"The Preacher Doesn't Have the Right To Tell Me What To Do" ?

[Danielwright2311]

Greetings,

I just had a conversation with a friend over the topic of the messages that are preached at the pulpit. I made the statement that application is a essential element to the sermon being preached. Although biblical literacy is an issue for many Christians, I believe that the problem isn't that people don't know the Bible, rather, they don't do what it says. Someone can preach a very informative sermon and still leave the congregation thinking "That's great. So what am I supposed to do with this information?" Yet I was surprised when my friend told me "It is not the responsibility of the Preacher to tell the congregation what to do or not to do." Is the role of the preacher merely to feed the congregation and let them figure it out for themselves?

Now, for clarification, when I say application I am not saying that the pastor start giving commands from the pulpit. Rather, the pastor provides a eternal truth from the scripture and then gives an example of how this can be practiced in you daily lives. Does anyone else have a problem with pastors giving suggestions or recommendations to holy living? Should the pastor merely teach an exegetical course on a passage and leave it up to the congregation to figure out what to do with it?

Imagine God using one man to tell you the truth, but you ignore this truth, its the same thing.

Now unless you know for a fact its wrong, as least listen to what he said.

The problem?

Findind a real man of God who God speaks through.

If the man sounds to worldy, he is not from God, if he preaches with examples from worldly things, he is not from God. If his message sounds emtey, be carfull as he coulde be half hatred.

I heard this one guy who always talked about himself, where he went and who he was with and how his situations worked out and, Everything was about him and how God blessed him or saved him, him,him,him.

I left that church fast.

Imagine a disciple or even Jesus himself up on the pulpit, this is how you judge and discern leadership in the church. If they do not line up with Jesus words, there not of God.

 

[RDKirk]

Following the bible is doing whats right in your own eyes?

Did the writer of Hebrews not have scripture? Is Hebrews itself not scripture?

Obey your leaders and submit to them --- Hebrews 13

Okay, let's be clear here. You fully intend not to follow the bible.

 

[timewerx]

Is the role of the preacher merely to feed the congregation and let them figure it out for themselves?

If this is all the preacher should do then we don't need preachers at all. All you have to do then is read the Bible and figure out for ourselves.

 

[W2L]

Did the writer of Hebrews not have scripture? Is Hebrews itself not scripture?

Obey your leaders and submit to them --- Hebrews 13

Okay, let's be clear here. You fully intend not to follow the bible.

I follow the leaders who gave us that scripture, but cant follow a denomination nor need to. Whos denomination should i obey and submit to?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Counseling the flock with the Law is one of the responsibilities of the pastor. But the pastor does this as a servant and a shepherd, not as a lord or master.

"Love your neighbor as yourself" is the Law, and so counseling God's people on loving their neighbor is a pastoral duty. What the pastor doesn't have the right to do is act as a lord or master over God's people and give them their own commands, or to seek to control the behavior and lives of the people.

This is the difference between pastoring and spiritual abuse. And it's a massive difference.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[St_Worm2]

I believe that the problem isn't that people don't know the Bible, rather, they don't do what it says.

Hi again No Username Found, that's true!

It's also true that they often a. don't know the truth and/or b. have been told or have come to believe something that simply isn't true about the Bible and what it teaches.

Also, there are a lot of people who know what the Bible teaches, but they choose not to believe it, or to "adjust" what it teaches in some manner, because they don't like what it teaches.

Should the pastor merely teach an exegetical course on a passage and leave it up to the congregation to figure out what to do with it?

That would definitely make him a "teacher", but probably not a "preacher". That said, I think a pastor should tell his congregation what they most need to hear about God's truth, and that like the noble Bereans used to do with Paul's sermons, they should receive his message with great eagerness and then examine the Scriptures to make sure that what he said was truly Biblical .. Acts 17:11.

--David

 

[topher694]

Greetings,

I just had a conversation with a friend over the topic of the messages that are preached at the pulpit. I made the statement that application is a essential element to the sermon being preached. Although biblical literacy is an issue for many Christians, I believe that the problem isn't that people don't know the Bible, rather, they don't do what it says. Someone can preach a very informative sermon and still leave the congregation thinking "That's great. So what am I supposed to do with this information?" Yet I was surprised when my friend told me "It is not the responsibility of the Preacher to tell the congregation what to do or not to do." Is the role of the preacher merely to feed the congregation and let them figure it out for themselves?

Now, for clarification, when I say application I am not saying that the pastor start giving commands from the pulpit. Rather, the pastor provides a eternal truth from the scripture and then gives an example of how this can be practiced in you daily lives. Does anyone else have a problem with pastors giving suggestions or recommendations to holy living? Should the pastor merely teach an exegetical course on a passage and leave it up to the congregation to figure out what to do with it?

