UPC, ALJC, PAW, etc.

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Should an evangelist inquire as to the general condition of the (local) church, or any pressing problems that might need to be addressed, upon accepting an invitation to come preach?

I think another aspect is how well the pastor should know the evangelist. My pastor outright refuses to let some in the building because he knows they have a tendency to critique instead of preach.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by Ehud

If you're winning a game, and the losing side is trash talking, you say scoreboard and that's the end because you're winning.

To hear my pastor tell it, he wants souls in the pews so he has a chance to preach the gospel to them. The other pastors seem content to preach to the same 20 people each week. So as they call him a compromiser, he says scoreboard. (He was quite an athlete before he received his calling, so he likes sports analogies even if he messes them up on a regular basis. He gets this one right, but this is certainly not always the case. Haha!)

Just so no one reads this and misconstrues it, my pastor does not think attendance numbers are the end all be all. But if the name of the game is preaching the gospel to as many people as possible and bringing them to repentance and baptizing them in Jesus name, then he is seeing better results than those calling him a compromiser.

That's awesome! Got it! LOL

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by n david

Isn't that just their "culture?"

Men in gangs have grown beards long before the 60s and 70s. So did the majority of men, for that matter.

"Roots" would mean Jesus and other Apostles and Christians all throughout the whole of history were in rebellion well before the 60s and 70s hippy era came about in America.

This is why I have reservations taking our queues of opposition from shifting cultural practices and not just staying grounded in Scripture. Beards shouldn't have been condemned. The licentious revelry of the Hippy Movement should have been condemned.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by n david

Outward dress codes based on what? Which Pastor and church view of dress code is correct? I'd argue the reason there is confusion is because the majority of Apo/Pente churches don't even agree on outward dress codes. One church believes one thing, the other believes something else. Then it really confuses people when you have beard prohibitions based, not on the Bible, but on some outdated stigma from 50 to 60 years ago.

Biblical holiness is so much more than what American Apo/Pente churches have used to label it as dress codes.

I've had this experience first hand.

It can be confusing. Especially to kids. They hear something is a sin against God for so long, then if they have to attend a different church with different standards it has to be explained that the first pastor was simply following his own beliefs and convictions, and not necessarily preaching Scripture. It can undermine one's faith if not handled appropriately.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by hometown guy

Difference between people “ mistakes “ and willfully sinning. Usually when it’s behind the pulpit it’s less humiliating because nobody will know who it is. If the pastor deal with it one on one that can actually be more humiliating. However the Bible actually says rebuke before all so other will fear. I know that is rare to have to do it but still times it needs to be done.

I believe that a pastor is within their rights to pull a person aside over a sin issue. They are also within their rights to rebuke the sin before all, without mentioning the person's name. I also think the pastor is within their rights to rebuke the sin, and name the person before the congregation.

Of course, wisdom and the leading of the Holy Ghost should guide the pastor in all of this.

Pulling someone aside to counsel over sin can begin a process of repentance, healing, and restoration, while not shaming the individual publicly. For minor issues of a personal nature, this might be best.

Naming the sin openly before the congregation without naming the individual might be good if the pastor believes that others might be being caught up in the same snare. It also serves as a direct warning, a clear address of the sin, to the individual who knows they are guilty but were not named. This can bring a massive altar call and allow the entire church to examine itself and ensure that those others who might be caught in the same snare have opportunity to repent. It also opens the door for individuals to perhaps come forward and talk to the pastor privately about the issue due to their sensitive conscience.

This last tactic is a nuclear option. I can imagine that sometimes something has just gone on way too long. Perhaps it's spreading, causing questions, undermining the faith of some, and causing a general uneasiness in the congregation. Sometimes you just have to draw the line. Rebuke the person for the sin openly. This can be harsh. And yes, they might be highly insulted and leave. Maybe friends and family will be highly insulted and leave. Or... maybe it will rattle the individual and those who know them so deeply, it brings repentance. Sometimes this risk is best for the sake of the body.

So, I don't criticize preachers for their method of addressing sin. I imagine that it can be very stressful mentally and even emotionally. Especially if the person is someone who is long standing or beloved of so many in the congregation. I couldn't imagine the pressure felt by a pastor who is feeling led of the Holy Ghost to rebuke an individual openly. I remember back in the day when old time pastors would openly rebuke through tears of weeping and stammering pleas for repentance. I can't see any decent pastor taking joy in doing such unless the individual(s) involved were just straight up troublemakers.

We should keep the men of God in our lives in our prayers and offer them regular encouragement. It's strange. We expect them to always be at the ready to encourage and cheer us on... we often forget that they need our encouragement and affirmation too sometimes.

We're all human, even our pastors.

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by n david

That's awesome! Now some Pastor's would disagree and say that church is for saints, not sinners. That sermons should be focused on the saved, not the lost. But that's another discussion.

