Publicly challenging a pastor

[Frogster]

I will grant you, the modern CEO pastor is far too insulated from his members. If I attended a church but could never reach my pastor, nothing is stopping me from moving on.

As a pastor, I try my best to do and say what is right and with integrity. My phone number is in the book and I am accessible to ever member all the time. Most pastors of churches are. I’ll grant you, some are not, but they are not really shepherds; they are hirelings at best.

I would hate to think that every time someone disagreed with me they would feel obligated to discourteously air dirty laundry publicly before the ears and eyes of impressionable novice believers (much less guests to the church) in a public church gathering rather than approach me privately. That shows a lack of respect and discourtesy. Respect is a two way street. Every person has my respect until they violate it.

Love is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. (1 Cor. 13.5)

BTW, do you practice correcting your pastor in public meetings?

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

You definately raise good points.I guess what happens is the extremes.You are more conservative on that issue,and i am more liberal in mine.Tomorrow,we will probably reverse the roles on another!Got to love God's kingdom.Filled with diversity.

Rush is on loan from Big g..God.So he would be plased with you.

 

[JimB]

1 Cor. 14.40 is the rule of the day.

IMO, of course.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

 

[Frogster]

1 Cor. 14.40 is the rule of the day.

IMO, of course.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

Acts 15 had both,private meetings,and public.

12 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.

Sometimes a little bit of debate is good for the body.

 

[JimB]

Acts 15 had both,private meetings,and public.

12 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.

Sometimes a little bit of debate is good for the body.

What happened in Acts 15 was more like a forum than a public gathering for worship. Forums, classrooms, seminars, symposiums, etc. are the place for public discussion. But a formal public address, a speech, a sermon is not a round table. Never has been, nor ever will be. In formal address requires decorum. Hence 1 Cor. 14.40.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

 

[Frogster]

What happened in Acts 15 was more like a forum than a public gathering for worship. Forums, classrooms, seminars, symposiums, etc. are the place for public discussion. But a formal public address, a speech, a sermon is not a round table. Never has been, nor ever will be. In formal address requires decorum. Hence 1 Cor. 14.40.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

That was about order for tongues,prophecy etc.But still there can be times for confrontation.Look at the first spirit filled meeting,In Acts 2,Peter confronted them,and called them murderers.Just sayin..

 

[mont974x4]

There is a time and place for accountability, even for pastors and preachers. However, if you are led by God to raise concern, be prepared for some serious backlash. My experience has been the health/wealth prosperity teachers are the worst.

 

[probinson]

There is a time and place for accountability, even for pastors and preachers. However, if you are led by God to raise concern, be prepared for some serious backlash. My experience has been the health/wealth prosperity teachers are the worst.

My experience has been just the opposite.

When I was dating my wife, I took issue with something the pastor said at the Nazarene church where she attended. I didn't even confront the pastor, but I mentioned it to my now wife, who mentioned it to her pastor, who then felt it necessary to tell me how wrong I was in numerous emails. Worse still, many of the people at her church viewed my wife very differently from then on because she was dating me and I disagreed with something the pastor said.

Ultimately, my wife decided for herself that she wanted us to attend the church where I have gone my entire life, which would most likely be classified by most people as a "health/wealth prosperity" church, and on the few occasions when we have had disagreements with the pastor and felt it necessary to say something, he has been far more receptive in listening to what we have to say than would have EVER been considered acceptable at her old denominational church.

Of course YMMV, but my point is there are arrogant, haughty teachers in every denomination and every sect of Christianity.

 

[New_Wineskin]

Acts 15 had both,private meetings,and public.

12 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.

Sometimes a little bit of debate is good for the body.

This was also the way of the Temple and the synagogues . Sharing and discussion was the way Jesus and the apostles were brought up given how people wlecomed their input when they came . The idea of one and only one person giving a lecture in front of an audience is not found in the Scriptures as a way of meetings . There was a difference outside of meetings and the buildings where people came to Jesus to hear Him speak - not the meetings during the Sabbath in the Temple and synagogues . The Greeks had a good influence in Jewish society for this to be embraced . Too bad , christianity threw it out early on as leaders demanded more and more attention .

Yet , the current tradition is to listen to one person and little to no fellowship . Even when people say that their groups espouse fellowship , it does not constitute a high percentage of the meeting nor considered of highest importance .

 

[Frogster]

This was also the way of the Temple and the synagogues . Sharing and discussion was the way Jesus and the apostles were brought up given how people wlecomed their input when they came . The idea of one and only one person giving a lecture in front of an audience is not found in the Scriptures as a way of meetings . There was a difference outside of meetings and the buildings where people came to Jesus to hear Him speak - not the meetings during the Sabbath in the Temple and synagogues . The Greeks had a good influence in Jewish society for this to be embraced . Too bad , christianity threw it out early on as leaders demanded more and more attention .

Yet , the current tradition is to listen to one person and little to no fellowship . Even when people say that their groups espouse fellowship , it does not constitute a high percentage of the meeting nor considered of highest importance .

Great post.Yes,it is so wierd,all these people get together,and just hear one man.There is more talent among the many,than the one,but we are just part of the audience,to hear sermon #124-b.

Imagine how interesting it would be,if we could all get together,and have a freeflow of interaction,and hear what other have to say?

A psalm,and teaching,a testimony..ooops,sorry,the leader just wants to talk.

Personally,if the structure finally falls,many will say it is the devil!

