TayoD, Welcome back 0! I don't even mind that you came with that your wooden racket !

I was hoping you'd have taken the time off to work on your game. Unfortunately that does not appear to be the case  .

TayoD:

Nice exchanges so far. Keep it up.

Thank you bro!

TayoD:

Analytical, I'm 100% with you on this. It appears that TV01 is more obsessed and polarised by the MOG concept and the so-called SAP than the people directly influenced by it.

I'm not obsessed by men or material things. I am not subject to undue or abusive MOG influence. My desire is to see all partakers of the liberty in Christ and freed from being slaves to men.

TayoD:

Elders are as susceptible to every vices that the SAP (using TV's terminology) are susceptible to. The mega-star status that he has trouble with was also a problem with the early Disciples. [/color]

We are all susceptible to those vices, but proper structuring of church and believers communion, will ensure that an atmosphere for such vices is not engendered.

TayoD:

No wonder Paul said: Romans 16:7 - Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
Galatians 2: 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship;

Ah, I remember now, wilful misrepresentation of scripture was always your preferred first service  . It beggars belief for any one to think that Paul, "Apostle Paul" would laud anyone for pride. The context and wording in no way suggests that in any of the instances mentioned. Note also that the same Cephas who was a pillar (not the roof or the head mind you), was "withstood to his face" when he stepped out of line". Plurality and equality is key to proper Christian leadership.

TayoD:

The plurality of leadership will never eliminate the 'Mega-star' concept that our dear TV01 is so averse to.

Whilst flesh will always mess up, Gods blueprint will certainly nix the mega-star/personality cult rubbish that is endemic nowadays. Talking of which, how's Chris O, aspiring Presido !

TayoD, Please feel free to respond to the questions posed in posts 62 & 91.

God bless and exalt those who humble themselves in His sight.

Hi TV01,

TayoD, Welcome back 0! I don't even mind that you came with that your wooden racket !

I couldn't hold myself at this!  This is sooo funny!  I'm still laughing my head off!!!

By the way, I thought you would have used that hypothetical scenario to explain or illustrate your position.

I will respond with mine shortly.

[TayoD you are much welcome after the sabbatical!]

Love.

Have been busy lately.

Here is an illustration of my position using your scenario:

Lets say we have a region, and in the region 4 areas. Let’ call them North, West, East and South. Now, let’s take the south.

Let’s say they are 32 areas in the south. S1 – S32. And let’s say that each area has a number of mature churches of a reasonable size with plurality of mature elders and a SAP. Please explain briefly, how these mature churches would be overseen.

The structure of the different mature churches will look like the one in the attachment (Church Structure) and the administrative structure for the region is also as attached (Admin Structure).

Note:

[list]
[li]There could be variations.  Also nomenclature may vary depending on preference (e.g. overseer=superintendent=bishop, shepherd=pastor etc).

[/li]

[li]The overseers are also shepherds of their respective churches in addition to their supervising offices[/li]
[/list]

Hope this explains your question.

Analytical:

Here is an illustration of my position using your scenario:

The structure of the different mature churches will look like the one in the attachment (Church Structure) and the administrative structure for the region is also as attached (Admin Structure).

Note:

[list]
[li]There could be variations. Also nomenclature may vary depending on preference (e.g. overseer=superintendent=bishop, shepherd=pastor etc).

[/li]

[li]The overseers are also shepherds of their respective churches in addition to their supervising offices[/li]
[/list]

Hope this explains your question.

Yes, absolutely. Not to misascribe anything to you, I thought I'd let you outline it first.

This was my extrapolation of the model;

If each area has say ten mature churches, then you’d require say, 1 OB for each one. That would be 32 OB’s for the whole of the south. Now according to your model, those 32 OB’s would have to be further overseen. Let’s say by PB’s. How many would one need? Lets say 1 per 8 OB’s. That gives 4 PB’s. This of course leads us ever upwards as your authority pyramid always tapers to the one person. So we would require a higher ecclesiastical authority, say a Senior PB.