A friend of mine from Bible school days was telling me of how the church he previously attended was growing by leaps and bounds. (He's since moved away from that area and attends a different UPC church) They remodeled their church to make more room in the sanctuary and within a year had to build a new building.

I asked what they were doing? It was around the same time that a couple other UPC churches had left the org and dropped the dress code, so I asked if his church did that. No, he said. I asked if Maddix or one of the Soul Winner Boot Camp evangelists were there. He said, no that isn't it either.

I asked, well then, what is it that your church is doing that is causing this incredible growth? He said he would think about it and get back to me. A couple days later we spoke and he said, the only thing he could think which was different than other churches he had attended or visited is that every week the Pastor would end his message with the Gospel (death, burial, resurrection) and New Birth. Without fail, the Gospel would be presented in the message and people responded to the Gospel.

He said, it's so simple. The Gospel demands a response - it's natural, so when it's presented to unsaved people, they respond.

Wow. That's really an awesome answer. Great oratory ability and sermonizing is nice for Bible study nights. But when you get down to it... it is the Gospel message that saves souls and brings in those that God is drawing to Himself.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by Antipas

I believe that a pastor is within their rights to pull a person aside over a sin issue. They are also within their rights to rebuke the sin before all, without mentioning the person's name. I also think the pastor is within their rights to rebuke the sin, and name the person before the congregation.

Of course, wisdom and the leading of the Holy Ghost should guide the pastor in all of this.

Pulling someone aside to counsel over sin can begin a process of repentance, healing, and restoration, while not shaming the individual publicly. For minor issues of a personal nature, this might be best.

Naming the sin openly before the congregation without naming the individual might be good if the pastor believes that others might be being caught up in the same snare. It also serves as a direct warning, a clear address of the sin, to the individual who knows they are guilty but were not named. This can bring a massive altar call and allow the entire church to examine itself and ensure that those others who might be caught in the same snare have opportunity to repent. It also opens the door for individuals to perhaps come forward and talk to the pastor privately about the issue due to their sensitive conscience.

This last tactic is a nuclear option. I can imagine that sometimes something has just gone on way too long. Perhaps it's spreading, causing questions, undermining the faith of some, and causing a general uneasiness in the congregation. Sometimes you just have to draw the line. Rebuke the person for the sin openly. This can be harsh. And yes, they might be highly insulted and leave. Maybe friends and family will be highly insulted and leave. Or... maybe it will rattle the individual and those who know them so deeply, it brings repentance. Sometimes this risk is best for the sake of the body.

So, I don't criticize preachers for their method of addressing sin. I imagine that it can be very stressful mentally and even emotionally. Especially if the person is someone who is long standing or beloved of so many in the congregation. I couldn't imagine the pressure felt by a pastor who is feeling led of the Holy Ghost to rebuke an individual openly. I remember back in the day when old time pastors would openly rebuke through tears of weeping and stammering pleas for repentance. I can't see any decent pastor taking joy in doing such unless the individual(s) involved were just straight up troublemakers.

We should keep the men of God in our lives in our prayers and offer them regular encouragement. It's strange. We expect them to always be at the ready to encourage and cheer us on... we often forget that they need our encouragement and affirmation too sometimes.

We're all human, even our pastors.

Very good.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by Antipas

This is why I have reservations taking our queues of opposition from shifting cultural standards and not just staying grounded in Scripture. Beards shouldn't have been condemned. The licentious revelry of the Hippy Movement should have been condemned.

It was preached against. The problem is with what the beards symbolize and affiliated one with. Like I said an earlier post. We know what the original meaning of the rainbow is. You go outside dressed up all in rainbow today and tell me what kind of result you will get. Yes we preach against homosexuality but also whatever affiliates one with that culture.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by Ehud

You objected to my characterization of "blowing up new converts," but how can a pastor put the hammer down in a mixed congregation without potentially doing that? I'm not saying it would be his goal, but collateral damage is a real thing.

For instance, a new couple arrives at the church. In the following weeks, they meet with the pastor for counseling and discuss some of the things they know they need to work on. Pastor hammers away on a few of these things in the next Sunday sermon because Sister Sally Pewsitter across the way has been doing them and that pastor wants to nip it in the bud. New couple thinks he is airing dirty laundry and never comes back. Has that pastor done his job or done more harm than good?

seem the Pastor needs wisdom. In the case you mentioned here he has done more damage than good for sure. A pastor can preach against sin in a caring way that the people will appreciate and still understand the severity.

[hometown guy]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

seem the Pastor needs wisdom. In the case you mentioned here he has done more damage than good for sure. A pastor can preach against sin in a caring way that the people will appreciate and still understand the severity.

The problem is they don’t understand God’s ways and want to figure it all out logically. I’ve seen men preach hard on standards with love and compassion and seen first time visitors there filled with Holy Ghost. Actually many times.....