Philosophy of Pastoral Ministry: Part 3

The private aspect of ministry refers to the small group or one on one instruction. While the prevailing portion of ministry is the public ministry, unless this is followed with training in a more intimate sense it will fail to “equip the saints.” This type of teaching not only shows the personal care for the soul of the member or parishioner, but will also lead to more gentle correction, as the Lord’s servant must. (2 Tim 2:24-26) This also allows for the specific tutelage in any area that is personally difficult for the child, guarding them from the snare of the devil. This concept of biblical discipleship is of second importance, only to the proclamation of public ministry of the word.

A pastor must be able to defend the faith as all Christians are called to do so. (1 Pet 3:15) In Acts 6, where we acquire the concept of the ministry of the word, we see that the apostles are not only preaching to the believers but the unbelievers as well. As pastors the primary focus is teaching the congregation, we are also called to evangelism and reasoning from the scriptures in the marketplace. (Acts 17:17) Thus defending the faith and engaging in conversation about it we must “destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ.” (2 Cor 10:5)

The apostle puts it simply that if one is to be a pastor he must be above reproach. (1 Tim 3:2) This is plain; we are to practice that which we preach. Without this our teaching will be empty at best and utter hypocrisy. Pastors must be able to echo Paul’s words “be imitators of me as I am of Christ.” (1 Cor 11:1) Furthermore Peter encourages pastors “to be examples to the flock.” (1 Pet 5:3) For this reason pastors teach by their faith (Jas 2:26) and give credence to it.

If a pastor is to be effective in the ministry of the word he must be a pastor that prays. Without the power of prayer no matter how the pastor tries he will fail to properly “equip the saints.” James tells us that the prayers of a righteous man are powerful (Jas 5:16) and as imitators of Christ we must pray for those in the flock under our care that they might not go astray, (Luke 22:32) making intercession for them as Christ does for us, that we might be equipped to equip them. As men we must also inquire the counsel of God in all things that we might properly teach that which He has revealed to us. This is the bedrock of any ministry and especially pastoral ministry.

There are many other things pastors could do at any given church, and this would vary from local body to local body. Pastors are not to do everything in the church as clearly stated in Acts 6. Rather they are to labor teaching the whole counsel of God and taking watch over the church of God, bought with His own blood. Thus we are “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, building up the body of Christ,” for that is the very heart of pastoral ministry.

FIN.

Philosophy of Pastoral Ministry: Part 2

The pastor must “study to show himself approved unto God” that he may “rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Tim 2:15) Only when a pastor “searches the scriptures” (John 5:39) can he declare the “whole counsel of God.” (Acts 20:27) Thus the study of the scriptures is principal in the life of a pastor, (Ezra 7:10) or shall we receive the same rebuke as Job “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?” (Job 38:2) Therefore let the pastor not be like the Jews with a zeal for God yet not according to knowledge.

This personal ministry of the word leads to the ministry of the word to others, both public and private. Rightly ministering the Word as the Apostle declares, requires us to “not shrink from declaring … the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27) holding back nothing that “was profitable, and teaching … in public and from house to house.” (Acts 20:20) As one charged with the ministry of the word a pastor must preach the entire book, as it all testifies to Christ. (John 5:39) Also this teaching must be both in the public arena and the private one. Finally a pastor must live the word that he preaches leading by example. (Acts 20:18)

The public aspect of ministry refers to be the preaching from the pulpit, though it is not limited to pulpits. This is where the pastor teaches the majority of the congregation and parishioners by declaring to them the whole counsel of God. This must be built upon a firm foundation of the study of the word. All preaching from this venue must be linked to Christ, as the scriptures all concern him. (Luke 24:27)

For this reason Pastors are set apart from other Christians as to have the gift of teaching, (1 Tim 3:2, Titus 1:9) as this is one of the two tasks in the “equipping the saints.” This is key to the role of a pastor, and for this reason they are will not only be judged more harshly (Jas 3:1) but are worthy of double honor if they “work hard at preaching and teaching.” (1 Tim 5:17) Thus this platform is one of the venues through which we feed the sheep with “knowledge and understanding.” (Jer 3:15)

Good teaching will also protect and guard the souls of those in the body from the treachery of the evil one. The pulpit is a platform for exposing, warning, rebuking, and correcting err and sin. Truth breeds truth, therefore when spoken from the pulpit the truth will guard the little ones in it.

