"[A] church structure, as well as a church message, is vital to the safeguarding and propagation of the gospel"

I Timothy 3:15 makes the point:

if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.

The Gospel and the Bible are not sufficient in themselves, but if their blueprint/instruction is followed by believing people, then it is sufficient.

Our generation is enamored of all things ‘natural’ and ‘organic’, but there is nothing successful, cohesive, or productive in this world that doesn’t have an underlying plan or structure.

Preaching is not an arcane skill given only to a score or men worldwide. If it were, Paul would have told us. In fact, he does not say to Timothy, ‘Find a few highly skilled men with media clout and hand the matter over to them.’ Not at all. What he essentially says is ‘Find men in your congregation who are trustworthy and true who, if they have families, have run their households well, who have a good track record within the church, who are respected by outsiders and who are competent to teach - and trust them with the gospel.’

IMO many churches don’t have this basic principle down. There are men in pulpits that are intelligent, skilled public speakers, but do not meet the qualifications of pastor/elder. Then some who meet the qualifications, but are not ‘apt to teach’. I’ve met a few who weren’t either one, but managed to keep a meager congregation together so they can expect a steady paycheck. Oy vey.

I agree with Trueman’s premise. A lot of us who are not “high profile” have been saying this for some time. Now, my friends, take the next step.

If church structure is important, where does this leave Luther’s (or the Roman Catholic, or Presbyterian) forms of pedo-baptism? Doesn’t the New Testament clearly establish the principle of preaching the Gospel (Acts 2:41), believer’s baptism (Acts 2:42), and regenerate membership (Acts 2:42)? The New Testament does spell out specific forms of church government. Let’s preach the biblical gospel and practice biblical church government

Most of us probably have had the experience of standing on a playground while kickball or wiffleball teams were chosen. It was The Kiss of Death to be chosen last. If we really do exercise Biblical church gov’t, we are going to be forced to make some hard choices, and someone might get ‘left out’, and then they would feel bad, and we as a church aren’t allowed to make anyone feel bad, because that is not ‘Christian love’.

Even though I hear folks say all the time that the church is to be composed of a regenerate membership, it seems that most choices churches make about structure and programs are formed to draw in an unregenerate crowd. If you question this, you obviously don’t want to exercise the Great Commission, and you are not a nice person.

I’m going to take my bat and glove and go home. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-angry033.gif

[Fred Moritz] Doesn’t the New Testament clearly establish the principle of preaching the Gospel (Acts 2:41), believer’s baptism (Acts 2:42), and regenerate membership (Acts 2:42)? The New Testament does spell out specific forms of church government. Let’s preach the biblical gospel and practice biblical church government

Dr. Moritz, we will be assured those truths are “non-essentials” — though the Scripture never says so. You seem to say they ARE “essential” — though obviously not required for salvation. One wonders if those who speak of non-essential doctrines also speak of non-essential obedience — yet doctrine and obedience cannot be separated.

In (rightly) pursuing charity towards erring / mistaken brethren, we minimised the importance of truth, and we are now watering down the importance of obedience. If you believe salvation truths, that seems all that matters. But God didn’t save us just to deliver us from Hell, He saved us for loving fellowship with Him. All these “non-essentials” tell us what that fellowship is like, and it is all essential.

I accept Trueman’s point, but not his title. The Gospel is a restored relationship with God, and ecclesiology and everything else is teaching us about that relationship. It is all Gospel. It is not that we need more than the Gospel, it is that we need to stop segregating things out of the Gospel.

Fred,

I appreciate your point. Two Questions:

1) Would you agree with the following statement - “While good men do not differ on what the Scriptures teach about ‘the gospel,’ good men do differ on what the Scriptures teach about ‘church government?’”

2) Would you agree that part of the Scriptures teaching on Church Government was that in at least 17 different cases a specific location or church was said to be lead by a group of pastors called “elders” (in the plural - all over the place in the NT text) - and that in Phil 1:1 Bishops (pl) and Deacons (pl) indicate that they were with the congregation of believers - and early 2nd century commentary demonstrates that there was but one congregation in Philippi at the time with Bishops (pl) and Deacons (pl) leading this one congregation. Would you also agree that NT Church gov’t uncovers a universal practice of a multiple elder leadership - except when a missionary church planter (called, “An Evangelist”) would preach, see conversions, mentor and release new leadership so that the evangelist/apostolic representative could go somewhere else and do it all over again? Is this part of your understanding of Church Gov’t that ought to be preached or taught which to you is as clear as regenerate church membership and believer’s baptism (which I would also hold to ….. with a hearty Amen!)?

Fred - my bad. The second questions seems to be a running list of multiple questions.

There is a Cause!

Straight Ahead!

jt

[Susan R] Most of us probably have had the experience of standing on a playground while kickball or wiffleball teams were chosen. It was The Kiss of Death to be chosen last. If we really do exercise Biblical church gov’t, we are going to be forced to make some hard choices, and someone might get ‘left out’, and then they would feel bad, and we as a church aren’t allowed to make anyone feel bad, because that is not ‘Christian love’.

Even though I hear folks say all the time that the church is to be composed of a regenerate membership, it seems that most choices churches make about structure and programs are formed to draw in an unregenerate crowd. If you question this, you obviously don’t want to exercise the Great Commission, and you are not a nice person.

I’m going to take my bat and glove and go home. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-angry033.gif

But our responsibility is to follow the NT pattern to the very best of our knowledge of Scripture and our God-given ability.

