This came to me today. I found it quite interesting, and Biblical BTW.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< From: "Buff Scott, Jr."

QUESTION FOR MONDAY Buff Scott, Jr., TheReformer

Q. "How do you feel about the practice of 'ordaining someone into the Christian ministry?' "---Gene.

A. Quite often, in different Christian publications, I notice that some young man has been "ordained into the Christian ministry." The usual posture places him upon his knees, head bowed, and a number of men surrounding him with their hands placed upon his head and shoulders. Words are spoken, prayers uttered, and the conclusion is that he is, at that moment, a Christian minister.

I see this practice as being weird in that it doesn't have heaven's blessings. Let me explain. When a man enters Messiah Jesus, he enters the ministry. When he accepts Jesus as his Lord and Savior, he becomes a minister. Every committed believer is in the ministry, including women. Since the same Greek word for "minister" translates "servant" as well, we agree that all believers are servants. In the same vein, all believers are ministers.

Then what happens when a Christian young man is "ordained into the Christian ministry?" He is ordained to function in a role the Holy Spirit knows nothing about. To express it in different terms, he is ordained into the professional clergy system. His role, whether he realizes it or not, is to interfere with and disrupt the priesthood of all believers. Both Peter and John affirm that all believers are priests (1 Peter 2:5 & Rev. 1:6). When one is elevated to function as "the minister," "the preacher," or "the pastor," he is, in essence, elevated to "high priest." That collides with the truth that we have only one High Priest, Jesus, and He reigns from heaven (Heb. 2:17).

"Preacher," "minister," "brother," and "teacher" are not to be used to elevate one believer above other believers. We all are brothers, teachers, believers, and ministers---although some of us are specially gifted in teaching and ministering. We discriminate just as much when we speak of "the minister" as we do when we speak of "the priest" or "the saint." If one is biblical, all are biblical. Either we all are ministers, preachers, priests, teachers, and saints or none of us are!

The exalted pulpiteer, however, lays exclusive claim to being "the minister," "the pastor," "the preacher"---in most cases. Everything revolves around him. He's the star, the actor, the performer, the speaker, and the nucleus or embodiment of the whole mechanism. Without him, everything would have to be reshuffled and repaired. This is how far we have drifted---almost beyond recovery. To state it as clearly as possible, the early believers knew nothing of pulpiteers. This system developed centuries later. It has fastened itself upon us to the point that we dare not oppose it for fear of reprisal. In truth, we have returned to the "fleshpots of Egypt."

We're no longer concerned about God's arrangement. We have surrendered to the "powers that be" in the form of clerical taskmasters. Instead of being slaves of Jesus only, we have become slaves of clerical taskmasters. Instead of being aligned only with King Jesus, we have, like old Israel, asked for earthly kings to rule over us. God told old Israel they would regret their choice. They did. In time, we'll regret our choice.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

-- Anonymous, February 14, 2000

Answers

Nice post Sam.

Thanks for the teaching.

-- Anonymous, February 15, 2000

Nelta,

Ordaining one for the ministry is certainly a Biblical idea. What else was Paul referring to when he said to Timothy..."Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through a prophetic message when the body of elders laid their hands on you." (1 Timothy 4:14)

Of course...all Christians are ministers. But there is also a usage of the term diakonos in the NT that is not applicable to "all" Christians. It is a term that has narrow and broad meaning. Just as apostle (sent out one) and elder (shepherd, elderly person).

Does this mean that one is "elevated" because he has a specific ministry calling? Nope, unless your jealous. What about this? Is someone who is "the evangelist" elevated as the article would imply that anyone with a title designation would be. And don't misinterpret me...I am not advocating titles (Reverend, Father) in this sense. I am saying that there are some titles that are appropriate Biblical designations and that does not mean one is "elevated" so much as it does that we are correct Biblically.

Or should we re-examine Ephesians 4:11 to say that Paul (who according to you gets it wrong on the elder's role, the woman's role) was advocating a Christian caste system with the list of "titles that clearly elevated".

Or do we apply common sense to the issue? I opt for the latter.