Philosophy of Pastoral Ministry: Part 1 Overview

The purpose of the Christian life is to glorify God in all things. (1 Cor 10:31) To that end the pastorate is no different than the layman. All of the tasks of the pastor must flow from this mindset, lest they all be in vain. Thus the heart of pastoral ministry is “to equip the saints for the work of ministry” (Eph 4:12) that they might “to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) by “teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ,” both “in the temple and from house to house.” (Acts 5:42) Therefore the ever-advancing kingdom of God is paramount in pastoral ministry. If anything other than the Glory of God as the center of our pastoral ministry then we are in sin.

Few men should aim to be teachers, as they will be judged with greater strictness. (Jas 3:1) Thus to take up the calling of a pastor one must be sure in God, and qualified. Foremost the pastor should be above reproach. (1 Tim 3:2) The apostle here is clearly stating the pastors are to be morally excellent, that men might see our good works and glorify our Father in heaven. Paul also adds the qualification of the husband of one wife. (1 Tim 3:2) This does not mean that a pastor must be married, rather that he must be of marrying age though he may be single as Paul was. (cf. 1 Cor 7:7) However this does mean that if a pastor does marry he is to do so in the biblical fashion, “the two shall become one flesh, ” (Gen 2:24) ergo monogamy.

Paul further exhorts the good behavior and character of pastors; that they might not be drunkards nor quarrelsome, nor violent, nor full of greed, for such are the deeds of the flesh. Rather a pastor is to display the fruit of the spirit, and manage his household well for how can one that is unable to keep his own house keep the Church of God? Finally they must be able to teach sound doctrine. Far too often today this quality is neglected or overlooked in a church’s search for a pastor. If they cannot teach then they are not qualified to be a pastor. This cannot be pressed enough, lest men who by their smooth words and blessings deceive the naïve. (Rom 16:18) Sound doctrine must be taught.

The New Testament is very clear about the plurality of pastors in the Church, following the pattern Christ set when he sent the disciples out two by two, (Luke 10:1) as two can withstand the adversary and three are not easily broken. (Ecc 4:12) Furthermore a reading of Titus 1:5 draws this picture as crystal. This also helps keep heresy from the pastorate, as two cannot walk together lest they agree. (Amos 3:3) This provides the much needed accountability in an age when the “Christian Church” is so plagued with sin.

A pastor is likened to a shepherd (Eph 4:11, 1 Pet 5:2) in the New Testament, giving an image of guarding and feeding sheep. Therefore the two main aspects of “equipping the saints” are the oversight of souls (Acts 20:28, Heb 13:17) and teaching with knowledge and understanding. (Jer 3:15, Titus 1:9) These two aspects flow from a healthy ministry of the Word and prayer life as the Apostles stated in Acts 6:4.

What, an Update? Blog Review.

What a new post... yes, I know your feed readers are burning...

Anyways The Seeking Disciple over at Arminian Today posted a blog about the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism entitled "Discipleship: Where Arminianism and Calvinism Clash." This is my response.

In paragraph 3 He says: "Calvinists would insist that the person was saved by irresistible grace whereas the Arminian would say that the sinner was saved by surrendering to the grace of God that they could have resisted but instead surrendered to (Acts 16:14-15, 30-34)." Actually a Calvinist would agree with both of those statements. A member of the elect can resist God's saving grace it is just God's saving grace can over come all resistance. Furthermore a Calvinist will say that all the elect will surrender to God's saving grace, though the reason for this would differ from that which Arminianism gives.

