₦airaland Forum

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 Analytical,

Please feel free to question the specifics of my model in anyway you choose. I feel my position is Biblically mandated, self-explanatory and practical. It remains for opposers to critique it.

Have a good weekend.

God bless

Hi Analytical (and anyone who cares to comment),

I'm back as promised.

I’m not sure how best to articulate this, I’d like to use a pictorial representation, but for now, let me try this.

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.

Thanks.

God bless

Analytical:
Not all church leaders/elders are full time ministers. Those that are should be the responsibility of the churches. They should be supported in everyway possible by the church (wages and other provisions) so as to concentrate on their duty. Even those that are not should still be partaker of the carnal provisions since they provide spiritually for the flock. This is the prescription of the scriptures.

I see no biblical warrant for this full or part time split. Christian ministry is part of everyday life. A mindset and a lifestyle. In a church setting, ministry is only during the gathering. Outside, it's in everyday fellowship and as a response to individual need. Anyone mature or well-resourced enough can attend to need.

Analytical:
Thank God we are getting these things sorted out. So it's agreed that God still calls apostles and prophets in our days. Halleluyah to that too!

I didn't say that in the sense you are implying it. Please don't knowingly mis-quote or mis-ascribe things to me.

Analytical:
I don't support the 'caste-system' of 'holier-than-thou' and 'I-am-not-accountable-to-anybody' too. Every steward will give accounts of his stewardship to the Owner. It is not to say there are no people given authority as ministers of our God.

I never said I-am-not-accountable-to anybody", my point is that church authority is devolved into a plurality of elders.

Let me ask a few questions;
1. Who does the SAP report too?
2. Who does the OB/PB report too?
3. And so on and so forth?

Analytical:
An elder that seems to have the final say, after a thorough deliberation of the matters by the others. Not too far if we call him the leader of the Jerusalem church. This is further implied in Acts 21 when Paul took the offerings from the churches to the christians in Jerusalem:

Acts 21:
17 After we arrived in Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.

18 And the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.

19 After he had greeted them, he began to relate one by one the things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.

You keep resorting to "implication". He did not have the final say, he just happened to have what everyone considered the final word on the matter.

One could equally imply that James was not even an elder. Or that the the significance of referring to him is the place where they met. Implication is a manybranched road. Sir.

I'll be back with refernce to your structure.

God bless

Grouppoint:
James was clearly the leader of the Church. This was displayed clearly in the Jerusalem conference. During which Peter, Paul and Barnabas were present also.
James made a ruling, as in a final decision concerning circumcision.
Acts 15:19-20
It is my Judgement,

Note the Greek word used by James here is krino, a term meaning "I decide", "I rule", "I judge" and not "I advise" or "I recommend".

I reffered to Peter as a sole authority, not of a specific church per se. I reffered to him as an apostle or evangelist, in view of passages in acts which describe his speeches to the jews and conversion of 3,000 in one day. He did not seem to confer with the other diciples before making those speeches.

You would also notice that Paul 'withstood' Peter,  because Peter was being hypocritical in the presence of emmissaries of his church leader, James.


- Roger Federer

~ James was not the leader of the Church in Jerusalem. Please show it clearly it from Scripture.

~ James made a sound judgment call (not a binding ruling) and all assembled agreed to it.

~ I’m not sure what you are saying about Peter?

~ Yes, Paul withstood Peter. What as? his junior? senior? equal?

~ If James was the SAP, surely Paul should have referred it to him and he should have done it?

~ Who was the SAP over Paul?

~ When Paul and Barnabas had a difference in Acts 15:36, why didn’t one use his SAP?

Rafael Nadal

fadenike:
@lafile & tv10,
can u please explain your points?
thanks

Yes I can. Based on your elucidation below.

fadenike:
let me just elucidate my point , xtains believe is that at courtship there should be no kissing, hugging, pecking or sex till d joining day. for those dt engage in doing such, who is to be blame?

You requested to know who was to blame? Sin dwells in the flesh, don't let it rule over you.

lafile:
ah ah Fadenike, you didnt answer TV01's questions.

Yes 0! And I'm still waiting .

Hello All,

Maybe it would help if we approached it from a different perspective.

In one sense, the incarnation of God in the flesh had nothing to do with Mary. God fully knows why he chose Mary, but this much we do know, she fulfilled certain criteria.

One of those was her lineage back to David. Remember the promise God made to David? Jesus was severeally referred to as both "the seed of David" and "the son of David"

Seed;

John 7:42 - Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the seed of David and from the town of Bethlehem, where David was?"

Romans 1:3 - concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh,

2 Timothty 2:8 - Remember that Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, was raised from the dead according to my gospel,

Son;

Matthew 1:1 - The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham:

Mark 10:47 - And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"

Luke 18:38 - And he cried out, saying, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"

Would we then insist that David was the father of God? Or even more ludicrously the great, great, ---------- great, grandfather of God?

Mark 12:35 Then Jesus answered and said, while He taught in the temple, "How is it that the scribes say that the Christ is the Son of David? 36 For David himself said by the Holy Spirit: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool." 37 Therefore David himself calls Him 'Lord'; how is He then his Son?"

The only way to properly understand this is to see that in the flesh he was the son of David (likewise Mary) but in a higher divine sense He was not.

The bible is a unified whole, no matter how one looks at it, if one does so honestly, the truth will be consistently reinforced.

God bless

Hi Syrup,

Hope you are well. It's good to have you back.

syrup:
If the gift of tongues is a supernatural gift (as surely it is), then the interpretation of tongues is equally a 'supernatural' gift of the Spirit.

I pretty much agree with your post. But could I ask this. Tongues manifested both as known(human) and unknown languages. Would you say that "Interpretation" could therefore be of a known (but unspoken by the interpreter) lanuguage, or a unknown one?

God bless

Grouppoint:
Some Christains are poor because they have not done what it takes to get rich e.g. Hard work and Smart decision making.
This has nothing to do with their christianity.

This is true, but only applies to some.

Grouppoint:
Some other christians are poor because God is taking them through a phase of earthly poverty, like a wilderness, after which they wouild come into their promised land.

This is true, but only applies to some.

