# Ordination standards for Third World Churches



## Pergamum (Oct 18, 2007)

Here is a quote by John Frame about Race and ordination standards. There is much overlap in that subject (race) and the subject of missionary work among Third World Christians. In my part of the world the Presbyterian denominations lack much forward progress because discipleship of future leadership is not happening. They are said to be "full in the head, and lazy in the feet" as far as evangelism and training others. Below is Frame's suggestion that might combat this:


_One of these traditions has been the tradition of a “learned ministry,” which I will discuss at greater length. The academic emphasis of the Reformed movement has led to an emphasis on academic qualifications for pastors. Reformed denominations typically demand an A. B. degree or equivalent, plus some amount of seminary training. And they give to pastoral candidates rigorous examinations in biblical languages, church history, and theological subjects. Members of minority groups typically don’t have the financial or educational prerequisites for this kind of study. The result is that very few minority people qualify to become Reformed pastors. But to attract minority church members it is necessary to ordain minority church officers. This is, I think, a major barrier to minority participation in Reformed churches.

There is much to be said for the concept of a “learned ministry.” The “parson” of early American villages was often the one member of the community with an academic training. He became the de facto local expert, not only on theology, but also on science, history, etc. Some would like to see the Christian church regain this cultural ascendancy.

But it can hardly be argued that such a degree of learning is a biblical requirement for ministry. The New Testament requirements do include the provision that an overseer be “able to teach” (1 Tim. 3:2), and we may infer from 2 Tim. 4:2 that he should be able to “Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage…” Compare Tit. 1:9. Surely these responsibilities require some head-knowledge as well as heart-knowledge. But they do not require, even in our present-day culture, an A. B. or equivalent. The apostles themselves were perceived to be “unschooled, ordinary men” (Acts 4:13). With the exception of Paul, they were not trained in the rabbinic schools, let alone what we would now describe as the disciplines of the liberal arts. The New Testament writers express themselves, not in the Greek of the poets and philosophers, but in the Koine of the common people.

Western missionaries planting tribal churches in areas new to the gospel often encourage these churches to install indigenous leadership as early as possible. Such leaders need to know the Gospel and the basics of the Bible. But no one insists that a young church need wait until some members of the tribe earn A. B. degrees before they can become pastors or elders. Yet Reformed churches routinely insist on such educational requirements (with some slight flexibility) in preparing people for ordination in America.

Why should there be such a discrepancy between our standards for mission churches and our standards for home churches? The mission field exists on US territory today. Educational expectations differ greatly in different ethnic and cultural communities. It still makes some sense to require college or university education of those called to be senior pastors of largely white suburban churches. It makes no sense at all to require such education of those called to work, say, with Hispanic migrant farm workers.

So my suggestion is that we recognize a broader range of educational requirements for different kinds of ministry, rather than having a common set of requirements for everybody who is to be ordained. Of course, some requirements must be met by all candidates: all must have a good knowledge of Scripture and Reformed theology. All must have good ability to communicate these truths in preaching, teaching, counseling. (I would actually elevate the requirements in these areas.) But there should be no requirements as to how this knowledge is obtained (whether by seminary, tutoring, private study). And of course there should be an emphasis on the qualities of character that dominate the Pauline lists of qualifications for church office (1 Tim. 3:1-10, Tit. 1:5-9), qualities that need to be emphasized far more in Reformed churches. But there is no reason also to require college preparation of all ordinands.

It may be that those who are ordained with lesser preparation will need more supervision when they enter ministry. Normally in Presbyterianism we assume that once a man is ordained to the teaching ministry he has all the tools: he is fully prepared to take any responsibility in the church, without any additional help. Of course, in our hearts we know that is wrong. Every pastor needs help, especially in his first years in ministry. In Presbyterianism, supervision of young pastors is supposed to come through presbytery, but that supervision is often very slow in coming. For this purpose, one is attracted to something like Episcopacy, in which one man is charged with supervising the ministries of other men. Presbyteries can approximate this by energizing their committees on “The Minister and His Work.” Through some such mechanism it could be recognized that the education of ministers in an ongoing thing; it doesn’t end with ordination. Given such a system, those who enter ministry with less educational preparation than others could receive regular guidance and counsel from more experienced and knowledgeable church leaders.