If one were to replicate this in all four areas N. W, E & S, we would require someone to oversee the 4 SPB’s. Say an Overseeing SPB (OSPB) And that’s in one region. Lets say they are hundreds of regions. You can see that all your model does is add never ending layers of ecclesiastical bureaucracy which tapers into one man.

Next I'll post my thoughts.

God bless

Negative, sir!  Your extrapolation just does not add up.  You are only complicating the model as simple as it is.  Remember the admin structure is just what it says.  The different overseers are in effect pastors/shepherds of some of those churches in each area as well.  They don't sit in the air, mind you.

In the case of growth of the church, 32 simply becomes 32+x (where x is no. of additional churches) and so on.

The focus of any position is not man, stop seeing it as such.  Any minister (whatever calling he has) worth his calling points men to God and not to himself.  And besides,  who told you many   countries cannot be under one region?  The essence is not to have a model that gets too big to administer, hence the need for effective admin at each level.

Ask Paul why he didn't put Timothy in charge of both Ephesus and Crete!

More thoughts later.

Okay, we'll work with your model exactly as you describe it.

Are you saying;

1. How ever many churches there are in an area, there is just an increas in the number of SAP's and there remains the 1 overseer for that area?

2. At whatever level of office above SAP, the position will always be filled by someone who is a SAP at church level?

3. You've tapered it into a regional overseer. What happens if the regions are multiplied say 100 fold?

4. What do those above SAP in your model do?

The reason why Paul did not put Timothy in charge (your word not mine), would be because they were two different regions/two different works.

Regards

There is no SAP in my model! Nobody with sole authority. That model is yours. The leaders/elders still provide the checks, advisory roles etc.

The model is not cast in stone and can reduce or enlarge depending on the size of the whole church, the spread and growth.

1. How ever many churches there are in an area, there is just an increas in the number of SAP's and there remains the 1 overseer for that area?

Very possible. If an area gets too big, you split and spread. Simple.

2. At whatever level of office above SAP, the position will always be filled by someone who is a SAP at church level?

Most likely. Has to be someone mature and experienced to lead the flock of Christ and whoelse, except a shepherd at that level.

3. You've tapered it into a regional overseer. What happens if the regions are multiplied say 100 fold?

A region is as large as you make it. A region maybe 1 country, several countries, or part of a country. Very flexible!

4. What do those above SAP in your model do?

They shepherd and oversee.

The reason why Paul did not put Timothy in charge (your word not mine), would be because they were two different regions/two different works.

Exactly my point!

Analytical:

There is no SAP in my model! Nobody with sole authority. That model is yours. The leaders/elders still provide the checks, advisory roles etc.

So, are you categorically stating that there is no "Sole Authority Pastor" over an individual church?

So, are you categorically stating that there is no "Sole Authority Pastor" over an individual church?

From my very first post on this thread (#29), I did make it clear that I'm not comfortable with that appellation of 'sole authority'. It connotes a case of someone who is power-mongering, control-seeking and position-drunk!

Authority has to be delegated for it to be optimally effective, except the pastor wants to kill himself before his time with too much burden and responsibility. This is unwise and unnecessary, especially as the church grows. Jethro advised Moses about it in the wilderness and what a sound counsel it was!

If you check my charts well, there are pastors over individual churches, but they are not 'sole authority'. Authority can be delegated or supervised.

Bless you.

Analytical:

From my very first post on this thread (#29), I did make it clear that I'm not comfortable with that appellation of 'sole authority'. It connotes a case of someone who is power-mongering, control-seeking and position-drunk!

I don't agree it connotes that. What you are unwittingly saying, is that that is what it tends to become in these times. Don't let us confuse the office, with the conduct of the officer.

And let me say this, "position-mongering/control-seeking/powerdrunk" is a spectrum. All eyes tend to be on the obvious Jim Jones/Rev. King type instances, but it is no less evident (if more subtle, stylishly sold and better masked) in all instance where power evolves into the one position.

Analytical:

Authority has to be delegated for it to be optimally effective, except the pastor wants to kill himself before his time with too much burden and responsibility. This is unwise and unnecessary, especially as the church grows. Jethro advised Moses about it in the wilderness and what a sound counsel it was!