Digiman:
You have a point there, a lot of christians pray, fast, give tithes and offerings but still struggle financially, they believe and confess Gods promises daily yet it is not manifested in their lives on the other hand non believeres seem to be prospering around them. - Maybe its because they ask amiss

Applies to some, so this is partly true.

jagunlabi:
Prayers will never guarantee financial success in this life,take it or leave it.

This is true and so applies to some.

cute-ass:
I love you for taking those words out of my mouth, people are so fund of looking at the surface of quotations without understanding the biblical/deep meaning. Mind you, poor in your eyes/eyes of man is not poor in the eyes of God. Now we say that God's time is the best, and in God's own special time everybody will definitely get what is rightfully theirs.

Now i'm sure all you "bible readers" just like to read what suits you or maybe your own bible lost the pages that taught us that there's time for everything "time to weep and time to laugh" and all the rest, afterall even the "rich" go through hard times atimes.

This is true and so applies to some.

The simple truth is that not every Christian will be rich! Great wealth in itself should not even be a motivator or desire for Christians!

God bless (not necessarily with cash-money !)

Hi Analytical,

As ever, you reveal glaring technical gaps in your all-round game. At this level they will be cruelly exposed. Don’t worry, you will surely emerge as a better player .

First a discussion on to pay/not to pay warrants a thread in it’s own right. However, it ties in with the whole authority/structure thing so I’ll start to answer here.

1 Tim. 5
17 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.

18 For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”

I repost your scriptural references above. The reference to wages is direct from Luke 10:7. Here you can see that sustenance is to provided for those who devote their lives to “spreading the gospel”. As you can see they were not paid in cash, it was food and board. I have made this distinction before on this thread. Such itinerant ministers can and should be catered for, even if it means a wage. But in a local congregation, there is no requirement for paid ministers. If ministers receive money it is for the same reason that any member of the congregation receives money. They have a physical need that money can answer to. This statement reflects that. As they devote time to feeding the flock, if the flock can devote resources to them “as they have need”, they should do so. It can be anything, from baby-sitting to hosting them. It can be blessing them with money. But it does not speak to a church payroll. If you wish I can further enunciate from the scriptural narrative.

Analytical wrote;
Ted started well, but has ended badly. Demas (and some others) started well and ended badly too in scriptures.

My response;
You totally ignored the nuance of my questions. And how are you sure it’s the end for Ted?

Analytical wrote;
The church spread organically as people moved. It also spreads as missionaries (another synonym for apostles) take it to virgin fiels in Asia, Europe etc

As for Peter, he did not always remain in Jerusalem. His epistle was written from Rome (I don't infer as a Pope!)

As for James, this Apostle James is not the James of the 12 Apostles, mind you. This James was the brother of Jesus! So he too became apostle evidently.

Part of the work of apostles is missionary and church planting. We still have them today!

My response;
Agreed the church spreads and grows organically.

If we consider the work of apostles to be foundational and/or constructional, you may have some semblance of a point. But only if we understand that the foundational is no more. But even that semblance of a point is disputed (net court!), if one considers the following;

Acts 8:4 ~ Therefore those who were scattered went everywhere preaching the word.

Acts 11:9 ~ Now those who were scattered after the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to no one but the Jews only.

Wherever people went, they took the gospel. Church was started. Does that make them all apostles?

If the eunuch Philip witnessed to started church back in Ethiopia (which incidentally claims to have the oldest Coptic tradition), would that make either of them apostles?

Listen to me clearly. Am I saying God cannot move in the Apostolic or Prophetic (a la Isaiah et al)? No I am not. God is sovereign. He does as He wills. And I say Hallelujah to that. But the pattern we see in NTC is a devolution of sorts. Witnessed by the Spirit filled/led life, priesthood and anointing of every believer. There is no caste-system or multi-layered hierarchy.

Peter was not itinerant in the manner Paul was (also, he was sent primarily to the Jews, whilst Pauls remit was primarily to the Gentiles). He made some trips and was at times sent for (Lydda etc). That was no doubt to give Apostolic oversight to believers in a fledgling church without a canon to refer to. But he was based at Jerusalem. His family and work where there.

James was no more than an elder. Respected for his wisdom, true. Very mature and of sound counsel, certainly. But he was still only an elder.

A decent effort, but to my mind, your case is actually weakening.

I have a proposal for you. I would like us to illustrate our different propositions, or our view of the others stance, so we can progress the discussion by reviewing the practical outworking.

What do you say/think about this.

God bless

trini_girl:
so this is what it has come to eh? TV, I thought you were waiting for me to ride shot gun with u on this topic. na wa.
it is ok. you already have 4 players and it seems like you are doing ok on this set.

That's not to say I wouldn't appreciate the company and the support !

Grouppoint:
Would you say that people like Peter, Paul, James and John were not 'Sole Authority Pastors' in their respective fields/regions/churches?

That is exactly what I would say and I don't believe the Bible suggests otherwise. For starters, Peter & James were both at Jerusalem. So to suggests they were at once SAP's at the same time and place is contrary to your own thesis.

Grouppoint:
James was clearly regarded as the leader of the Jerusalem Church.

He was highly regarded certainly. That would be as a consequence of the maturity and wisdom he possesed. There was nothing clearly suggesting He was a SAP. That is nothing but supposition.

Grouppoint:
Pauline epistles rarely seemed like Paul sought the opinion of a fellow elder or deacon. Scripture shows that Paul it was who dished out the instructions to these other Bishops. Why?
The same cuts across when you read James, or John.

Please read Galatians chapter 2. Although Paul had a unique commission received directly from the Lord, he still conferred with the other Apostles. And withstood them (not commanded or deferred mind) when they erred.

Who was the leader of the Apostles?

Grouppoint:
Furthermore, the dark events which occurred in the history of the church: e.g. The spanish inquisition, could hardly be blamed on a 'sole authority papacy'. You obviously are aware of the influence that cardinals weild even today.
Hence whether there is a celebrity pastor up there or a group of celebrity elders, the focus should be on God rather than Man/Men.

Please don't confuse church history with Roman Catholic history. The bogus structure of RC and the power that went with it facilitated the evil that took place. Rev king is just a smaller scale occurence. In lots of churches with such set-ups & structure, there are similar things happening. Maybe not as blatant and in some ways more benign, but wrong none the less. Enforced tithing and false authority/submission precepts are basic examples.