In paragraph 4 he says that "the Calvinist would encourage the person to abandon a life of sin (at least I hope they would and feel confident many would do so)" but wouldn't by definition "stress that true repentance is not just feeling sorry for our sins but actually leaving a life of sin and pressing toward the higher calling of Christ Jesus". It seems that he is creating a strawman, I hope unknowingly. I agree that the issue of the mortification of sin in the believer is different between the Calvinist and the Arminian, but not at this point. The Calvinist will say that this side of heaven no sin will ever be slain completely but must continually be mortified. There will never be a day when anyone wakes up and says, "Yes! I mortified all my sins completely so now I do not have to continue to fight sin." For more on this from the Calvinistic Prospective see The Mortification of Sin in the Believer by John Owen.

In paragraph 5 he states that: "Jesus didn't die to preserve sinners in sin but He died to make saints out of sinners". This seems to be a complete misunderstanding, or misrepresentation of the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints. A brief summery of the doctrine would state that "when we speak of “once saved, always saved,” we are not taking into account the full scope of salvation. We have been saved (justification), was are being saved (sanctified), and we will one day be saved (glorified). You cannot claim to have been “saved” (justified) unless you are being sanctified. Jesus Christ is Savior and Lord." (Michael Horton, Putting the Amazing Back into Grace, 171) Thus according to the Calvinistic position God continuely works in the lives of those who are elect that they might grow in holiness.

Finally in paragraph 1 he assumes Calvinism to prove his Arminianism. Allow me to explain. He stated that part of the Gospel is that a person places their "personal faith in the Lord Jesus for the remission of sins (Ephesians 2:8-9) and that without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6)." However wouldn't this coming to faith be an act that pleased God? How is it that the carnal minded unbeliever pleases God by coming to have faith without first having faith? You must either assume Calvinism, that God is the one who gives the faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), or deny Romans 8:7-8 and ironically Hebrews 11:6, not to mention the words of Jesus in John 6:35-51,8:39-47,10:25-29,17:9ff.

Just one more thought. Antinominism is a problem that has plagued both Arminianism and Calvinisim in the past and that both theologies must fight it and it's brother legalism in order to remain within the Faith.

Too Poor for Seminary

For those of us who love theology and learning theology but are unable to afford to go to seminary at this time for any number of reasons I have compiled a list of FREE online theology courses and other resources to keep oneself sharp. Oh, this list is in no way, shape, or form exhaustive, and if you have anything you think would be good to add just leave it in the comments.

Theology:
Gordon-Conwell Theological's foundational teaching in the areas of Old and New Testament, Biblical Interpretation, Church History, Theology, and Missions and Evangelism. - http://ockenga.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/dimensions/

Biblical Training Institute Foundational Classes - http://www.biblicaltraining.org/foundations

Wayne Grudem's Lectures about his Systematic Theology, a project five years and counting - http://www.christianessentialssbc.com/messages/

Covenant Theological Seminary's Free Seminary Courses in their Worldwide Classroom - http://worldwide-classroom.com/

Biblical Training Institute - http://www.biblicaltraining.org/

Reformed Theological Seminary on iTunesU - http://itunes.rts.edu/

Concordia Seminary on iTunesU - http://itunes.csl.edu/

The History and Theology of Calvinism by Dr. Curt Daniel - http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/histtheocalvin.html

The White Horse Inn with Dr. Michael Scott Horton - http://www.whitehorseinn.org/

John Piper on Monergism - http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/bio/johnpiper.html

Greek:
Bill Mounce's Resource site that is complementary to his Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar - http://www.teknia.com/

Jonathan Robie's Greek Course - http://www.ibiblio.org/koine/

A list of the best Greek grammar text books - http://www.ntgreek.org/books/grambook.htm

A list of online Greek grammar learning tools and study aids - http://www.biblicalgreek.org/grammar/

Hebrews - Introduction

The letter written to the Hebrews is often one of the most mysterious books in the bible to westerners. We Americans as a whole are rather biblically illiterate, rather ironic since we also have the most "bible onlyist" churches in the world. So let's take a look at Hebrews.