Does this mean that minority pastors would hold a second-class ordination? No. In my judgment every pastor should be under authority, under supervision. We should not assume that ordination gives the right to autonomous ministry, following the supervised trial period of licensure. Ordination rightly confers some privileges: rights of participation in session and presbytery; rights to administer sacraments. But it should not be the end of accountability. If every teaching elder is accountable to some fellow-presbyter (s), then we need not worry that this process will distinguish some as second-class. _





Brothers, what think ye?


----------



## elnwood (Oct 18, 2007)

I am in complete agreement. In Baptist polity, this is easily exercised. The local church decides the educational requirements because they themselves hire the pastor. Ergo, a church in Washington, DC could require a pastor with a Ph.D. The church I went to in DC had multiple pastors with Ph.Ds.

The church I went to in San Diego had a pastor with only a high school diploma and a handful of college classes. Yet, he had an excellent grasp of theology and the Word and passed an ordination exam given by three well-known Reformed Baptist preachers, two of whom had accredited seminary doctorates.

My ecclesiology is very similar to my political philosophy. I think that it is best to regulate standards at the local level than at the higher levels. Those at the local level have a better idea of what is needed in order to minister to their particular community.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 11, 2007)

So, what education standards should a minister have?


Also, at what point does a missionary turn over a foreign chuch plant to local control.


----------



## DMcFadden (Nov 11, 2007)

During the past 26 years I have served on the standing ordination council in my denonimation (the past 14 yrs as chair). Examining some 500+ candidates for ordination has given me a somewhat different perspective than some of you. 

1. Full disclosure . . . while the group is Baptist, it does require both a B.A. and M.Div. (or equivalent).

2. I _believe_ in a learned clergy. My own resume includes three theological degrees plus another one in progress (plus a M.A. in organizational management, a 30 unit program in non-profit management from UCLA, and a MBA certificate).

3. At least in Baptist circles, I'm not so sure that the M.Div. has delivered on its promise. Candidates often seem ill-prepared for the simplest ministerial functions. And, for those who attend a "cafeteria" seminary, the process of instruction seems to inculcate an epistemic paralysis where the "one the one hand" cancels out the "on the other hand" rendering them useless (give me a Reformed, Dispensational, OR (even, shudder) Arminian seminary anyday over the motley mix in most "evangelical" seminaries!). Perhaps you truly Reformed guys attending Reformed schools come out with less uncertainty, but most cafeteria grads have a very tough time proclaiming a prophetic word from the Lord (e.g., "on this text, some scholars say, but on the other hand several others say . . ."). 

Plus, a shocking number of seminary profs move from the academy to the academy, without any significant local church experience in between the two. When a man is fully taught, he WILL be just like his teacher. Unfortunately, graduate degrees in biblical studies and theology do not of themselves correlate with ministerial effectiveness. Three years of "learning" from PhD's only teaches you how to act like them.

4. Frankly, I have come to believe in competence over credentials. And, those who have been mentored by an effective pastor are probably better prepared to serve than many of those who have a B.A./M.Div.

5. If I could re-write the world (probability stands at 0.000000%), we would require seminary profs to have substantial real-world experience and allow for the option of some ministerial candidates to do their studies under the direction of an experienced pastor (with MP3 seminary level courses to be sure that the content is not short sheeted in the process).

6. Greek, Hebrew, Theology, Bible, and Philosophy are ESSENTIAL, not dispensible. However, can't we find a better way of delivering the content without making the resulting ordinands so learnedly incompetent? Repeatedly, I have witnessed the seminary "teaching" unintentionally much that is deleterious to effective ministry without even realizing it.

7. I am greatly impressed with some of the Reformed seminaries mentioned on this board. Perhaps they avoid some of the problems I have experienced with graduates from mostly interdenominational seminaries. However, if we expect the church to be faithfully served, the learned clergy must be taught to be both "learned" and "clergy."