Grouppoint:
Your serve,

Double fault. Try again  !

God bless

Dey is poor cos dey has not got any money innit? Cud be dey was mogged mugged !

mrpataki:
@ MOG TV01,

No scriptures to back your serve to me?

None required, I resorted to plain common sense .

mrpataki:
Yet another weak serve of yours TV01.
When the scriptures made note of the verse Making your calling and election sure, it was not talking about a selection sir!

I still insist if you aspire for the fruits of the spirit, you are entitled to be called a MOG.

Therefore, if all born again christians aspire for the fruits of the Spirit, they are qualified to be called MOG

Now again your weak serve

Ah, there you are.

Producing spiritual fruit is the call of all Christians. If all Christians are MOGS, then it cannot be applied to a certain elevated few. Thanks for making my point

Even when you play against yourself, you still take a beating .

God bless

Just default if you've had enough  ;D1

Double honour;
Goes to those “elders” who rule (lead by example, offer exemplary service) well and especially those who labour in the Word and doctrine. Quite simple really, eldership would be in addition to family and work commitments (no salaried workers). The extra commitment taken to study and share should be acknowledged (and not just with lipservice, but by othe means/resources at one's disposal). Further evidence that they are not recompensed monetarily for their efforts.

The Lord addresses;
The whole of the church. Elders, deacons, young old, male female. Or are you suggesting your “leader” caste have no need of this message/instruction? Funny given the way many of these “MOGS “succumb to all types of questionable (read sinful) practice.

And you miss the import of the 7 regions addressed. The message was to all churches through all time and in every place. Even the 7 who were sent messages should take heed of all.

Not everything in OT times is carried over into NT practice. Notable amongst these is temples, a mediatory priesthood (MOGgery), physical sacrifices, holy days, human kings (MOGgery). And on and on!

By their fruits? Okay, please answer this. After 3 years of unrepentant homosexual behaviour and indulgence in illicit drugs, was Ted Haggard ever a Christian? Was he a fallen one, or had he departed from the faith?

Again emphasise, if people did not subscribe to the SAP model it would have been much harder for Rev King to abuse his followers. Falsely spiritualising authority leads to a form of bondage, which people find it hard to be delivered from. Evidence the very recent saga at Victory church here in London.

There is structure in church. Overall authority is the Lords. This is devolved in a church setting to elders.

Church in a Virgin Land;
Again you miss the essence of church. Probably because you have confused it’s very nature. In the book of Acts, the church spread organically as believers were “scattered”. There was no set pattern. As people moved the church spread. A home-led, community-based church will spread through society. The Ethiopian eunuch, what would have happened to him on his return? The woman by the well, to whom did she first witness?

If mature believers happen on to virgin territory they witness to unbelievers, and teach/pastor any converts. They will use the pattern already laid out and as the Bible clearly describes T&T doing. The focus being on raising up suitably qualified men to function as elders/deacons in the local church. When that is done, they either remain and function as elders (Like Peter and the other apostles who remained in Jerusalem), return or move on.

Tithing;
Is not outlawed per se. But it is redundant as an applicable command to NTC. Your organisational approach sees a management structure and a payroll! That’s why your game lacks inventiveness and creativity  . A rigid org/hier approach. That is not NTC. Offerign is just that. Offered from the heart. There’s a thread for tithing already. I’ll meet you there if you wish. But be warned, it’s boxing and I’m warmed up, gloved up and ready to rumble  .

Peoples acceptance of Pauls is neither here nor there. The Bible testifies to his calling as a “foundational apostle”. Others of his type in this age would suggest omissions in scripture.

You have still failed to provide a biblical brief for the SAP or elder. How counter intuitive is it to say that only the most junior and the most hands-off roles are outlined, but the requirements and outline for those who run the day-to-day affairs (in your construct) were omitted?

When one draws together the instructions and outlines, the requirements and charges addressed in Acts, the pastoral epistles and other NT letters, one receives a unified whole for the elders mandate. Trying to force it to read hierarchy means you have more than the indicated functions and they all (except deacons) lacks fullness. The missing parts are then forcefully imputed by those who adopt this approach, and  exactly as they please. A bishop is an overseer, elders oversee. A pastor is a shepherd, elders shepherd.

I can see that fatigue is setting in and the game is absolutely beyond your reach.

A plucky effort, but nobody rerally expects much from lower ranking players  . Talking of which, where is the unseeded mrpataki?

God bless

Ivan

Analytical:
I have used the example of Christ and also the focus of His messages to the 7 churches in Asia directed to the minister/pastor in charge of each church and not to the elders, as TV01 would have us accept.

The Lord sent messages to 7 individual churches by His angel/messenger. The messages were sent to the whole body. Not to digress, those letters were for all the believers. Your relentless insistence that it was sent via a SAP is nothing more than a wilful implication. I never said or implied it was sent via the elders. It was equally addressed to them along with all believers.

While I'm heres, let me nail another plank.

Philippians 1:1 ~ Paul and Timothy, bondservants of Jesus Christ, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:

If indeed, there is an overseeing/presiding bishop for each region and bishop =/= elder, why does Paul adress the Bishops in plural? Surely there would be only one OB in Philippi? Like in Ephesus & Crete (as you claim)? Does'nt it seem odd? Additionally, why would he address the bishops & deacons, and not the SAP(S) and elders?

^{Analytical working tirelessly but fruitlessly to return these thunderous but pin-point returns from TV01. It's only a matter of time now  !}

God bless

Rod

Grouppoint:
One would suppose that the present day church structure, which mirrors the vatican structure in some respects is born out of imitation of the example set forth by Christ himself.

Would one? WHat is wrong with the clear leading of scripture? The Lord specified the church blueprint through His Apostles (Cornerstone & foundation). He never left an example of a "church". Furthermore, I don't think He intended His actions to be worked into the church structure, but rather into individual walks.

The Vatican structure and the whole Pope thing is not attested too by scripture. If by God's grace we progress the tournament, we shall touch on the outworking of structural doctrine on day to day Christian life.