"That's great. So what am I supposed to do with this information?"

This is something I consider with ever single message I write. I ask myself things like: what do I want them to know? Why do I want them to know it? What do I want them to do? Why do I want them to do it? Not only does it help them, it sure helps me a lot as well.

That being said I think the phrasing does the pastor have the right to "tell me what to do" is a bit harsh and inaccurate for this. It's more about giving practical examples that people can relate to.

Here's an example from my message from last weekend. I've been preaching on David's path to fulfilling his call to be king. Looking at all the craziness he had to endure just to get there. One of my points at the end was, "Don't let your success blind you to what you need to address" (I rarely rhyme, but it worked out this time so don't judge ) then I went on to explain how there were warning signs all along David's journey that pointed to his future failing with Bathsheba. But David was largely successful in his journey and even became king in spite of those warning signs. Point being, we should never let our success be and excuse to ignore the things we still need to work on. Then I gave a hypothetical example of a traveling minister who sees great success (salvations, miracles, crowds, whatever) in his meetings and uses that "success" as an excuse to have an affair... God wouldn't allow me to have success if he had a problem with this... he knows how hard and lonely it is for me... that kind of stuff really happens, and not just to ministers.

So, is that me telling people what to do? Kinda yes, kinda no. Whatever you call it, I see it as being a helpful approach.

 

[royal priest]

This is something I consider with ever single message I write. I ask myself things like: what do I want them to know? Why do I want them to know it? What do I want them to do? Why do I want them to do it? Not only does it help them, it sure helps me a lot as well.

That being said I think the phrasing does the pastor have the right to "tell me what to do" is a bit harsh and inaccurate for this. It's more about giving practical examples that people can relate to.

Here's an example from my message from last weekend. I've been preaching on David's path to fulfilling his call to be king. Looking at all the craziness he had to endure just to get there. One of my points at the end was, "Don't let your success blind you to what you need to address" (I rarely rhyme, but it worked out this time so don't judge ) then I went on to explain how there were warning signs all along David's journey that pointed to his future failing with Bathsheba. But David was largely successful in his journey and even became king in spite of those warning signs. Point being, we should never let our success be and excuse to ignore the things we still need to work on. Then I gave a hypothetical example of a traveling minister who sees great success (salvations, miracles, crowds, whatever) in his meetings and uses that "success" as an excuse to have an affair... God wouldn't allow me to have success if he had a problem with this... he knows how hard and lonely it is for me... that kind of stuff really happens, and not just to ministers.

So, is that me telling people what to do? Kinda yes, kinda no. Whatever you call it, I see it as being a helpful approach.

Although it is important that the preacher understand the spiritual needs of a congregation and address those needs from God's Word, it is even more important that the preacher does so in a way that harmonizes with the text he is preaching. The first question preachers must ask is 'what does God intend for us to learn from this particular text and what does He want us to do in response to what He is teaching us?'
It is too easy to stray from the main point of the text, and to assert one's own opinion of the text. The preachers first and only matter of business in preaching ought to be the declaration of 'thus sayeth the Lord.'

 

[topher694]

Although it is important that the preacher understand the spiritual needs of a congregation and address those needs from God's Word, it is even more important that the preacher does so in a way that harmonizes with the text he is preaching. The first question preachers must ask is 'what does God intend for us to learn from this particular text and what does He want us to do in response to what He is teaching us?'
It is too easy to stray from the main point of the text, and to assert one's own opinion of the text. The preachers first and only matter of business in preaching ought to be the declaration of 'thus sayeth the Lord.'

Of course I do that first and foremost, as do most of the pastors I know. However, that was not the topic or context of the OP.

 

[RDKirk]

I follow the leaders who gave us that scripture, but cant follow a denomination nor need to. Whos denomination should i obey and submit to?

Are you in congregation that doesn't actually do anything?

Do you just sit in the pews on Sunday, hear a homily, and then go back home again?

Does your congregation not have a fragment of Christ's mission? Is your pastor not leading that effort?

And if so, don't you have a fragment of your congregation's fragment of Christ's mission? And aren't you following your pastor's lead?

And if not...what are you in the Body of Christ for? Just for a free ride to heaven?

 

[FIRESTORM314]

Greetings,

I just had a conversation with a friend over the topic of the messages that are preached at the pulpit. I made the statement that application is a essential element to the sermon being preached. Although biblical literacy is an issue for many Christians, I believe that the problem isn't that people don't know the Bible, rather, they don't do what it says. Someone can preach a very informative sermon and still leave the congregation thinking "That's great. So what am I supposed to do with this information?" Yet I was surprised when my friend told me "It is not the responsibility of the Preacher to tell the congregation what to do or not to do." Is the role of the preacher merely to feed the congregation and let them figure it out for themselves?