In Reformed circles, there are typically few problems with pastors knowing the theology and polity of their denominations. That does not, however, mean that they can effectively facilitate the health and growth of the congregation. Having good elders alongside you makes an enormous difference. But, I will still carp about the need for more pastoral experiential training.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Nov 11, 2007)

The purpose of ordination exams is to evaluate the candidates knowledge and gifts. If he has demonstrated sufficient knowledge then who cares how he got it? In America, seminary is the more common route to go. In other times and places, discipleship or apprenticeship was the way to go. I think either is a perfectly viable option. So long as the standards are met for ordination, and his gifts have been tested and affirmed in the church, it shouldn't matter how he was educated. Most Reformed denominations do in fact allow a loophole for such non-seminary cases, though it is rarely used.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 11, 2007)

An initial note - I've read Ken Jones argue that one of the primary problems in the inner city Churches is an ignorant clergy. My own experience with the Chaplains of many such denominations is that oration is valued over Theology. Just the other day, we celebrated the cake cutting ceremony for the Marine Corps Birthday and we had a chaplain who obviously came from the inner city. He was giving an impassioned prayer that was really a motivational speech - all really quite blasphemous. The female chaplain was responding out loud in the crowd. Nothing about Christ whatsoever but simply about how we need to become better Marines and leaders and more motivated.

It is anecdotal, I know, but I've got quite a bit anectdotal experience with Churches of this nature.

Is the spread of just "any Gospel" a good thing Pergie? I'm not convinced it is. Back in the mid-90's people were really excited that the Jesus video was being shown all over the globe. Interviewed thereafter, the responses on "what it meant" were extremely varied - virtually none orthodox.

If you go into Latin America or Africa there is virtually little spread of the Gospel in relation to the spread of the Trinity Broadcast Network and Oneness Pentecostalism. Even on the island of Okinawa, a Church that teaches the Gospel is like a small island in a sea of Word of Faith and other Charismatic expressions or "Joe Olsteen" expressions. Being at the ground level of trying to spread the Gospel in a foreign land that doesn't _seem_ impoverished for opportunity to spread the Gospel has given me a fresh perspective on the absolute necessity for an educated ministry and is actually teaching truth.

That all said, I do think that, organizationally, some place too much value in a "check in the box" with respect to completing an MDiv and passing an examination and Churches do not nurture men for real leadership. On the one hand, they might be missing some opportunities to allow men to Pastor who have sufficient gifting and knowledge and leadership while, simultaneously, thinking a man is qualified for Pastor simply because one day he didn't have a degree and the next day he does. It reflects our society and its view of degrees. I'm not against degrees and education but I do wish people would balance all requirements out some times.

For my part, then, I would never look at a situation in the third world and simply try to be pragmatic and overlook ignorance and say: "But it has to get done." I think that lacking a qualified man to do a work that seems to be absolutely necessary is an indication that the Lord hasn't provided the person yet for that work. That doesn't mean that you stop trying to attract qualified people but it also doesn't mean trying to distill down to a point of minimum standards because a warm and willing body is better than no body at all. Witness the problems the Army is having with recruiting right now and the standards they are now accepting just to fill bodies. That kind of standard lowering always backfires - even with things less spiritually dire.


----------



## DMcFadden (Nov 11, 2007)

SemperFideles said:


> For my part, then, I would never look at a situation in the third world and simply try to be pragmatic and overlook ignorance and say: "But it has to get done." I think that lacking a qualified man to do a work that seems to be absolutely necessary is an indication that the Lord hasn't provided the person yet for that work. That doesn't mean that you stop trying to attract qualified people but it also doesn't mean trying to distill down to a point of minimum standards because a warm and willing body is better than no body at all. Witness the problems the Army is having with recruiting right now and the standards they are now accepting just to fill bodies. That kind of standard lowering always backfires - even with things less spiritually dire.



I am saddened to hear how prevalent the "prosperity gospel" (I refuse to use the upper case for the word in THIS context!) is in the third world. Yikes! Maybe it is just the fact that I did a masters in management, but leadership seems to be a real lack in my own seminary program (and most others that I know about). The office of pastor is NOT merely that of a theologian, but of a practioner. And, it is difficult to learn practical ministry skills only from academic theologians.

As to the original point of this thread (sorry for my thread drift), third world pastors NEED training as precise as anybody else. If they are to counter the surplus of heterodoxy imported from the U.S., they must have tools to interpret Scripture, place it in its historical context, understand the history of doctrine, and be competent to make theological judgments on various issues facing them in their own unique cultural contexts. Again, I vote for using the technology of the day (e.g., MP3) to give future pastors in the third world the functional equivalent of an M.Div., but in a more culturally relevant and pedagogically appropriate way so that the "learned" part does not dwarf the "clergy" part of the descriptor of a trained pastor.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 11, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> So, what education standards should a minister have?
> 
> 
> Also, at what point does a missionary turn over a foreign chuch plant to local control.