Grouppoint:
-Christ is the head of the body. The 'sole authority pastor' if you may.
-He had Peter, James and John as the 'elders, pastors or deacons'
-Then He had the 12, who may be seen as ministers.
-He also had the 70 and 120, who can be seen as evangelists.
-Finally the 5000 may be seen as the congregation, who need to be fed physically and spiritually.

I don't deny anyone the right to interprete things as they will. I only ask that if they profess Christianity, that they show it in relation to the scripture. Point in question, apart from your first point here, I see none of what you have postulated. It also demonstrates how easy it is to "force-fit" anything and claim biblical validity.

Grouppoint:
So without going into what Paul, Peter and James interpreted or directed a certain church, one may look unto the examples left by Christ himself.

One may, but do all things according to the pattern shown (Hebrews 8:5)

Grouppoint:
Your serve.

Actually, I think it's your second serve. The weakness off your first meant it failed to clear the net !

lafile:
I am really enjoying the atmosphere in which this debate is being conducted. wish all debates on nairaland could go like this. Thumbs up to TV01 and Analytical (also Mrpataki and 4get_me). And the tennis baseline of the debate keeps everything calm (after all its just a game). Love u guys.

I love God, I love His Word. I could do this all day. The tennis metaphor is apt, as it really is like play (fun) to me. Thanks all for playing in a gracious spirit. Otherwise I'm taking my ball and going home  !

God bless

Mac

Analytical,

As ever, you have no recourse to scripture, unsurprising really as you are merely regurgitating wholesale notions that cannot be found in it.

If my position is wrong, at least I have carefully referenced it by indicating supporting scripture. If you would have me adjust my position to be in line or more inclined towards yours, I would expect you to do the same.

You keep skipping the very simple questions posed and try to sweep away the scriptural facts under an avalanche of rhetoric. Please answer the question/s as posed.

I note your latest attempt to overlay wholesale OT precepts into NTC.
It’s an old ploy and it won’t work. The NT is both complete, and replete with instruction and examples of the church’ proper functioning structure and offices.

There was no celebrity circuit in the early church. Any attempt to exalt them was sternly resisted by the apostles. Peters calling himself a “fellow elder” demonstrates the leveling that true fellowship in Christ engenders.

To compare Rev King to Simon is just wrong. And to further say that He was never a Christian is not your call. Many so called Christian leaders fall. Truth is, maybe some of them were never Christians, but it is equally likely that some fell into error and others departed from the faith, but not the church.

Pride is not the preserve of the novice. Anyone can succumb to it and being venerated by your fellow man will only increase the likelihood of it happening. Even Paul had a thorn to keep him humble.

Trying to imply that the completed canon obviates the need for plurality of elders is wrong.  First it’s that very canon that prescribes such. Second, the exaltation of men means some introduce extra-biblical precepts, which are swallowed wholesale by followers who don’t look into the bible in the way they should. Why? Because their gaze is on the MOG. A vicious circle  .

I have nothing against organization. The church is indeed organized, but along simple lines. And please don’t try and cloud matters by resorting to semantics. Yes, people are sent out in this day and age, to spread the gospel and start church, but that does not make them Apostles in a foundational sense.

You keep insisting on offices & positions that scripture does not attest to and then resort to the same scripture to validate your error. It simply cannot work. I have shown that Bishop = Elder, kindly show otherwise. I have demonstrated that Elder = Pastor/al, please show differently.

I have stressed that doctrine & structure go hand in hand. Faults in one often lead to error in the other. The very structure of many of today’s churches lead to this veneration of men (and the cursed “trust in flesh”) which the correct structuring of church would avert.

Martin Luther had truth revealed to him regards faith/works. The truth came because he sought it. I sought God, and something I saw clearly was that “tithing” was not for NT Christians. I share this with anyone that cares to listen or wants to hear. It doesn’t make me an Apostle in the mould of Paul or Peter. It just makes me a believer sharing his walk. What ML received was not a new precept it was something that had previously been twisted or obscured.

Not everyone needed to know it and not everyone has accepted it. Likewise tithing, it was never a tradition in some denominations, so what to me was revelation was already knowledge to them. And even now, many who practice it refuse to abandon it on hearing the truth. And just like the faith/works understanding, many look to MOG’s for confirmation instead of to the Word.

You have used all the ploys in the book. Feigning injury, time-wasting, excessive toilet breaks and even praying for rain interruptions. It will avail you nothing.

I am more than happy to continue this match, but on a point by point basis. This will prevent you hiding under a torrent of words and enable us to discuss this in detail.

I have asked you a question, please respond to that directly. Of course I am also willing to field any specific posers you may have

You do realise that whatever the duration of this match your crushing defeat is inevitable? 

God bless

Bjorn

mrpataki:
I Tim. 6:11 >> But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.

Taking a closer look at the scripture goes to show what we as Christians also Men of God are to follow after. It is not a title, nor an office, calling, but what every True Born Again Christian should aspire to attain.

A MOG is expected to follow after the fruit of the Spirit. So if I aspire after the fruits of the Spirit, and I am called a MOG, I have no problem with.

You have (probably unwittingly) shown just how much a nonsense the usage of the term "man of God" has become in much of contemporary Christianity.

The term MOG is used to signify something (usually a higher/calling/station/authority/anointing). It has a specific application. Not everyone is lauded as a MOG.

You have quite clearly pointed out that a MOG is supposed to aspire to the fruit of the Holy Spirit. But sir, that is the remit of every believer, so inserting a distinction by calling a select number MOG's cannot be biblical, as those not aspiring to the fruit hardly qualify as Christinas and if all are then everyone is a MOG. QED

Go back to your seat in the stands as I polish off your buddy Analytical

God bless

4 Play:
It is one of the things preventing our society from disintegrating

Enter religious delusion. Religion is one of the most malevolent phenomena in Nigeria right now. Along with it's brother, politics it proves something that men have known for centuries. Religion and politics are the source of most of the worlds problems.

Spiritual codswallop !

"Must My Pastor Rake Me To Fall In The Name Of Deliverance"?

No! but,
1. They like to put on a show and encourage audience participation.
2. Those at the show somehow feel they are getting value for money.
3. It makes for good spectacle/television/testimony/gist.

Listen carefully;
1. God never assigns a Pastor to anyone. Why?
2. In a real scriptural/technical sense, there is no such thing!