FM

[JG]

[Fred Moritz] Doesn’t the New Testament clearly establish the principle of preaching the Gospel (Acts 2:41), believer’s baptism (Acts 2:42), and regenerate membership (Acts 2:42)? The New Testament does spell out specific forms of church government. Let’s preach the biblical gospel and practice biblical church government

Dr. Moritz, we will be assured those truths are “non-essentials” — though the Scripture never says so. You seem to say they ARE “essential” — though obviously not required for salvation. One wonders if those who speak of non-essential doctrines also speak of non-essential obedience — yet doctrine and obedience cannot be separated.

In (rightly) pursuing charity towards erring / mistaken brethren, we minimised the importance of truth, and we are now watering down the importance of obedience. If you believe salvation truths, that seems all that matters. But God didn’t save us just to deliver us from Hell, He saved us for loving fellowship with Him. All these “non-essentials” tell us what that fellowship is like, and it is all essential.

I accept Trueman’s point, but not his title. The Gospel is a restored relationship with God, and ecclesiology and everything else is teaching us about that relationship. It is all Gospel. It is not that we need more than the Gospel, it is that we need to stop segregating things out of the Gospel.

JG,

On believer’s baptism, please consider the biblical evidence. Jesus set the principle of making disciples and baptizing them (Mt. 28). He taught the same principle in Mark 16. The Acts record is that the same pattern was followed on Pentecost (Acts 2), with the eunuch (Acts 8), with Cornelius (Acts 10), and with Lydia and the jailer (Acts 16).

Historically, Erasmus noted that pattern in the annotations to his Greek manuscript. He discussed the issue with Zwingli, met with Grebel, Manz, and Blaurock in Zurich, and corresponded with Menno Simons. For substatiation please see Abraham Friesen’s book Erasmus, the Anabaptists, and the Great Commission. This Mennonite scholar either teaches or taught Anabaptist History at UC Santa Barbara and Eerdmans published his book.

One is skating on thin biblical and historical ice to deny that the NT teaches believer’s baptism and regenerate membership. The numerous references to the holiness of the church and to believers in the NT churches as “saints” reinforces that point.

FM

[Joel Tetreau] Fred,

I appreciate your point. Two Questions:

1) Would you agree with the following statement - “While good men do not differ on what the Scriptures teach about ‘the gospel,’ good men do differ on what the Scriptures teach about ‘church government?’”

2) Would you agree that part of the Scriptures teaching on Church Government was that in at least 17 different cases a specific location or church was said to be lead by a group of pastors called “elders” (in the plural - all over the place in the NT text) - and that in Phil 1:1 Bishops (pl) and Deacons (pl) indicate that they were with the congregation of believers - and early 2nd century commentary demonstrates that there was but one congregation in Philippi at the time with Bishops (pl) and Deacons (pl) leading this one congregation. Would you also agree that NT Church gov’t uncovers a universal practice of a multiple elder leadership - except when a missionary church planter (called, “An Evangelist”) would preach, see conversions, mentor and release new leadership so that the evangelist/apostolic representative could go somewhere else and do it all over again? Is this part of your understanding of Church Gov’t that ought to be preached or taught which to you is as clear as regenerate church membership and believer’s baptism (which I would also hold to ….. with a hearty Amen!)?

Fred - my bad. The second questions seems to be a running list of multiple questions.

There is a Cause!

Straight Ahead!

jt

Joel:

There are good, saved, and godly men who disagree on church government for various reasons. That doesn’t make the differing views of “good” men right. That doesn’t make my views of church government right. The standard, as you know and we agree, is the revealed Word. Our positions must account to, and be measured by, the revealed Word.

You and I have corresponded privately on plurality of elders. Whatever the NT teaches about the plurality of elders (and we aren’t very far apart), that teaching doesn’t negate or nullify the clear teaching of the NT on congregational government also.

FM

[Fred Moritz]

[Susan R] Most of us probably have had the experience of standing on a playground while kickball or wiffleball teams were chosen. It was The Kiss of Death to be chosen last. If we really do exercise Biblical church gov’t, we are going to be forced to make some hard choices, and someone might get ‘left out’, and then they would feel bad, and we as a church aren’t allowed to make anyone feel bad, because that is not ‘Christian love’.

Even though I hear folks say all the time that the church is to be composed of a regenerate membership, it seems that most choices churches make about structure and programs are formed to draw in an unregenerate crowd. If you question this, you obviously don’t want to exercise the Great Commission, and you are not a nice person.

I’m going to take my bat and glove and go home. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-angry033.gif

But our responsibility is to follow the NT pattern to the very best of our knowledge of Scripture and our God-given ability.

FM

My last line was facetious.

I fear I wasn’t clear. I agree with you entirely.

My objection is that too many people say those things are “non-essential” — because as Joel said, “good men disagree.” The disagreement of godly men does not make a doctrine “non-essential”.

My objection is that too many people say those things are “non-essential” — because as Joel said, “good men disagree.” The disagreement of godly men does not make a doctrine “non-essential”.

So is this disagreement a Biblical absolute, conviction, or preference?
__________________________________

http://www.utmgr.org/blog_index.html

But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

Dr. Moritz was talking about aspects of our worship. I would say if the Father is seeking those who will worship in truth, that it is unbiblical to call such matters “non-essential”. It is essential to love Him, and if we love Him we will keep His commandments, so we will keep His commandments on ecclesiology.

Thx Fred,

I agree that you and I are not really that far off - I also agree that a congregation can have it right on a plurality of leadership and on the right timing of congregational leadership vis-a-vis elder or deacon leadership. I’m working on a book that in part will speak to when the congregations gets the say and when the congregation follows elder or deacons or elder/deacon leadership.

Straight Ahead!

jt