I have the deepest philosophical answer known to man: it depends. I think it is safe to play each case on a situation by situation basis.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 11, 2007)

I did a blog post some time ago on the presumably unconscious elitism that sometimes arises from a rigid list of academic requirements for ordination.

I think it's also worthwhile asking whether John Witherspoon did us a disservice: whether Samuel Johnson (I think) was not right. In short, whether the _lecture_ model is really the best didactic method.


----------



## westminken (Nov 11, 2007)

How about taking the seminary level education to these minority pastors? Just some food for thought. It is being done right now by certain men that have been called to this particular mission field.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 11, 2007)

The OPC goes to Korea, goes to Uganda.

Her missionaries start a church. And immediately start training elders. And then found a pastors training academy.

A friend of mine from Seminary, took his MDiv, and immediately went back to Uganda and started teaching students everything he just spent 4 years learning. In addition to being a pastor/missionary. It takes more work, much more, to give people without our education system _just the basics_ of a theological education. But it has got to be done. That is the ONLY WAY a self-sustaining church, with the ability to present a credible alternative to the WOF and pentecostal movements (and the romanists, and anything else out there), will have staying power.

Look: Jesus' mentor-model is still possibly the single, best intensive course--especially if the followers are "uneducated, common men" (Act 4:13). But they still spent over THREE YEARS in the school of Christ, and still needed a good dose of Holy Ghost power to throw the switch, and truly "get it." A guy like Apollos took far less time to get up to speed, and to rise to the first rank of teachers.

There is simply no way to create a church overnight. Even the NT church had relatively significant initial advantages, as OT saints (many of them synagogue elders) became NT saints. And we just tend to totally miss the fact that these short, closely connected, fast-paced chapters in Acts jump sometimes over DECADES of dull, drudge, _boring_ church work. But when we read the payoff, we mustn't forget all the labor that went into it.


----------



## Kevin (Nov 11, 2007)

Mission to the World ( the ARP mission ) has an innovative program called Mobile Theological Training Team or MT3. The "team" is made up of well trained (PhD) men with pastoral expirience who travel to various mission fields to teach courses in local bible schools/seminaries.

A good friend of mine serves on this team and he travels to various countries. He is just back from a month of teaching in SA at 2 schools. The concept is that 3 to 5 men who are qualified to teach seminary level courses travel to various parts of the world delivering the same courses to each school in turn, thus giving hundreds of local men acces to a seminary education who could not otherwise recieve one.

Each local school is the work of a local presbytry or missionary. The visiting prof will spend at least a week or often more, up to one month, before returning home. 

This team has served schools in Surinam, Kenya, Pakistan, South Africa, Hungary, Uganda, and I am sure others I can not reacall.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 11, 2007)

Kevin said:


> Mission to the World ( the ARP mission ) has an innovative program called Mobile Theological Training Team or MT3. The "team" is made up of well trained (PhD) men with pastoral expirience who travel to various mission fields to teach courses in local bible schools/seminaries.
> 
> A good friend of mine serves on this team and he travels to various countries. He is just back from a month of teaching in SA at 2 schools. The concept is that 3 to 5 men who are qualified to teach seminary level courses travel to various parts of the world delivering the same courses to each school in turn, thus giving hundreds of local men acces to a seminary education who could not otherwise recieve one.
> 
> ...



 I'm guessing that you have some former military men in the ARP with that acronym. The Marines currently provide MTT's (Military Training Teams) to both Afghanistan and Iraq.

It's funny, when it comes to the military, everybody knows you can't just send some inexperienced person to train men for battle but we lower our standards for an even harder work. The more I live the Christian life the more I understand why Paul uses so many military analogies.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 11, 2007)

SEMPERFIDELIS:

"...Is the spread of just "any Gospel" a good thing Pergie?..."


Hmmmm...when did I say THAT?



A false Gospel versus a basic Gospel are two different things. A good simple education in the basics is different from needing 4 years of Bible School plus 4 yearsof seminary to minister at all...especially in areas where you can a hundred of milles without passing a single school.