Beware of Wolves in Sheeps clothing!!!!

God bless

Genial:
What religion are these assertions from Nella? Certainly not christian.

Yes 0! Somebody please query all these posts. This thread is becoming more and more scatalogical

More ad-libbing than at a soul-singers convention !

Analytical, your latest return is no more factual or scripturally based than your previous ones. You are in serious jeopardy of defaulting  .

Prior to responding to the points you have raised, may I clearly state that you have in no way answered the simple question I put to you in my previous post. If it’s there in scripture, please show it.

Analytical wrote;
The crux of my position is not the 'pastor' title/office.  Rather, it is my disagreement with the plurality and parallel nature in which your model functions that makes everybody equal and in charge and doesn't make them accountable to any.  I cannot find any such type or pattern in the scriptures, anywhere.

My response;
Plurality is exactly what the Bible prescribes. Again, I challenge you to show from the scriptural narrative anywhere, time or place that elders are addressed or referenced individually (in a functional or operational sense).

One clear reason for this is abundantly clear when casting a glance over today’s religious landscape. The sleazy celebrity circuit & personality cults that predominate arise largely due to the focus on man in a hierarchical paradigm.

Plurality of Elders stops the focus resting on one person and also acts as a check against error or abuse. If a single person with sole authority falls into error/heresy, the whole flock are likely to follow. Debacles like the Rev. King Saga arise due to that very reason.

Analytical said;
I have made my position as plain as I could.  Call him whatever you want, there is a bishop/overseer/superintendent/minister-in-charge/Senior officer/pastor in a church ably assisted by elders/leaders/ministers and supported by deacons for the purpose of administering the flock over which the Lord has made them leaders.

My response;
Sir, your position could not be clearer. Unfortunately, your efforts to provide a scriptural foundation for it haven’t really gotten of the ground.

Analytical said;
The qualifications/criteria for the office is well spelt out and well discussed already in Timothy and Titus and in your post #53 above.  The same office the Lord addressed in His messages to the churches.

My response;
I can’t really argue with a nod to my input, but that in no way buttresses your premise, which is simply wrong. The office is for bishop/elder/presbyter/overseer etc, which are one and the same as I have severally explained by recourse to the scripture.

Who exactly did the Lord address? Was it the SAP or the OB? (You also wrong foot yourself here if you subscribe to the false “pastors are called elders are chosen” notion)

Analytical wrote;
The robustness and number required on the structure varies depending on the size and maturity of the church.  In a baby church, the pastor/teacher is the elder and deacon.  As the church grows in size and maturity and spreads, it calls for more structure to be put in place to carry and share the burden.  Hence the emergence of the deacons and more elders, to be put in place by the pastor (now bishop) overseeing the church.

My response;
Clear evidence of an organisational and hierarchical approach. Church in it’s primitive form is home-led community based. It just keeps replicating, not growing endlessly in size. Due to said approach, you mistake size/numbers for maturity. A typically wrong emphasis in much of todays badly structured church. The Bible gives no leave or makes any provision for an endlessly growing organisation. That is an organisational imperative. Hence Pope’s, Primates. Superintendants, Metropolitans GO’s and the like.

Analytical wrote;
This leads me to the unfinished business of apostles and others and how they fit in the NT church.

My response;
The business of Apostles is finished!
Ephesians 2:20 ~ having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone,

Analytical wrote;
Let me state briefly how it fits in in the contemporary.  It is still the same way it was in the early church.  The apostles and prophets lay the foundation.  They are what I refer to as the earth-moving equipment (or the bulldozers) in preparing a virgin land or a site for construction.  The evangelists are the harvesters or the rakers that proclaim the good news and bring in the souls.  The Pastors stay with the souls to feed them and nurture them to maturity like a good shepherd does.  The teachers break down the word and brings it down to the level of each member of the flock, baby to adult.  Some times pastoral and teaching grace combine in the same person.

My response;
The foundation is laid already. We are merely building on it. Your use of the word “construction” is both apt & ironic. As that is exactly what you are presenting here. A man-made construct with no foundation (pun intended  ) in scripture!

1 Corinthians 3:11 ~ For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Please see verses 10 & 12 also.

You omitted the OB (or “Presiding Bishop” as some religionists refer to it nowadays ).
Every believer proclaims the good news, and even those specifically gifted do not have to minister to large groups using costly (and relatively unproductive) crusade/program formats.

Elders as I have detailed severally shepherd (pastor) the flock. The pastoral is a function of eldership. The pastoral and teaching grace is often combined in the elder.

Analytical wrote;
The NT prohets are not to be confused with the OT prohets of old that primarily does foretelling and are sometimes called seer.  The NT prophets exhorts.  Each office have their peculiar giftings and unctions that make their functions effective as the Holy Spirit enables them.

My response;
Your first point here has already been stated. As for “NT Prophets exhort”, you are lunging at thin air here. Two quick passing shots as your hope of retrieving this match slowly slips away;

Hebrews 3:13 ~ but exhort one another daily, while it is called "Today," lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.

1Peter 5:1 ~ The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed:

We are all called to exhort. Exhortation, edification and comfort are the whole basis of Christian fellowship. The Hoy Spirit gifts and enables all believers “severally as He wills”.

Analytical wrote;
The 1st category apostles- the original 12 apostles that were chosen by Jesus.  These have all died and are no more.  You cannot add to their number again.

The 2nd category apostles- like Paul, Barnabas, Apollos etc that are mostly itinerant. These plant churches and establish structures and raise the leadership.  We can also add Timothy, Titus to these as examples.

The 3rd category apostles- are those that establish the truth or re-establish a lost/forgotten truth of the word or sent for a particular mission, to a specific people
To the 2nd and 3rd categories, the Holy Spirit still gives men even in our contemporary days. To take the gospel to virgin lands, plant the churches and establish them, apostles are required.  They may not wear the tag, but they can still be identified.


or sphere of operation.  These are seen in their operation like Paul was the Apostle to the Gentles, John Apostle of Love etc.

My response;
You have retreated into making it up as you go along? One post it’s in, the next it’s out? I repeatedly stressed the Apostolic nature of T&T work earlier. You insisted they were OB’s. You are now backtracking and calling them Apostles?