Well said. And in the model I see clearly outlined in the Bible it is. Again you are muddying matters. To much authority never killed anyone. Authority is not synonymous with burden. I feel you are confusing authority with workload here. Either there is one SAP or there isn't?

I like your reference to Jethro & Moses, but that was for their time. We have a differnt blueprint for ours. Not to mention that scripture testifies that Moses was the most humble of men.

The model is either true to scripture or it isn't. You shouldn't need to qualify it. The personal qualifications are outlined in scripture. Your model should stand on it's own merits. The flaws in your model are both obvious and numerous, as the discussion progresses, I will detail them.

God bless

My responses:

I don't agree it connotes that. What you are unwittingly saying, is that that is what it tends to become in these times. Don't let us confuse the office, with the conduct of the officer.

Then why do you keep qualifying them as such? Pastors should just be pastors and not sole authority pastors or SAP. I don't confuse office and the officer's conduct. That only stems from your view of them all over this thread.

And let me say this, "position-mongering/control-seeking/powerdrunk" is a spectrum. All eyes tend to be on the obvious Jim Jones/Rev. King type instances, but it is no less evident (if more subtle, stylishly sold and better masked) in all instance where power evolves into the one position.

Whoever ascribes power to himself is either a fake or is abusing his office. The genuine ones far outnumber the fake. They are humble and serve God in spirit and in truth. Power doesn't have to 'evole into one position' for you to abuse it. Your model can as well breed an oligarchy of a ruling class over God's heritage. This is no less an abuse too!

Well said. And in the model I see clearly outlined in the Bible it is. Again you are muddying matters. To much authority never killed anyone. Authority is not synonymous with burden. I feel you are confusing authority with workload here. Either there is one SAP or there isn't?

No sir. No muddying. With authority comes responsiblity. Authority delegated is responsibility shared.

I like your reference to Jethro & Moses, but that was for their time. We have a differnt blueprint for ours. Not to mention that scripture testifies that Moses was the most humble of men.

If Moses could be humble others can be too. Let's focus one the use of the office and not the abuse of it. Whatever happened in OT is for our learning and example. It's still the same God. If it worked for Moses, Paul etc. it will work for us.

The model is either true to scripture or it isn't. You shouldn't need to qualify it. The personal qualifications are outlined in scripture. Your model should stand on it's own merits.

And it is. I have not done any such thing as qualifying it. I couldn't find what's not scriptural there. The qualifications are true to scripture. Rather it's you that's unduly qualifying and extrapolating.

The flaws in your model are both obvious and numerous.

I have tried as much as possible to make my position so plain and easy to understand. It worked then and is still working. I have not seen a perfect church. I have not seen a perfect people. That's why we are humans and His strength is made perfect in our weaknesses. Even in the early church, with the first apostles, theirs was not a perfect one.

Or do you have a flawless one?

Analytical:

Or do you have a flawless one?

Please feel free to critique it !

35 Reasons Why The Organisational- Hierarchical Model Of Church is Wrong

1. There are no qualifications outlined in the bible for anything other than the eldership and the deaconate.

2. There is no biblically prescribed ranking order within the remit for elders. Which is to be plural and equal. As such, they are always addressed as a group in the scriptural narrative.

3. It introduces a clergy/laity split which is patently unscriptural and particularly hated by The Lord. It’s called the the Nicolaitan heresy.

4. It will become top-heavy and deny the fullness of communion and impartation available too and between all believers in properly prescribed body fellowship.

5. It denies the Priesthood of all believers and re-introduces the OT mediatory priesthood model. Mediators other than the Lord are introduced.

6. It gives “headship” to a man. And takes the focus off The Lord. The scriptures are unambiguous in Christ’s Headship of His church.

7. As the model is organisational instead of familial, it becomes bureaucratic, political and flesh-driven instead of Spirit led.

8. It blunts and denies the ministry of the Holy Spirit. He leads those who seek Him into all truth. He points to Jesus (as do the scriptures), not to MOGS.