CONTRAMUNDUM wrote: "It takes more work, much more, to give people without our education system just the basics of a theological education."

Yes, amen. 


But how far beyond these basics do we require before we let locals own their own church? DO we hold them to our own Western academic standards?


----------



## Kevin (Nov 12, 2007)

SemperFideles said:


> Kevin said:
> 
> 
> > Mission to the World ( the ARP mission ) has an innovative program called Mobile Theological Training Team or MT3. The "team" is made up of well trained (PhD) men with pastoral expirience who travel to various mission fields to teach courses in local bible schools/seminaries.
> ...






I'll ask.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 12, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> SEMPERFIDELIS:
> 
> "...Is the spread of just "any Gospel" a good thing Pergie?..."
> 
> ...


I didn't say that you did but the point of my soliloquy was to note that you usually end up with one in the end if you take too many shortcuts or take a minimalist approach to the Gospel. I acknowledged that academic credentialing isn't the answer but are all missionary organizations, in many cases, doing much better to really equip simply because they got boots on the ground? The funny thing is that some of these places that criticize a specific education will have their own minimal training and, like the Churches that assume a seminary education guarantees they're ready for ministry, some assume that the completion of their school equips in the same manner.

I noted that it wasn't a matter of being in a rigorous and expensive MDiv that equipped for ministry. Bruce provided a model that I very much agree with in terms of the manner in which the OPC performs missions. Even in the Acts of the Apostles, you may not find Seminaries being set up but you do see a long "dwell time" to ensure that men are being built up in the Church and equipped. I think the requirements for ministry in a man are aptness to teach, a Godly life, and not a small amount of maturity that includes being wise in the "ways of the world." You just can't nail down the "...what about a 4 year program with just a Bible degree...?" Sure, depending on the man but no way depending on another. No matter how much you educate some they'll never be ready for ministry while there is always some minimal education and "watching" that needs to occur before you're sure someone is ready for leadership. Churches need to be patient enough to be ready to send people out when they're ready and refuse to send out anyone ill equipped. But pragmatism won't allow that in many corners.

You had me thinking about this while working out today. I even thought about the fact that a "minimalist" attitude is part of the reason why many men don't really feel the necessity for improvement or education. People rise to the level of expectations. Set low expectations on readiness for something and that's what you're always going to get. (Again, I'm not arguing for PhD's but I am trying to explain my principle).

One of the reasons my recent Pastor left was likely due to impatience and frustration. I think he thought he could just pour Miracle Gro on people with a 3 week teaching series on marriage followed by a through the Bible in a year preaching series followed by 5 weeks and a surface-level interaction in Wayne Grudem's Systematic theology. He had initially agreed with me that the poverty of evangelism in Okinawa was primarily a problem with "fruit". That is, there weren't very many mature Christians who were bearing it. The remedy had to be long term however if it was really agreed that this was the problem. I was flabbergasted as, within a month, he moved from the strong presentation that it is our union with Christ produces this motivation to an exhortation that everyone in the Church should be out Evangelizing. It was almost as if he thought that people had actually matured.

Well, it's sort of a reflection of a typical Evangelical attitude that the job just needs to get done and that as soon as a man leaves the Baptistry that he should be on the corner next day preaching to people about Jesus. Because _everybody_ is qualified for what many believe is full-orbed mission work, then what reason would anyone possibly have to become _more qualified_? What's the big deal about studying more of Scripture since it would just seem to interfere with the time spent telling people about Jesus?

There's a reason why the type of Churches I described above flourish in Okinawa: Cotton Candy is easy to make and it's easy to teach another person how to make it.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 12, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> CONTRAMUNDUM wrote: "It takes more work, much more, to give people without our education system just the basics of a theological education."
> 
> Yes, amen.
> 
> ...



Owning the church. I think its important that elder training begin almost immediately. I see some missionary efforts as designed to provide long-term, stable employment for the missionary, when he ought to be trying to work himself into superfluity as soon as possible. Ruling elders need no more than the basic qualifications found in the Pastorals.

As for the ministry, I think you need to define not what "western acad. stds." are, but what (as pastor McFadden said) are the minimum constituent elements of a first generation theolgical training regimen.