What better place to start than at the beginning? Well perhaps before the beginning? The author of this book is not explicitly or even implicitly known. Some in the past have suggested Pauline authorship however since this book does not follow the Pauline framework found in his other epistles this is most likely not the case. However whoever wrote this letter probably did have direct contact with Paul and was familiar with his teaching style. (A comparison of Hebrews and Romans shows us this much.) They also had an intimate knowledge of the Old Testament since it is quoted, alluded to, made reference to, and summarized far more extensively than most other biblical books. (Matthew references the Old Testament more but is also twice as long.) So we can say with some confidence that this letter was written by a learned in both the Old Testament and Pauline Theology and was perhaps written by Apollos. (Acts 18:24ff)

The book was likely written to Jewish believers, though it may have been to the Hellenic Jews. The concepts that this book speaks to would suggest this since the Greco-Judaic mind loved issues such as the veneration of Moses, Mediation of angles, the Old Covenant Law, and the role of Wisdom in creation. Further this book was addressing those who were seeking to return to the synagogue or temple system, which Gentile Christians wouldn't be returning to but coming to the first time. (See also Galatians) Furthermore this was letter was very likely addressed to the Jews of Rome, since in the farewell the author mentions greeting from those in Rome who are not of Rome.(13:24) Finally the concept of "leaders" (hegoumenoi) is mentioned a concept subsequent church leaders from Rome will pick up on and use. So to recap this letter was probably written to a community of Jewish Believers in Rome who were struggling with Christianity and remaining within Christianity.

The overarching goal of the book of Hebrews is to encourage the believers to endure in the faith. The author does this by moving back and forth from a theological concept to how we ought to live in light of such a concept, with the basic point as Jesus is the best(only) basis for relating to God and enduring in a relationship with Him. Those who reject Jesus are in trouble!!!

Finally this Book was probably written before the fall of the temple in Jerusalem but after Christianity had been well established in Rome. This is because there is no mention of the temple falling, which would have been another key that the writer assuredly would have picked up on. At the same time there had been Christians there for some time so (5:11-6:3) therefore we can safely assume that this letter was probably written sometime in the mid 60's.

Hopefully that helps. Next time we dive into Chapter 1.

Soteriology - Quick and Dirty

Often when one is in an unwanted place it is good to change places. Thus when affliction sets in within the mind it may be good to get away into a good bit of theology; and what better topic than one that will start a heated debate among almost everyone I know? Instead I think I will simply summarize (emphasis on simply) the differing views of soteriology (doctrines of salvation) that have rooted their heads within the Christendom.

Heretical Systems:
Pelagianism - Named for a Fourth century British Monk named Pelagius who first formalized this teaching. (Pop culture reference, King Arther's hero in the 2004 film starting Clive Owen, which on this point was historically inaccurate.) Pelagius taught that men were not corrupted in any way by Adam's sin, he was merely a bad example for us. Christ was a good example who taught us how to live morally. Through hard work following Christ's good example rather than Adam's bad example one might achieve salvation. Furthermore without grace or faith man can choose to move toward God without any prompting by the Holy Spirit. Therefore in this view of salvation man is the effectual agent, but he is also the only acting agent, faith and grace are unnecessary. This does not mean that the atonement of Christ was unnecessary for the forgiveness of sins, however, it did not compel anyone to actually seek the forgiveness of those sins, nor does it play a role in sanctification.

Semipelagianism - After Pelagius was defeated in debate by St. Augustine, a new breed of his teaching popped up. This view held that man was still in most ways unrestricted in what he can and cannot do with his relationship to God. The difference between this view and the fully Pelagian view is that man cannot make it to God apart from grace. This view does hold however that man can turn to God apart from any act of Grace on God's behalf. Again in this view the effectual agent of salvation is man. Both Pelagianism and Semipelagianism were condemned as damnable heresy by the Council of Orange in 529 AD.

Hyper-Calvinism - Hyper-Calvinism is not John Piper sitting in starbucks after five vente lattes. This is a view that believes the command of the Gospel is not for every single person but only for the elect. Further this system also denies God's love for mankind as a whole and that evangelism is necessary at all because God has predestined some to life and others to death.