Now, for clarification, when I say application I am not saying that the pastor start giving commands from the pulpit. Rather, the pastor provides a eternal truth from the scripture and then gives an example of how this can be practiced in you daily lives. Does anyone else have a problem with pastors giving suggestions or recommendations to holy living? Should the pastor merely teach an exegetical course on a passage and leave it up to the congregation to figure out what to do with it?

I think for many years I failed to understand how to apply the bible to my daily life. Yes - I read the bible often, attended church and put the effort in. I think even on here we talk of faith and works and the only works being preached is reaching out with the Gospel. How do we conduct ourselves, How do we live, Relate to our families, control our thinking processes and make good decisions such as career choices and other important activities?

I think examples are an excellent idea but direct instruction leads to the idea of someone is controlling you and does get some heated responses. It's a necessary subject but also one which must be tread very carefully. I think such sermons need to be thought out clearly in advance rather than just do it as you feel like it on the day.

The best teaching of all - is someone's own example. Not preached but lived out daily. That speaks louder than words and is easier to understand than any amount of theory or study. Spend some time with "quality people" , good mentors and role models. Some people are fortunate to have good role models as parents - many aren't so fortunatea and have to look elsewhere.

 

[carp614]

I studied on this for some time last year and decided this: By becoming an official member of the fellowship to which I belong, I have chosen to submit myself and my family to the Lord and to the pastor the Lord anointed to lead my fellowship. My pastor is my spiritual leader. I consult with him on spiritual issues I face and often will do exactly what he says I should do.

In submitting myself and my family to his leadership, I did not abdicate my responsibility as spiritual leader of my family. If the pastor says I have to do something that is against God's will and/or against scripture I am under no obligation to do what he says.

I believe that a good, God anointed spiritual leader will advise me, but won't try to run my life or my family for me.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I apologize that I did not have the chance to respond to everyone's posts. I just wanted to express my appreciation for taking the time to help me with this question. Likes for everyone.

 

[RDKirk]

I follow the leaders who gave us that scripture, but cant follow a denomination nor need to. Whos denomination should i obey and submit to?

The bible says:

Obey your leaders and submit to them --- Hebrews 13

So, let's be clear here: You fully intend to disobey the bible, and to continue to argue against obeying the bible. And you think you're justified by creating an excuse out of thin air to disobey the bible.

 

[royal priest]

The bible says:

Obey your leaders and submit to them --- Hebrews 13

So, let's be clear here: You fully intend to disobey the bible, and to continue to argue against obeying the bible. And you think you're justified by creating an excuse out of thin air to disobey the bible.

Not to mention losing out on the immense benefit of Christ's provision of shepherds to His flock.

 

[Paidiske]

I think it's perfectly fine - and good - for a preacher to give examples or suggestions for what the consequences of a particular text might/ought be for those in the congregation.

I'd add a dimension I don't think many above have touched on; I don't think the pulpit is primarily for dealing with people's individual struggles/issues/sins. I think it is more for looking at the community as a whole, its dynamics, its mission, and how the Scripture text being preached on relates to all of that.

So for example, on Sunday I preached on a text that suggested we should "think bigger" about God's action and mission, and my illustrations/suggestions were about what difference that might make to what we do as a parish. Now that will have implications for individuals too, but I didn't put the individual in the foreground. If that makes sense?

Note that that's not quite the same as telling them what to do, or what they should do. Generally I think we have to be very careful not to tip over into controlling or abusive behaviour.

 

[W2L]

Are you in congregation that doesn't actually do anything?

Do you just sit in the pews on Sunday, hear a homily, and then go back home again?

Does your congregation not have a fragment of Christ's mission? Is your pastor not leading that effort?

And if so, don't you have a fragment of your congregation's fragment of Christ's mission? And aren't you following your pastor's lead?

And if not...what are you in the Body of Christ for? Just for a free ride to heaven?

I follow scripture not pastors. Sorry if that offends you.

 

[W2L]

The bible says:

Obey your leaders and submit to them --- Hebrews 13

So, let's be clear here: You fully intend to disobey the bible, and to continue to argue against obeying the bible. And you think you're justified by creating an excuse out of thin air to disobey the bible.

Im a big boy and i know right from wrong.

 

[RDKirk]

Im a big boy and i know right from wrong.

And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.

 

[W2L]

And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.

1 Corinthians 14:20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.