I have to say that I agree with pastor McFadden that some original language skill--however rudimentary--is nonnegotiable. Has to be there. If it isn't there to START WITH, the likelihood that it can be seen as VITAL later on is very slim. The importance of this skill, though it may not be well developed for the first couple generations of pastors, needs to be pounded into the heads. Shucks, its hard to get that through to Americans!

Teach them the Bible, OT and NT, and biblical, covenant theology. They need to know the story of Redemption, as the Bible presents it so they know the functional outline of the Bible's message. That alone is one of the chiefest safeguards against error and heresy.

As for theology, they need to master a Protestant Confessional statement, they should know how it relates to the most important creedal statements of the church down through the ages. And then they ought to have some grounding in a systematic theology. This is necessary to help them gain a grasp of essential theological coherence, and how all the data on a locus is examined and arranged. If Calvin's Institutes is available, I would just use that.

And if there is no ST they can read (can't read English! No ST of any kind translated in a known tongue!)--then the missionary needs to break new ground. His instructional notes, perhaps only as taken down by the students, will be the foundation for this critical text.

Bottom line: why wouldn't the missionary want to impart as much of his own training to the next generation of pastors as they can absorb, along the way engendering in them an insatiable desire for self-improvement? You may not be able to teach everything, but you know what you USE to prepare to teach and preach. The next generation needs whatever that is at a minimum. And trust the Lord who calls to gift the men he's calling.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 12, 2007)

Rich: 

I like your wording of "dwell time" - you seem to have hit the nail on the head. Maturity is key. In the US we mistake education for maturity - when education and maturity are not the same and education does not equal maturity. This seems to be one of your points right? If so, I say AMEN.


I do take objection to the term "minimalist." At least if you apply it to what I am advocating. 

I am not looking for the least amount of skills that a candidate can master, but I am looking for "entrance level" requirements. Of course, these men are going to continue learning. How can I, however, use them before they learn Greek, learn a confession (remember, some places don't even have a written language, much less a ST in their language and not even a single bible book yet translated). The seminary education in the US is very classroom-oriented and many get by in the academics and turn out to be disasters in real life.

I am for a "graduated level of service" for lack of a better phrase. AN increasing level of responsibility as they mature. A decreasing level of guidance and oversight as the new leaders prove themselves. Not just one "graduation" but many small advancements. 

Rich, let me say I do recognize your concerns. They are very real.




Rich (and all), what did you think of Frame's article?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 12, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> Rich:
> 
> I like your wording of "dwell time" - you seem to have hit the nail on the head. Maturity is key. In the US we mistake education for maturity - when education and maturity are not the same and education does not equal maturity. This seems to be one of your points right? If so, I say AMEN.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry if you interpret everything as specifically applying to what you are arguing for. I recognize that you are not arguing for a complete pragmatism. I am trying to pull together a lot of concepts. I've got "my Church on the brain" right now. Much of what I'm kind of expressing is based on what I encounter and I'm not necessarily saying you have this infected concept of education.



> Rich (and all), what did you think of Frame's article?



I think what Frame is saying is sort of what many of us are saying. The reality in life is that degrees are thoughtlessly used, in many cases, as a "check in the box" so there is an automatic insistence upon one. My current Commanding General often makes the sly observation that people who get assigned to Headquarters Marine Corps don't become instantly wise simply because they travelled to Washington D.C. to an assignment there but it is typical of human nature to equate that someone has been somewhere with their skill or competence for it. The more you live life, the more you realize that people are people no matter where they are or what degree they have.

I'm not at all eschewing the idea of degrees. The seminaries have a rigorous process. I just wish that Churches didn't think they have done their job simply by sending a man to Seminary and then trusting that he somehow figured out the world around him simply by the degree he achieved. He needs the education but there's more as well.

I would love to see men like Frame and others who are equipped to train men who can't afford this education with the same kind of rigorous training on the cheap. I'm excited to see a lot of RTS' and WTS' stuff for free on iTunes now. It does take a mature Presbytery to begin to recognize that a full-orbed education is more than that Seminary diploma and, in some cases, if you do it right you can achieve the ends properly if you invest time in a man.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 12, 2007)

Rich: I think we just agreed 100% - thanks for your last reply! 


I have some follow up questions, but these deaprt a bit and so I am starting a new thread.