Your 1st & 2nd Categorisations are needless. Paul was called & commissioned by the Lord. T&T were not Apostles per se, but the work they undertook was apostolic in nature. Again with your 3rd category you are ad-libbing like Jacko! Your are on dangerous ground when you somehow imply that some of the truth has not been established? No truth is lost or forgotten, just warped or ignored by deceivers. But the truth cannot be hid.

Pray give me an example of these latter-day apostles. As the apostolic carries with it a foundational authority, which truth or foundational precept has been revealed to us in this age that was not fully revealed to the early church? An apostolic mandate has to be writ large as the body has to accept apostles utterances as foundational. So an apostle cannot be incognito. Please think about these things sir.

I could go on and on. Even the religious colloquialisms you use betray your received tradition. Churches are not planted. Church is where believers gather/are. We don’t open branches. In your rush to codify you fail to see that even, gifts, functions, commissions and office could all be temporary and changing as the need arises.

I’m not really being exercised here. On second thoughts, don’t even think about getting into the ring with me  !

God bless

Pete

donnie:
The number of angels assigned to you depends on the responsibility you have in God's kingdom.

So how many do you personally have? (WOW! Think of how many pastor Chris must have!!!)

donnie:
While others have only the guardian angel sent with them when they came into this world, some others who are doing great exploits in God's kingdom have battalions folllowing them around to ensure that the work of God is accomplished without delay or hinderance.

Battalions ke? You must be tripping over them

donnie:
Angels differ in strength and the strength or greatness of the angels you have depend on your assignment in the kingdom. While some have dangerous worriors such as Micheal following them to ensure that the devils kingdom is plundered and souls are set free, heald and delivered, some just have two:goodness and mercy following them around.

Please advise angel ratios per assignment. I want to plan my career trajectory in the KOG to ensure I retain the maximum number. And I don't want any non-dangerous or weak angels .

So who is angel Michael assigned to at the moment? Presumably some naija MOG as they are undoubtedly doing the most exploitation, I mean exploits

donnie:
They also do what you order them to.

How? By remote control? Text?? Or does one just speak into the air?


Please, is this generally accepted doctrine? It's just that I noticed that nobody had anything to say about this?

Which Bible exactly

Lord have mercy!

I'm back. New balls please  !

Analytical;
The crux of your position is the “pastor” title/office. You have (and quite creatively I admit), built your whole thesis on this point. However, you did so without actually showing it as extant in or mandated by the scriptures. I have repeatedly stressed that it is simply not to be found. Further, I have shown how it is wrapped up within the Eldership function, which is (and I have) extensively detailed.

So I’m serving with this, and please reply to this directly. No digressional tactics or   ploys to obfuscate.

~ Kindly show directly from scripture the Sole Authority Pastor office/role, as distinct from that of elder and overseeing bishop (if you can, please detail that of the OB as well as the SAP). Not by inference or by implication. After all, if the junior and less weighty role of deacon is clearly outline (not inferred or implied), one would reasonably expect that of the senior roles to be also. ~

4get_me;
Here is your opportunity to make a cogent argument, and one that’s thread-relevant. I’m sure you fully realise that no one would start a thread just to prove that the term “man of God” is not in the bible?

However, since you are grasping firmly to it having some sort of tangible form and application, please articulate in your own words ~ How this MOG concept works out in practical NTC. Is it an office/title/rank/position/ministry/calling? How does one worthy of or who aspires to be a MOG qualify? How do MOGS differ from non-MOGS? Or those who are not deemed qualified or worthy of MOGship ~  A short thesis with pertinent scriptural back-up would be greatly appreciated and edifying to all. Thanks.

Mrpataki;
How about a few cartwheels and back-flips during the toilet break  !!!

I sense an ace (actually, 3 aces)  !

God bless

Boris

Analytical:
This tournament is about ending. . .

Not so fast. Looks like a hard 5-setter (and in the absence of an impartial umpire you have introduced tag-teaming ). No probs, I worked hard in the off-season to build up my stamina. I going to revert to a grinding point by point game .

mrpataki:
@ Analytical,
I will watch from the sidelines for now, then chip in my own service oce in a while!

Yes I am game with you.

Dude, your cheeleading efforts will not affect the outcome of this match !

I'll be right back after this time out!

God bless

Roger

Analytical:
This game is surely getting too hot for you to handle now, hence your desire to end it by all means by taking over the job of the umpire. . .

I knew you were never going to return that last drop shot.  I told you I'm an all-court action player.  It surely is a winner. . .

Revelations 2 vs 1,8,12,18 and 3 vs 1, 7 & 14:

'To the angel of the church in . . .

Here is the exegesis of this-I sure like analysis!

The Lord Jesus Christ was sending a messages to the 7 churches in Asia at this time.  John, the last of the original 12 apostles was banished to the island of Patmos.  Jesus was glorified at this time, so He was not a human being, but Spirit.  He, as such, had no need to send John, a human being, to deliver a message to a spirit.  That will be absurd!  Jesus could have delivered the messages to the angels himself since they are always at his beck and call in the spirit realm.

The angels in these verses are not spirit beings!  Also, the messages were for the churches and were to be written down.  They are certainly messages meant for human beings and not spirit beings.

Secondly, the word 'angel' in the 7 instances was always in singular meaning they are messages for a single person in each instance.  This is coming from Jesus Christ himself!  There goes you plural and parallel model of authority!

Checking the Greek word translated 'angel', you find 'aggelos'.  What does it mean?  From Strong Greek dictionary:

aggelos-  a messenger; especially an angel; by implication, a pastor -- angel, messenger.

The Chief Shepherd and Bishop Himself was giving messages to the churches through His last of the 12 he commisioned and He addressed them to the pastor and not the elders of each church.  The pastor is the messenger (that gives messages) to the church.  You may also interprete it as the 'minister' or shepherd of the church.  What does this tell you of authority and hierarchy?  The revelation was the last book (in choronological order) and the visions happened when the church was well established and not just embryonic.

I said earlier that Jesus believes in hierarchy and order.  Tell me where in the OT or NT, human or spirit realm, where there is no hierarchy.  In the pattern  in OT there is structure and hierarchy,  even in heaven there is hierarchy, among angels you have arch-angels.  Why would the church of the Living God not have structure and hierarchy?  The end-time army of Joel (talking prophetically about the church) is one that doesn't break its ranks!!