American Decisionism - This view picks and chooses what it likes from all of the major views and rejects what it doesn't like. Therefore it is often hard to pin down what this view is actually espouses. However the majority takes Arminian or Palegian free choice and combines it with half of the Calvinist's Perseverance of the Faith. This creates the mentality that "I chose Christ at one time in my life so I'm saved and can live like a pagan if I so choose," or as I call it "decisional once saved always savedism," or "conditional unconditionalism" e.g. that salvation is by a one time admittance that Jesus is Lord that being said I can do whatever I want. One could liken this position to the argument, "well my spouse loves me unconditionally so its okay if I go and have an adultery."

Systems Within Orthodoxy:
Arminianism (Wesleyanism) - A theological system named for Jacob Arminius and better articulated by John Wesley. Far to often zealous, though well meaning Calvinists, will wrongly overgeneralize this position labeling it as semipelagian or even pelagian. (Though sometimes this analysis is correct of the individual or group.) However this seems to come from a lack of knowledge of what this system actually teaches. There is much that Arminians and Calvinists agree on, first that men are born spiritually dead, unable to come to God outside of His grace, and that salvation is only possible by grace through faith. They also agree that men must actually choose to follow Christ. Finally they agree that if one is saved they must continue in the faith. However after this the two part ways.
The Arminian believes that while all men are dead in their tresspasses and sins that through prevenient grace, (common grace) can be made alive by submitting to it rather than resisting it. (The Calvinist also believes in common grace, but believes it serves a different function.) This prevenient grace is granted to all men allowing all the capacity to turn from their wickedness to righteousness. On the cross Christ died for all men in the same way so that, among other things, this grace could be given to all men. However as fore mentioned this grace can be resisted and rejected, and by this condition one obtains their election. Finally in this system one who does not continue on in the faith loses the salvation they once had. So in this view while the major agent of salvation is God, the ultimate agent of salvation is the individual man who continually makes the choice not to resist the grace of God so that they are able to choose Him.

Calvinism (Reformed) - This theological system named for John Calvin, which was greatly influenced by St. Augustine, and was later made into an acronym by those tulip obsessed dutch. This view is often wrongly overgeneralized by zealous, well meaning, Arminian Christians as Hyper-Calvinism, which I believe again comes simply from ignorance of the system. (Though sometimes this analysis is correct of the individual or group.) As mentioned in the above paragraphs about Arminianism, Calvinists believe that all men are born spiritually dead, unable to come to God outside of His grace, and that salvation is only possible by grace through faith. However for the Calvinist there is no prevenient grace in the sense that it quickens men to life. Rather the common grace of God to all men is displayed in every good thing that every man has. God does grant some men the gracious gifts of repentance and belief to the elect. Now to be sure these gifts of grace can be resisted and rejected but the Holy Spirit can overcome any resistance man might build up.
This factors into the way in which the Calvinist views the atonement; Christ died for all men, to be sure however he did not die for all men in the same way. He did not die for Judas the same way He died for Peter, so while the cross of Christ is sufficient for all the world, it is effective for only the elect, therefore election is not based upon the condition of "making a decision for Christ." That being said, if you remember I wrote both Calvinists and Arminians believe that once a Christian is saved they must remain in the faith. Where they differ is that while the Arminian believes one can lose their salvation, since they might fail to continue, the Calvinist does not, because God will continue to work in the Christian transforming him into the image of Christ. This however does not mean that a Christian will never stumble, only that when he does he will be granted the grace of Repentance and Belief again.

Modified View, 4 Point Calvinism - There are many forms of this and to try to touch on all of them here would be quite a task however what they all try to accomplish, some more than others is a bridge between Arminiansm and Calvinism. This group might also include the Lutheran view though putting it here seems funny to me.

Yaayy for Quick and Dirty - Unfortunately far to many within the American Church fall outside the realm of orthodoxy on this core issue of the Gospel. Work for reformation in those churches and pray for their revival. Oh also if my facts are mistake please feel free to comment, however try not to turn this into a huge debate over which view is most correct. There are plenty of other places for that.

Soli Deo Gloria!