-- Anonymous, February 14, 2000

<< Ordaining one for the ministry is certainly a Biblical idea. What else was Paul referring to when he said to Timothy..."Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through a prophetic message when the body of elders laid their hands on you." (1 Timothy 4:14) >>

Mike, we have been over all this before but here goes again. Timothy had special gifts. The *elders* were made thus by the H.S. We don't have any Timothy's today.

<>

Some want to pick and choose from this list. BTW These were not titles...but descriptions. I think we would all admit there are no apostles today...nor prophets, but some have no trouble deciding there are evanglist today. And even if there were they would not be what is had today in the preacher system, where one stays at a place for awhile..moves..and another follows. The Evangelists went out into the world and preached to sinners. Jesus said *go*, today the word is *stay*. An Evangelist converted..then helped the converts become mature enough to be left as he then went on doing more converting.

<>

This is a rather shallow remark, Mike. I don't remember this about you in the past.

<< What about this? Is someone who is "the evangelist" elevated as the article would imply that anyone with a title designation would be. And don't misinterpret me...I am not advocating titles (Reverend, Father) in this sense. I am saying that there are some titles that are appropriate Biblical designations and that does not mean one is "elevated" so much as it does that we are correct Biblically.>>

Please consider the fact that there were no titles in the N.T...only discriptions.

<>

Again...only descriptions and for the time of the infant body, who didn't have the written word, except some of the letters Paul addressed to them.

<< Or do we apply common sense to the issue? I opt for the latter.>>

I believe we should apply God's sense to what we do (as Buff said) and not our own.

-- Anonymous, February 14, 2000

In a word, bunk. As you have so often done, you have neglected the clear teaching of Scripture in order to fan the flames of your own anger, or hurt, or whatever it was that set you so against spiritual authority in the body of Christ. Just a few examples for you to consider:

Acts 13:1-3 "In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabus, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the Tetrarch) and Saul. While they were worshipping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabus and Sau; for the work to which I have called them." So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off."

1 Corinthians 9:3-12a "This is my defense to those who sit in judgement on me. Don't we have the right to food and drink? Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brother and Cephas? Or is it only I and Barnabus who must work for a living? Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? . . . If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? If others have this right of support from you, shouldn't we have it all the more?"

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 "Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you. Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work."

1 Timothy 5:17-18 "The elders who direct the afairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages."

1 Timothy 4:13-14 "Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching. Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through a prophetic message when the body of elders laid their hands on you."

Do some preachers get big heads? Do some preachers abuse their position? Do some preachers go into the job with the wrong motives? Certainly.

I would put it to you, however, that most don't. Most preachers work hard to uphold the honor of the declaring of God's Word, and work hard to feed the people of God. Most preachers do it at great sacrifice to themselves. Most preachers could get a "secular" job and develop a career that made a much bigger income than they earn in the ministry. They accept less then they might because they have a burden to build up the church, and the people in her.

If you've had problems with preachers, I'm sorry. But that does NOT negate the clear teaching of Scripture about the idea, as given in the examples above. Being cheated by an accountant does not mean that accountancy is evil. Being ripped off by an unscrupulous businessmann does not mean that being a businessman is a bad thing. And finding a bad preacher here and there does not undo what Paul and the other apostles laid out in the New Testament.

If you focus on poor examples of an idea or principle, you can make the principle look bad. That's what you do, Nelta, to the detriment and denigration of many good servants of God.

-- Anonymous, February 14, 2000

Normally, Nelta, I take up your side on your posts because I very much hear what you're trying to say - and for the most part, I agree. But I need to disagree with one thing: you say that there are no Timothy's today, nor apostles, nor prophets, nor tongues, or other gifts - that the time for these things has passed.

Why would the church of the first century be the beneficiary of these things and the church today not? If so much of what you fight for has root in the early church, why would you cast these out? Where does scripture say that these gifts were needed for lack of the written word but then would disappear after printing arrived? I would argue that we need these things as much today as we did then.