9. Gifts are given to all as the Spirit wills for the profit of all. But the ordained/no-ordained split focuses attention on a certain subset and consistently on a certain few. This means that in almost every gathering, the main focus is on the one person, instead of the whole body.

10. It denies that Sons of God are led by the Spirit of God. To often the focus becomes on the SAP, MOG or Mentor (Guru'ism).

11. It means that prophesy from non-titled, non-ordained believers without ministries, churches, religious organisations or other platforms (or high profiles), can be ignored.

12. It unbalances scripture by focusing on “feeding” at the expense of “maturing”. God is after sons. The leader/follower split requires that some remain babes (dependant) on others. Please note, babes are no more than servants, and servants do not inherit, sons do!

13. It leads to an ever worsening personality cult/sleazy celebrity circuit problem. It means those titled “MOG” foster (and often downright fabricate) an image of their own hyper-spirituality in order to burnish their own legend, raise their profiles and increase their following.

14. Did I mention the ridiculous outfits?

15. Or the ludicrous (and often blasphemous) titles?

16. It engenders pride (whether you agree or not), as man are not built to handle that kind of authority or adulation that MOGGERY inculcates. Please ask rock-stars how they feel when performing to an adoring audience.

17. It allows error and heresy to become entrenched as there are virtually no checks or balances on the MOG. Followers are prone to reverencing MOGS (hence unbiblical titles such as “reverend”). See 12 above.

18. In a primitive house led, community based church format, error would be contained and checked locally. As congregational autonomy and absence of hierarchical top-down enforcement would stop spread or dissemination.

19. It would be easier to confront error. It’s why Paul could confront Peter. Peter was not his senior and had no authority over him. It’s hard to challenge someone who you feel is in some way spiritually senior to you. How much more so, when there are others senior to him who are re-enforcing the very same thing.

20. It changes Christianity into a “mass march” instead of an individual walk. The focus on hierarchy figures instead of the one-to-one relationship means that everyone is fed the same thing at the same time. Every relationship with His children is at a different stage The Holy Spirit is able to meet every single believer at their unique point of need. It further means that believers are kept away from the Word, either by policy or practice. Further deepening the split and the dependence.

21. The structural flaws lead to doctrinal aberrations and vice-versa in a vicious cycle. Examples are unbiblical covering and warped authority & submission precepts. In attempts to reform or correct the institutional church, many look to doctrine. The truth is that structure and model are equally responsible for its flaws.

22. Because the model is increasingly carnal, worldly mores are introduced into the body. Political correctness, PR budgets, Feminism, etc.

23. Introducing Worldly mores has as a consequence, the application of worldly measures of success. So it becomes about numbers and not disciples. The splendour of the temple as opposed to the maturity of the body. It focuses on things men will applaud, not what will please God.

24. As rampaging flesh is given its head, the church becomes more and more like the world instead of witnessing against it.

25. Like any organisation, it becomes an end in itself and needs money to survive. Hence the propagation of lies like “enforced tithing” (you have to fund this thing somehow!), and that oft repeated lie “It takes money to spread the Gospel”. It does not.

26. It perverts the true use of Christian resources. Money only ever moves in response to need in the body or outside it, but the basis is always true physical need. Instead funds are diverted to paying salaries, temple construction, building empires (ministries) and the like, for which there is no requirement.

27. Working for a salary makes you a hireling. It also means many are motivated by the temporal reward. Note worship leaders for hire and the revolving door policy for many salaried pastors (doubtless there are specialist recruitment agencies for church staff these days). It further gives head to the fixation with temporal things, such as temple building. After all, every CEO wants a shiny new corporate headquarters (and the phalanx of staff/offices/departments to go with it), as a focal point for the enterprise.

28. Ultimately it leads the church to partner (read fornicate) with, endorse and become subject to the state/world. Hence misguided (at best) initiatives such as “Political Christianity”

29. As it goes deeper into the world, it loses the sure anchor of the Word of Truth. Scripture has to be discarded or adulterated to ensure worldly acceptability. Hence re-interpreting or questioning the inerrancy of scripture. (The leaven of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod). Disastrously compromising pure Christian witness. Female and Homosexual bishops are a case in point. 