What it then means is that operating according to your model, while not a sin, simply robs you of the fulness of the blessings of building according to the pattern, and that of spiritual parental oversight and mentorship that makes for guidance and maturity!

I will respond to the last part of apostles tomorrow.  I gotta rush somewhere.

Meanwhile it's Game, Set & Match (for Analytical) and it will be Tournament tomorrow  !!

Blessings!

The inference that Aggelos (Angelos) => Pastor is one strongs does not make. That is your own forceful interpretation of it (and slightly fraudulent is the manner you attempted to ascribe it to Strongs  ). I will show you why it is tenuous at best. Strong denotes as follows;

"a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God"

The word is used numerous times in scripture. Some instances include John the Baptist (Luke 7:27), the messenger of Satan (2 Cor 12:7), and even Satan himself (2 Cor 11;14). Pertinently, Paul also uses it in Galatians 1:8 to specifically refer to an angel from heaven bringing a message. And it means just that!

I will not even take you to task on your "Jesus as Spirit". The Bible clearly portrays The Lord as having a glorified body. You have used lots of verbal sleights, erroneous inferences and tenuous connections in an attempt to make your point, but you cannot clearly trace any of your claims from scripture alone, as I have gone to great lengths to do severally.

The old trick of quoting a verse (usually out of context) and then going on to weave a whole (read totally wrong) dissertation around it is favoured by many in an attempt to justify their back to front (set-up to scripture instead of vice-versa) approach.

In as much as the messages where meant for the church, it means just that, all the church. You also reveal your belief that God speaks through mediators other than The Lord, Who as scripture shows speaks directly to His sheep. Presumably it's the same MOG who fed you this bunkum that told you that?

It speaks nothing of hierarchy, you just insist on implying it does. Please enunciate the hierarchy you are so fond of refering to? How many levels? What is the geographical area? How about numbers? Non of this works in practice. From the Pope down to the Catholic faithful, there are something like 14 different levels! Is that scripturally mandated? How exact is it?

Even the reference to The Lord as the Chief Shepherd & Bishop makes a nonsense of your stance. That is one person (office), clearly carrying out the different functions. 

Your "Spiritual Parent Oversight" remark further betrays how your error is compounded. There is no such precept validated by the scripture! Please show it? Humans do not cover humans. That's flesh covering flesh. Nor do they give "spiritual birth" to other believers. Your fixation with a fleshly hierarchy leads you to place men between believers and God and usurp the roles of The Lord & The Holy Spirit. Mentorship & Leadership comes from Elders. The word rule is better understood as "lead by example". As the Lord (& Peter) Himself said, believers are not to rule/lord it over each other.

Your shot variety and selection are both poor, and your on-court movement limited 

Join 4get_me on the challenger circuit   .

God bless

First to answer your question;
Who were being addressed in the message of Jesus Christ to the seven churches of Asia in Revelations 2 vs 1,8,12,18 and 3 vs 1, 7 & 14:

'To the angel of the church in . . .

The angel or messenger of the church. Please don't attempt that old ploy of translating the word angel/messenger into pastor. It doesn't wash, neither is it corroborated by any other passage of scripture. I have shown variously that the SAP role is nowhere to be found or substantiated in scripture. Not even the shoddiest scholarship can attempt to infer what is simply not there!

A poorly executed drop shot, merely enabling me to reply with a clean winner of my own .


All references from the NKJV.

There is only 1 reference to pastor in the NT (more later). There are 2 pertinent references to the overseer in the NT, both in conjunction with and inseparable from eldership. There are 4 for Bishop 3 of them pertaining to the qualities requisite for the position (which is undeniably synonymous with eldership) and one (Phil 1:1), which is used in exactly this synonymous way. There are over 20 references to elders. To a large degree church-based activity and dynamic turn on this pivotal role.

The other 3 references to Bishops are all in the pastoral epistles as follows;

1 Timothy 3:1 ~ This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop,* he desires a good work.

1 Timothy 3:2 ~ A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behaviour, hospitable, able to teach;

Titus 1:7 ~ For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money

If as you have claimed, Timothy & Titus were “Overseeing” Bishops, why would they be asked to appoint other OB’s? It makes no sense unless you see that bishop = elder. Even if they were setting up a hierarchical church, why would they replicate their roles, which you have claimed to be the singular head of the hierarchy? Surely you must see that your inferences are all flawed in this regards?

Likewise, the overseer is not distinct and senior to the elder, they are synonymous. Note the following two relevant instances where it occurs;

1 Peter 5:1 The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed: 2 Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; 3 nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock;

Acts 20:17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of the church. 28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

These passages clearly show that both shepherding & overseeing are indubitably eldership functions. Claiming that all offices/functions are first of all elders and then different levels and offices is simply not borne out by the scriptural narrative.

The word “pastor” is used just the once. Nowhere is a mandate or remit outlined for this role. Nowhere is the role shown as having sole authority over a church, or reporting into an overseeing bishop. The word best translates shepherd as you yourself pointed out. The shepherding (pastoral) function is carried out by elders as is the teaching role. As I have shown clearly from scripture.

Ephesians 4:11 ~ And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,

Here is a verse quoted variously to validate an organisational hierarchical approach to church.

Apostles under divine inspiration helped found the church after the OT prophets had heralded the coming of the Founder and Chief Cornerstone.

The church having been founded and established has no more need of Apostles. The Lord having come and left has fulfilled all the preceding prophetic utterance. Goodbye OT style Prophet.

As ever, if as you clain the roles of Apostle & Prophet still exist in the original types, please outline the following;
1. How they fit into the NTC and work in align with other “leadership” positions.
2. Exactly what they do

The church now only requires evangelists to propagate the gospel and pastors & teachers to help it to mature from within. That simple.

Closed with an ace. Game, set & match methinks !

Analytical, do you like boxing ?

God bless

End game coming up  !

Analytical wrote;
For the umpteenth time, I repeat the elders refer to the group of leaders in the church, and not an office.  Anyone called to a leadership position based on the criteria set in Timothy and Titus qualifies as elder.