You mention that they didn't have the written word back then, save some letters from Paul or Peter. What you hold in your hand is not the word of God - it is a translation of the word of God. Have you considered that most of your arguments with Michael Demastus and everyone stem from difference of interpretation of English, which is interpretted from New Testament Greek, a language in which not one of us can claim native fluency? So you disagree over an interpretation of an interpretation. Today we have over 6,000 pieces of manuscript copied and recopied and none of the originals and now there are people who devote their lives to deciphering which mss are right and which have it wrong. I'm not sure what advantage you think we hold today over those who had not only the Old Testament, but the actual letters from the apostles as they flowed from the pen in a tongue they daily spoke and understood.

There will be a day when apostles and prophets and tongues and all of this will be irrelevant: the day of the Lord. But until then we need every gift given to us, and I don't find in scripture where it states that these were episodic to the first century church.

-- Anonymous, February 15, 2000

Well, will wonders never cease?

I agree with Danny again! :-D

Also Nelta,

You said...

"I think we would all admit there are no apostles today...nor prophets..."

I highly disagree with you! This statement is as ridiculous as the one concerning elders simply bing "older people." Please understand that I am not calling YOU ridiculous. This is not a personal attack againt YOU. Rather your statement. I believe you to be a misinformed Prophet. You see the term "Prophet" (gr. prophetes) is defined as: "one who speaks forth or openly" (Vines Expository Dictionary). Doesn't that sound alot like you?

So do we have prophets today? You betcha! Do they fortell the future through divine intervention? No, I don't think there is a need for that anymore since we have the inspired word of God. But we DO need people who speak forth or openly. Also, may I bring your attention to Ephesians 4:11-13 where Paul says... "It was HE who gave some to be apostles, some to be PROPHETS, some to be EVANGELISTS, and some to be PASTORS and TEACHERS, to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and BECOME MATURE, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ."

Not everyone who IS an Pastor/Teacher, Evangelist or Prophet desires to be known through the TITLES... there are those who are happy just to do them without titles. But because you have a problem with some, doesn't mean we do away with them all.

Nelta, I thank God for you! You continue to make me THINK and strive for answers... just be careful what and how you teach or you may become a FALSE PROPHET.

In Him,

-- Anonymous, February 15, 2000

Nelta,

Why do you assume that Timothy's ordination was an event of the laying on of hands to transfer supernatural gifts? If this is the case, then it rubs against your anti-pneumatological framework because it is the elders who transferred them and not the apostles...and I thought only the apostles were able to transfer such gifts. If indeed you are allowing the elders to have made such a spiritual transfer then you have some big problems. For starters you can not, will not, and never could show a verse that would dictate that the supernatural gifts were only transferred via the laying on of the apostles hands. Secondly, if others could do the same, then there is absolutely NO reason to conclude (and there isn't anyway) that the supernatural gifts "died out" when the written Word appeared and the apostles died.

The reference in 1 Timothy 4:14 IS a reference to Timothy's ordination, because contextually it does not make any sense that Paul would all of a sudden change his thought and bring up Timothy's gifts of the Spirit, when he has been speaking of encouraging him in his ministry...He brought up TImothy's ordination as a point to remind him of what he is a part of.

Secondly...your hermeneutic of description as opposed to title is the most foolish thing I have ever heard. So how do we apply this? Where is the Scripture that would tell us these are descriptions as opposed to titles? Why can't I say that the temple was a description of things a not a title of a building? How do we apply this hermeneutic and better yet, where is your rule for telling us how to apply it?

Not only is it consistent with your anti-authority hermeneutic it is also consistent with your anti-Word of God hermeneutic.

-- Anonymous, February 15, 2000

Brother Sam:

This will be one of the shortest post I have ever written because your comments have thoroughly answered, with the very word of God, Nelta's latest NONSENSE! I say a hearty amen to you. I thank God for you and your efforts in this forum. Your excellent use of the scriptures in your post is especially commendable.

I pray that your wise comments will be heard. It is not likely that Nelta will respond to your arguments from the word of God. She does not like to hear the truth. She only intends to "perish in the gainsaying of Korah" and lead as many souls as possible to perish with her in her rebellion against God's constituted authorited clearly deleniated in His word. With this statement I refer to her rebellion against the elders in the church.

May our Lord abundantly bless you Brother Sam.

By the way, thank you for you kind and wise advice that I recently received via e-mail. I hope that you can see that you have been "Saffolded" in a different way! Ha!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, February 15, 2000