----------



## Iconoclast (Nov 12, 2007)

This is a very interesting thread with many issues being addressed. Not to be too pragmatic,but it is like
the idea of anyone of us coming to the scene of an accident. We might prefer that a trained medical professional was available to treat the injured. But we might be called upon to preform a life saving activity that is temporal in nature[ apply a tourinquet, mouth to mouth, traceomoty,etc] . That action is not to be preferred to a trained
person. You do what you can with what you have, but recognize that what might be God's provision
in the short term,might eventually give way to a more completely trained individual
Amos got the job done as God called him where he was. [Paul Dowling is doing a great job preaching through Amos by the way on sermonaudio,,, listen to the one called Inhumane Britain.]


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 12, 2007)

Iconoclast said:


> This is a very interesting thread with many issues being addressed. Not to be too pragmatic,but it is like
> the idea of anyone of us coming to the scene of an accident. We might prefer that a trained medical professional was available to treat the injured. But we might be called upon to preform a life saving activity that is temporal in nature[ apply a tourinquet, mouth to mouth, traceomoty,etc] . That action is not to be preferred to a trained
> person. You do what you can with what you have, but recognize that what might be God's provision
> in the short term,might eventually give way to a more completely trained individual
> Amos got the job done as God called him where he was. [Paul Dowling is doing a great job preaching through Amos by the way on sermonaudio,,, listen to the one called Inhumane Britain.]



While I don't completely disagree, the Church is not quite the scene of an accident. I think part of the reason people feel like everything has to be done right away is a lack of prudence and appreciation for how glacial the process of Christian maturity is. It's partly the triage mentality that leads to slapping bandages on everything.

The Church is filled with men and women that got their merit badge in first aid but there's little appreciation that the average man shouldn't be satisfied with this.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 12, 2007)

More on the triage mentality:

Should different priorities be given to different parts of the world?


In the West where there are Bibles and churches galore, things are not quite so urgent and more care and education should be taken.

In some countries where access and understanding of the Gospel is nil, should we be getting uneducated evangelists out there with a basic message in advance of the more educated ones that will take 5 or 6 years at least down the line. 


I.e. better the paramedic-in-training now than the doctor after one is dead.


I think the analogy does fit for some of the world. A college degree..ha...even literacy is a rare thing in some parts. Bible school then seminary (about 8 years post high schol) is a big jump for a people who don't even have schools.

Then of course, missiologically, many oppose the actions of missionaries who want to build schools instead of preach the Gospel. But some litercy training must be done before even sort of Bible school can be successful.


----------



## Iconoclast (Nov 13, 2007)

*clarification*

Quote:While I don't completely disagree, the Church is not quite the scene of an accident. I think part of the reason people feel like everything has to be done right away is a lack of prudence and appreciation for how glacial the process of Christian maturity is. It's partly the triage mentality that leads to slapping bandages on everything

Rich, let me clarify. I do not mean the church is like the scene of an accident. I was thinking that Pergamum
was describing missionary work where little or no bible influence has happened yet.
It sounds like many times he is coming across unchurched ,minimally educated, somewhat destitute,persons.
That is how I meant the analogy. An individual christian might need to make an initial assesment of how to build a bridge to present the claims of scripture concerning sin and salvation first. 
Once the bible is established as the rule of faith and practice, then the discipleship process can be established as a crucial part of someone's new life In Christ'
I recently came across a man who has a prison ministry where they go into the prisons indivdually, make contact, then link the contacts to a local church on the outside,through snail mail, and or email.
Maybe in some missionary situations there is much more isolation and obstacles that lead to less than ideal circumstances. I believe God will bless the faithful witness and service offered by this individual,until other believers can come along to help out.
Year's ago I worked on a job where I spoke with many men about the scripture. Once in awhile one of them would say if you are that into the bible,why don't you go away to bible school and discuss it there?
I answered that God uses people who are sinners, to reach other sinners with the truth. If God would send a pastor to the job I would be quiet and listen and learn also. But unless I see a pastor or evangelist get hired, I see that individual christians are to be ready to give an answer. Study to show thyself approved 
The goal should be as Bruce indicated in his post,a relationship,leading to forming an assembly and training those in the assembly.
Pergamum,was that what you were speaking about,or did I miss the point of the original Post.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 13, 2007)

Thank you Anthony for the clarification. It is helpful.

Blessings Brother!


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 13, 2007)

Iconoclast: Yes, exactly.


----------