My response;
And for the umpteenth time, please outline your scriptural understanding of what these different leadership positions are and how they align to operate as “leadership”

Analytical wrote;
This group will include the heads of the various units/departments/groups depending on the usage, and those ministers in the speaking ministries (preaching and teaching) like the pastors, teachers and evangelists within the church.  Note that it's not all with pastoral gifts that are in charge of a church.  These all consititute the elders of the church, with the overseer in charge.  This is why the scriptures in speaking about elders quickly followed with the particular office of the bishop who oversees the work.

My response;
As ever you are institutionalising church. Units? for what? departments? what for? It is not an organization. The error stems in part from a failure to properly understand exactly what church is and what it is for. Believers come together for two main reasons (1) For mutual impartation/edification leading to growth and maturity (2) body welfare. It’s why just the two offices Elder (Bishop) or deacon are required.

You continually insist that elders in turn are under a bishop. There is nothing in the Bible to suggest this. Again, and as any concordance will show, pastor/bishop/presbyter/shepherd/overseer etc are all facets of eldership. In all his travels, Paul always addressed Elders (as did Peter), as they were charged with leading the flock. Further, no one can show from scripture a mandate for SAP the way it is manifest in many churches today. That's an invite for you to do so by the way.

Analytical wrote;
So how do you force something that has been there all the while or doesn't the simplistic reading of the two books of Timothy and Titus even point to the fact that these were individuals having a higher authority to rebuke, teach, exhort, ordain, set things in order, oversee, appoint, denounce, organise etc?

Why do you think the books were not addressed to the elders in Ephesus and Crete if everybody was in charge?

My response;
The above quote and ensuing question are both misguided and disingenuous. At Ephesus, Paul did address the elders, repeatedly. At Crete, there were no elders. Indeed the church was embryonic, and what Titus was commissioned to do, was strengthen and establish it by raising up mature believers and men qualified for eldership. In their apostolic capacity, Timothy & Titus would have had to have been jacks of all trade until such time as the church matured.

Analytical wrote;
How do you then honour them?  What then have these elders, in your definition, been doing that to study and share the word is now additional burden on them?  What are their functions apart from wearing the tag?

My response;
As we have both stated, not all elders share the Word. The bible simply states that those that do (and those that lead well), should be given double honour. The role of elder is not a paid position. So in addition to family and career/business responsibilities, they have the additional burden of eldership. And as such should be honoured. 

Analytical wrote;
From the insitutions ordained by God Himself (home, government and the church), which one of these have the pattern where everyone is in charge and no one is the head?  Certainly not the home, for the husband is the head, and not the government where there are the kings and thos eplaced in authority.  Why then the church having a parallel model where no one is responsible and accountable but all?

My response;
The Head of the Church is The Lord. All are personally accountable to "Him to whom we must render account". In the body, some have more responsibility.

I will post some references to eldership and ask that you do likewise for sole authority pastors or overseeing bishops.

Acts 14:23 ~ So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.

Elders clearly appointed to oversee churches.

Acts 15:6 ~ Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter.

No sight or sound of OB or SAP luminaries?

Acts 15:22 ~ Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren. 23 ~ They wrote this letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings.

Still no OB or SAP??

Acts 20:17 ~ From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of the church. 18 ~ On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.

Wey them? Hmmm, Paul appears to be addressing elders and at Ephesus!!!

Philippians 1:1 ~ Paul and Timothy, bondservants of Jesus Christ, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:

Wait a minute, here they are at last! Bishops. Hold on, where are the elders? Can they have been excluded for some reason? Or addressed elsewhere? No dude, the terms elder & bishop are simply synonymous. They just happen to be different renderings of the same role. QED

1 Timothy 5:17 ~ Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.

Surely it’s the Pastor/SAP who labours in doctrine?

Titus 1:5 ~ For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you.

Things lacking in Crete would suggest an as yet mature church that needed building up. Which task Titus was charged with! Apostolic not SAP or OB!

James 5:14 ~ Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.

One would have thought the SAP or OB would be called into action here.

Truth is there are no such offices. Nowhere found, outlined or mandated in scripture. Please feel free to apply such paradigms to your own construct if you wish, but please don’t misrepresent them as scripturally inferred.

I'll  end the final game to love and with a flourish  .

God bless

Grouppoint, what are you playing at ? That piece of overly pious input will effectively kill this thread! Just watch. What were you thinking

We are all used to the cut and thrust of debate and it never gets so personal as to derail the discussion! Even people that keep it resolutely impersonal when posting rarely complain and for the most part everyone self-moderates. I don’t hear anybody whining! This kind of post is a big dampener.

Analytical pulled that one on me in the Christians & Politics thread and I’m still recovering. If you are so set on being “Class Monitor” I suggest you mosey on over to the “Pastor Chris Oyaks” thread, where lysaa and shahan are set on mauling each other. But even there you can see they are calming things down, and with no outside intervention.

If people want to call a spade a spade, let them. Don’t insist they call it a hand-held garden implement. Leave off dude!

trini_girl:
you're right. I got carried away, I apologize.

Trini what’s with you? Don’t fake. Odds are that a dozen posts or two days later (whichever comes first), you’ll be lambasting someone who has caught your ire !

mrpataki:
I most humbly apologise, if my post has been deprived of any reasonable points. As well I apologise for not maintaining any decorum of sanity in addressing goodguy

Mrpataki, you pretender you. Your particular brand of input adds something (I hesitate to say what exactly ), to the mix. A constrained mrpataki wouldn’t be the same! I sometimes read your posts and wonder (don’t ask). Anyway sha, like trini, you’ll soon revert back to type. No shaking.

I’m off to the Church Structure thread to summarily deal with Analytical and at the same time take a cursory swipe at that time waster called 4get_me.

davidylan:
We are trying to expose "holy scam" by forming "spiritual EFCC" in order to catch "spiritual Atikus" masquerading as pastors.

Ah  ! I hope you realise what you are up against? Perpertrators of "holy scam" will try and confound "spiritual EFCC" by claiming "spiritual constitutional immunity" aka "Touch not my anointed". Thereby bypassing "spiritual due-process" and the "ecclessiastical rule of law". Works every time!

I'm cracking up. This thread is 2nd only to "Why must my Pastor rake me to fall in the name of deliverance" for overall laugh value  !

Ey yah!