30. It abounds further to contextual criticism & reinterpretation. Attacking the very foundations of the faith. Leading to the erosion of core Christian belief both within and without the body. Calling parts of the biblical narrative myth or fairy tale. Denying or re-ascribing the authorship of certain books.

31. It brings imbalance to the family/church alignment as outlined in the bible. Undue authority and influence is ceded to the church and its authority structure.

32. Because in truth, there is no remit or requirement for these “management” positions, they have to create work to justify their salaries/positions/titles. Hence the daily, weekly, monthly, annual rituals (vigils, power nights, anointing nights, youth conventions, dominion hours etc.). Which are really in order to justify the salaried/titled bureaucracy.

33. The deviation increases and morphs into a product led approach to Christianity. I have a ministry of/to – singles, deliverance, prosperity, marriage, family, healing, witchcraft etc – All these things are incidental to Christianity. As a Christian grows and matures, wisdom, experience and discernment increase to enable them to tackle any problem and be delivered from any issue, which are first and foremost a product of an unconverted spirit and un-renewed mind. Keeping them babes, means they are always looking for a product expert in the form of the SAP or MOG.

34. So people are “Deliverance ministers”, instead of deliverance being something that may be required in certain instances and God being able to use any vessel available.  Or take prosperity preachers. In truth, true Christianity is oblivious to wealth or lack thereof. And in any event riches would not be meant for all, all the time, depending on the stage of their walks, calling and purpose.

35. So eventually the MOG, the ministry and the church are all institutionalised. It becomes wholesale idolatry (my pastor, my church, my ministry) and a legalistic human construct that brings men into bondage to the very thing Christ came to set them free from, ritual religion!

A tragic mix of the unscriptural the blasphemous and the carnal. All wrapped up in the idolatrous and the adulterous. It’s why He says “Come out of her my people”.

Let God be true and every man a liar!

God bless

Hi TV01,

Now, you are beginning to sound like you really have an axe to grind with certain issues beyond our discourse in this thread.  And it's beginning to scare me!!

Your thesis has been dealt with to a long extent, that makes your latest treatise so uncalled for.  This is where I get scared.  But I will only respond to one point I won't let pass just like that:

3. It introduces a clergy/laity split which is patently unscriptural and particularly hated by The Lord. It’s called the the Nicolaitan heresy.

How unture this could be!  This is not what the Nicolaitan heresy is about.

Rev. 2

6 ‘Yet this you do have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

The deeds/heresy of the Nicolaitans taught Christian liberty meant license to commit sensual sins. In otherwords, they taught that once you are saved, it doesn't matter again what you do, by way of sensual and sexual immorality, that you are always saved. This is what the Lord hates and not what you listed in your thesis!

I beg to take my exit from this thread at this point.  I don't want to be drawn into argument of rightness or wrongness of the expressions of our faith, whatever our leanings are, within the confines of grace.

But may I conclude with this.  The body of Christ will fare more effectively if we concentrate on those things that bind us together and not those that tend to gender strife and needless division among us.  A house divided against itself cannot stand.  We lose so much impact by so doing and the enemy gains.

A christian is not one by structures or models.  Whether leadership by plurality of elders (as in congregational, some baptists etc) or hierarchical (as in episcopal, penticostal etc), everyone who has believed and accepted the saving grace of Christ is part of His one church, structure or not.

What do you call those our brethren in the underground church when communism held sway?  They did not even have the priviledge of gathering, not to talk of structures/models!  Are they not part of the church of the living Christ?  May we not make the purchase by blood of Christ of no effect!

Thank you and God bless.

@Analytical,

It appears you have come to the same realisation I was awakened to when discussing with TV01. Thanks for all your inputs so far. they have been a blessing.

I particularly love this closing statement of yours which is amply suopported by the scripture I will quote hereafter:" A christian is not one by structures or models. Whether leadership by plurality of elders (as in congregational, some baptists etc) or hierarchical (as in episcopal, penticostal etc), everyone who has believed and accepted the saving grace of Christ is part of His one church, structure or not.".

