of 'forgiveness', or of God 'restoring a backslider into communion with Himself and the brethren.' Oversight of the church is more a matter of divine appointment. It cannot be 'earned', but it does come with Biblical qualifications.

So then, a bishop who commits sin worthy of excommunication, upon their repentance, their record is clean as far as GRACE and FELLOWSHIP is concerned. But as far as QUALIFICATION FOR OVERSIGHT? Not so sure about that.

I would think, under the seriousness of the circumstances involved in the question, we would need a direct, clear, unambiguous command, example, or necessary inference proving that a bishop, excommunicated for sin, repented and restored to the church, can still qualify for oversight of the church.

Of course, most churches do not even follow proper Biblical procedure for dealing with sin anyway, so all this is probably academic for most congregations to begin with.

Another thing that comes to my mind for minister who has fallen. Did he come clean on his own or did they have to get caught. I personally believe that if a person struggles with the same vices long enough their conscious becomes seared. They may show remorse after being caught, but it is likely for image sake. When I was a teenager I had gotten entangled in sin and I went to my pastor and stepped down from a worship service ministry. I didn't confess all the details and I wouldn't even now, but I was tormented with guilt. Sin is slavery and if we allow ourselves to partake of sin after our deliverance it again takes a miraculous intervention to deliver us. We aren't guaranteed that we will continue to get chances.

[shazeep]

good stuff E, GS.

GS, why do you say it takes a miraculous intervention? I would say confession and rebound (repent) are what we are told to do there?

(understanding that you mean public confession in your "didn't confess, and wouldn't now," and not confession to God or those whom you sinned against or with, which i find disturbing enough but never mind that for now.)

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Another thing that comes to my mind for minister who has fallen. Did he come clean on his own or did they have to get caught. I personally believe that if a person struggles with the same vices long enough their conscious becomes seared. They may show remorse after being caught, but it is likely for image sake. When I was a teenager I had gotten entangled in sin and I went to my pastor and stepped down from a worship service ministry. I didn't confess all the details and I wouldn't even now, but I was tormented with guilt. Sin is slavery and if we allow ourselves to partake of sin after our deliverance it again takes a miraculous intervention to deliver us. We aren't guaranteed that we will continue to get chances.

Most of the time they get caught.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by shazeep

good stuff E, GS.

GS, why do you say it takes a miraculous intervention? I would say confession and rebound (repent) are what we are told to do there?

(understanding that you mean public confession in your "didn't confess, and wouldn't now," and not confession to God or those whom you sinned against or with, which i find disturbing enough but never mind that for now.)

I believe repentance is done on our part and deliverance is done on God's part. Jesus died to break the yoke from off of our neck. If you turn to your old ways after God's deliverance it is like crucifying him afresh.

Hebrews 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

My sins weren't against anyone other than myself and God. There was no one to apologize to. Church ministry is sometimes a challenge because people try to remain loyal to their responsibility while on the inside they feel like they are dying. That is why I feel many trudge along in sin because they feel like they cannot quit their responsibility, and in coping they begin to justify themselves in their own mind in order to deal with their own guilt. There is no platform worth losing out with God. In the end people may only remember us for our failures, but God sees what we really have in the bank.