I say,it might just be God,knocking down the third temple.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Great post.Yes,it is so wierd,all these people get together,and just hear one man.There is more talent among the many,than the one,but we are just part of the audience,to hear sermon #124-b.

Imagine how interesting it would be,if we could all get together,and have a freeflow of interaction,and hear what other have to say?

A psalm,and teaching,a testimony..ooops,sorry,the leader just wants to talk.

Personally,if the structure finally falls,many will say it is the devil!

I say,it might just be God,knocking down the third temple.

That's one of the things that I like about the Messianic congregations. During the teaching times, several people share, not just the Rabbi. I don't know that it's that way at all the Messianic congregations, but I'd say that out of the six that I've been in attendance to, they all did it. The larger congregations had an oneg afterward where the Rabbi was accessible to questions and comments.

 

[ydouxist]

This was also the way of the Temple and the synagogues . Sharing and discussion was the way Jesus and the apostles were brought up given how people wlecomed their input when they came . The idea of one and only one person giving a lecture in front of an audience is not found in the Scriptures as a way of meetings . There was a difference outside of meetings and the buildings where people came to Jesus to hear Him speak - not the meetings during the Sabbath in the Temple and synagogues . The Greeks had a good influence in Jewish society for this to be embraced . Too bad , christianity threw it out early on as leaders demanded more and more attention .

Yet , the current tradition is to listen to one person and little to no fellowship . Even when people say that their groups espouse fellowship , it does not constitute a high percentage of the meeting nor considered of highest importance .

Great post.

 

[JimB]

This was also the way of the Temple and the synagogues . Sharing and discussion was the way Jesus and the apostles were brought up given how people wlecomed their input when they came . The idea of one and only one person giving a lecture in front of an audience is not found in the Scriptures as a way of meetings . There was a difference outside of meetings and the buildings where people came to Jesus to hear Him speak - not the meetings during the Sabbath in the Temple and synagogues . The Greeks had a good influence in Jewish society for this to be embraced . Too bad , christianity threw it out early on as leaders demanded more and more attention .

Yet , the current tradition is to listen to one person and little to no fellowship . Even when people say that their groups espouse fellowship , it does not constitute a high percentage of the meeting nor considered of highest importance .

This may or may not be true (you will have to show that it is from scripture—I believe I can show where it is not). Anyhow, that is for another thread and I am not "Messianic" (I am happy being a Gentile).

But that is not what this thread is about. This thread is about “publicly challenging a pastor,” and as it has developed so far apparently means calling his hand when you “think” he crosses the line, being the final arbiter in doctrinal correctness, blowing the whistle as the theological policeman of the church, publicly humiliating your pastor in front of everybody for not toeing the line, and avoiding a private face-to-face discussion of your difference at all costs.

Such a public confrontation, calling the pastor’s hand, assumes that you are right and he is wrong. And what makes you right and what makes you the final authority on correctness. If you are wrong (and perhaps, even if you are right), you have become guilty of sowing discord among brethren, which is listed as one of the seven sins God says He especially hates (see Prov. 6.19).

So, when you call the pastor’s hand you better have a royal flush or you are in some big trouble.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

 

[JimB]

*****

Imagine how interesting it would be,if we could all get together,and have a freeflow of interaction,and hear what other have to say?

*****

Don’t all churches do this? Haven't you heard of Sunday school?

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

 

[mont974x4]

I actually allow the free flow of information and ideas in my Sunday services. I study a passage and present a "sermon" that is a verse by verse exegesis of the passage, or a compilation of applicable verses to address a specific issue, and this is followed by a comment and question and answer period. It gets people involved and really looking at the Word and not just sitting there being spoon fed niblets of data. This discussion time often will carry over to our lunch and fellowship time (which we have every week).

 

[lismore]

I am a member of a "Mega Church." I don't attend the main campus but one of their satellites.
A man stood up in the middle of a service once and called the pastor a false teacher. He was quickly escorted from the sanctuary.

Its a different style of Christianity. I used to belong to a House Fellowship where everyone shared a word, a scripture, a song, a word of knowledge or of fellowship. The Spirit moved, there was no party line.

In these more structured and formal churches God only speaks through the boss and you are there to listen, not to share.

Why go to a show-based church and expect anything other than a show?

 

[lismore]

Don’t all churches do this?

Erm........no!

 

[JimB]

Don’t all churches do this?

Erm........no!

Really? I do not know of a single church that does not have classes and small groups where people can dialog and interact with each other.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

 

[lismore]

Really? I do not know of a single church that does not have classes and small groups where people can dialog and interact with each other.

But back to what New Wineskin said about 'lectures'. 'Classes' style small groups are not fellowship, they're classes. Lectures, tutorials, workshops are not the same format as Christian fellowship.

I dont know of a single formal church that offers biblical type fellowship:

When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

'Everyone has' is not the same as one fuehrer has.

According to the bible formal teacher type services are for new converts only.

 

[ComingWitDaBig3]

Erm........no!

So your church doesn't have a Sunday school?

Really? I do not know of a single church that does not have classes and small groups where people can dialog and interact with each other.

~Jim

Mercy triumphs over judgment. ~James 2.13​

True, also it'd be interesting to note that even after a sermon is spoken there can be dialouges afterwards between people over the sermon(talking about its validity or not).

 

[probinson]

I dont know of a single formal church that offers biblical type fellowship:

Wow. Might I suggest you get out more.

I'm sure there are churches like you're describing, and you've obviously seen them, but I would venture a guess that most churches are not the nazi-esque places you make them out to be.