Here is how Apostle Paul stated this same fact - 1 Corinthinas 12: 5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

@TV01,

When you prove yourself to be as paranoid of this mode of administration which you call the SAP, don't you think you are just as bogged down by the same system that you are so vehemently opposed to? You talk about clergy/laity split which is one thing I have no clue about and have never witnessed. Everything must be in your over-active imagination.

I grew up in a denomination where the 'elder' concept was in full operation. Guess what happens? Nothing gets done unless a vote is taken after a quorum is established. The same concept is what is giving rise to homosexual Bishops being ordained just because a body of elders vote such abominations into practice. The same clergy/laity split you are crying about manifests itself in the elder/laity relationship as well.

The eldership concept as I told you before came from jewish tradition based on the principles in Proverbs 11:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety. And based on Jewish tradition, the older you are, the wiser you are expected to be as stated by Elihu in Job 32:7 I said, Days should speak, and multitude of years should teach wisdom. 8 But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding

By definition and as revealed in scripture (1 Timothy 5:1 for instance), an Elder must be advanced in years and this contradicts the later statement of Elihu in the scripture I stated above. It is a reason why people like Timothy, though called, could never be an Elder which makes foolishness of the wisdom impacted by the Spirit of God and it mirrors the Sanhedrin concept developed by the Jewish people.

I don't expect you to agree with what I've stated. Infact, I'd be shocked if you do. But for goodness sake, do not be quick to make generalisations and judgments of things you know nothing about. God bless.

TV01,


I guess the game, set, and match would have to go to , TayoD and Analytical

Grouppoint:

I guess the game, set, and match would have to go to , TayoD and Analytical

Como que? What are you doing on my thread  ?

If you come up in here you'll get mashed, like de man dem before you  .
Unable to gain ground, they soon scuttled off!

You will end up the same way. You have been warned  .

Gods blueprint for the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ has been severally enunciated.
If you have any refutations or scripturally backed alternatives. Then serve! Otherwise.

God bless

Ressurected so I can discuss with GODSON2009

so much has been said here and i believe we all are maturing; my own contribution will be in the area of persecution. Its much easier to engage a church that has a formal structure, take out its shepherd and scatter the sheep. Personally i do not see any difference between church organizations today and business organizations; i even at a time proposed that there is no difference between churches and cults. The structure found therein at this time seems sufficient for the now but i look forward to a better future.

@tv01
i didnt realise such a thred existed,funny enough i agree with most of your original assertions on this particular thread,so it seems to me that you are disagreeing with yourself more on the other thread for some reason,however the part which i will comment on on this thread is that which addresses which of the elders or five fold might have pre eminence.
the way i see it,the prophet has been unwittingly given pre eminence due to the fact that most christians,especially the young christians whose faiths need regular boosting and  who constitute the majority of the global church requires the services of the prohet more than even that of the pastor.

im not sure if you r also the one that made the comment that a christian is not bound by heirachy or structure,but if you did then i will have to disagree with that as well simply because our GOD loves order,also the bible says precept upon precept,line after lineincluding several places in the old and new testament where respect for constituted authority was severally highlighted

@TV01,

I have tried to follow your arguments here and came to this juncture that it seems you're contradicting yourself on several occasions on this subject. Here's an example:

(a)

TV01:

Elders are primarily responsible for the spiritual well-being of the flock, and facets of the eldership role include the pastoral (or shepherding if you will), teaching, counseling etc, which in a sense all overlap to some degree. The role of deacon is primarily concerned with the physical/material well-being of the flock.

. . .but, in post #45 you had argued that:

(b)

TV01:

However, I can see no scriptural support for a Clergy/Laity (leader/Follower) split in NT Xtianity. Further to my immediately prececeeding point, please outline who in addition to the "eldership" would be included in the "leadership" - you may want to briefly outline how they function and compliment the elders and deacons.

The point I would like to observe here is that you seem to be acknowledging that there is a leadership role in the Church on the one hand, while yet disavowing that same thing about leadership in the Church on the other hand. It's like you acknowledge "eldership role" (which is the same as leadership), and yet came back to say that there is no Scriptural support for such a fact!

Another example to show this in some of your posts elsewhere is this excerpt (post #1111):

TV01:

There is no clergy/laity - leader/follower - split in NTC. There is no call for paid ministry in the local congreagation.

Comparing those quotes above, it seems that the conclusion to be drawn is that you have been maintaining quite a contradition of your position, as well making very unfounded statements that are not informed by a careful study of God's Word.

However, without trying to draw a tone of finality, could I request that you try to reconcile both sides of your arguments so we could understand what you were on about?

Hi GODSON 2009, thanks for honouring the request.

GODSON2009:

@tv01
i didnt realise such a thred existed,funny enough i agree with most of your original assertions on this particular thread,so it seems to me that you are disagreeing with yourself more on the other thread for some reason,

Ah, ah. Come now. On the other thread you disagreed with me and on this one I disagreed with myself  . Brother please!

Everything I have said on both threads is in consonance. This one speaks more to what was a digression on the other and I gave leave there as the initial assertions regard the pastoral role were yours and we were waiting for you to enunciate and provide back-up for your position on SAP. I also pointed out that you seemed to misunderstand me as much as disagree with me, hence my efforts to clarify matters.

Having said all that, if you agree with most of my views on this thread - which are the same as on the other  !, why don't we discuss areas of difference and see if our respective positions are in any way reconciled?

God bless
TV

GODSON2009:

however the part which i will comment on on this thread is that which addresses which of the elders or five fold might have pre eminence.
the way i see it,the prophet has been unwittingly given pre eminence due to the fact that most christians,especially the young christians whose faiths need regular boosting and who constitute the majority of the global church requires the services of the prohet more than even that of the pastor.

I'm sure I've touched on that already. In talking about church - the gathering and the local congregation - there is no pre-eminence amongst elders. Some may well be more mature, they may be variously gifted, minister in differing capacities, but I personally do not see pre-eminence.

In reference to the five-fold, I would still like to know what role an apostle or prophet performs in the congregation. And what is the "unbalance" that results due to their absence or not being accorded due prominence?

GODSON2009:

im not sure if you r also the one that made the comment that a christian is not bound by heirachy or structure,but if you did then i will have to disagree with that as well simply because our GOD loves order,also the bible says precept upon precept,line after lineincluding several places in the old and new testament where respect for constituted authority was severally highlighted

Without reading through I can,t say for sure, but to clarify, in the church - as gathering - sphere, we must all be subject to shepherds and duly constituted authority, just like we would be at home, in the work place or in the community at large. But my view remains that a Christian is not bound by "church hierarchy" in anything but church.

God bless
TV

God has a system of dealing with people through a leader at a given time and not altogether as a group.From Moses ,Joshua, David, Jesus and to the church. It is Gods system.
Deacons and elders that were ordained were stil accountable to the pastor who is the head.
I've not been able to read all the earlier post but I will read them so I could make better contribution

If there was ever a thread worthy of being resurrected - this is one.

Joagbaje:

God has a system of dealing with people through a leader at a given time and not altogether as a group.From Moses ,Joshua, David, Jesus and to the church. It is Gods system.
Deacons and elders that were ordained were stil accountable to the pastor who is the head.

Cant blame oga Jo for such comment. You people want to take away his garri

Church Structure & Sole Authority Proprietorship Pastors

Corrected

There is so much to comment on on this thread, but I will start here:

Joagbaje:

God has a system of dealing with people through a leader at a given time and not altogether as a group.From Moses ,Joshua, David, Jesus and to the church. It is Gods system.
Deacons and elders that were ordained were stil accountable to[b] the pastor who is the head[/b].

*the last time someone made this gross statement, this happened https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-397372.0.html*

Joagbaje, sir, all you have to do is to please show us the scripture that says "the pastor is the head of the church". Thank you.

[quote author=TV01 post=703397]
Hi, Kindly please cite some examples of churches that have elder leadership structures here in Nigeria. Thanks.