Deacons and Deaconesses: Do Local Churches have Biblical precedent for both or either?

Deacons and Deaconesses: Do Independent Baptist Churches have Biblical precedent for both? (Part One)

Most denominations I'm aware of have at least (at a minimum) one pastor/elder and if large enough one deacon. Some have one pastor and multiple deacons and some also multiple elders and with multiple deacons. We've discussed elders and congregations already but who are these deacons?  Men or women? Servants? What are the requirements or expectations?  Do they teach or have authority? Are they a rotating board? I would guess by what I can read and have experienced for over twenty five years in independent baptist churches that how you define the "purpose" or "function" of a deacon defines more who qualifies for this position than what the Bible actually says.  So on that note what does the Bible actually say? On another note, where have we made up as roles the Bible never gave or potentially never intended by God? 

To evaluate the scriptural data available there are two potential options?  (To be fair, we could even ignore what the Bible says and make it up--don't laugh we do this more than you think). First, we'll examine the references to deacons as a noun.  Then secondly, to examine the references to serving or acting as a deacon in verb form. We are left to appeal to the only forms where this church activity even exists. From there it just gets more complicated dealing with two divisive or contested verses: Romans 16:1-2 and 1 Timothy 3:11. So let's begin.

The noun διάκονος appears 29 times in the NT and six times in the LXX. In the KJV it appears as three terms: minister, servant, and deacon (3x). At face value the terms minister and servant help us understand what role we're talking of in the local church.  The three references to the term deacon are simply transliterations and don't help us much. By way of reminder, a transliteration is copies the underlying letters of another language into the letter of the receptor language.  For example, consider the term ἄγγελος. A transliteration would be the term angel. You can almost without knowledge of Greek see with your own eyes the letters A-N-G-E-L.  If I wanted to translate the term I would use another English word such as messenger.  So simply seeing the English word deacon doesn't help much. However, the uses of this term contain several contextual issues of great importance which will be discussed in detail later. For example, these individuals minister or function as servants to include Christ himself modeling a servant (Rom 15:8-9). The three references to deacon (as a church "office") will be given special attention (Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3 (2x)). And of course once we get a good NT basis for what a deacon is or is not maybe this will help with Phoebe's role/function in Roman 16 as well.

As for the verb form: to minster or to serve how does this help us understand this role? Simply by the numbers it occurs 37 times in the NT. The NT has the following senses for this verb: to serve, to minister, or to wait on. No references to a leadership role.  This is a role or function or service.  Consider some examples. Jesus came to serve (Mt 20:28). The angels served Jesus (Mt 4:11). This was not the focused mission of the apostles (Acts 6:6). Remember Mary and Martha. One of them was zealous in serving (Lk 10:40). So this act of serving/ministering is seen by men, women, angels, and even Christ himself.  So the subjects who perform this verb doesn't help much. This is a simple term for serving/ministering to other people of multiple genders and classes.

So what can we take away?  Christ served. Angels serve. Men and women serve. There appears to be nothing inherent in this term of any idea of leadership. These are servants in particular situations. So to really get at the church function of deacons we'll have to dig into the references where they have been transliterated for this church function.  We'll have to look at each one of our "deacon" passages.  What do they tell us? How do they help us understand this role/function within the local church?

I'm afraid the NT available data for word studies is not helpful to answer this question.  However, it does provide some interesting starting points.  First, the underlying Greek in noun form is translated as servant, minister, and three times as deacon. Second, similar results are for the verb form: to serve or to minister. So to answer this dilemma we'll need to focus on the contexts where the term deacon is actually used as a local church role/function.

Read. Enjoy. Comment.

Fasting, Praying and Pulpit Committees (Orthopraxy in Local church decision making)

Fasting, Praying, Pulpit Committees and a Plurality of Lay Elders in Local Baptist Churches (Part Three)

As we continue our series on congregationalism (especially a subset called a pulpit committee) and a local church having a plurality of lay elders, we would be falling short to leave out Acts 13.  So it is to here we turn. The verses of primary importance are as follows,

"And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed..." (Acts 13: 3-4a).

So why are these verses so important?  Maybe we should ask who are the subjects? I've tried to highlight the important pronouns. So lets go through the context and focus on the details that might help us here.  By way of reminder, we are trying to focus on who is making decisions in the local church.  What is the combination or focus? What do the scriptures say must be our focus not what we want to see in them to defend a particular position.

First, the context is a local church in the city of Antioch.  We see this in verse one "in the church at Antioch." For sake of argument I'll simply refer to this as a local congregation. 

Second, there are actual men in the first century functioning as prophets and teachers in a local that particular local church.  Both of which appear as plural nouns.  So at a minimum there are multiple prophets and teachers functioning in that particular church.  How we determine which roles/functions continue in 2018 is another question and a much needed thread. These are two of the four gifts to the local church found in Ephesians 4:11. Yes I'm including pastor-teacher as one individual. If your highly concerned about whether it's one office or two I recommend Harold Hoehner's commentary Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (pp. 542-546).  They provide an excellent summary of the multiple views here. 

Third, verse two reads "while they were ministering...and fasting" Both verbs are plural and the only subjects mentioned so far are a list of names matching the before mentioned prophets and teachers (Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, Manaen, and Saul). I think the focused subject on these men is even more clear from verse two because the original text includes the emphatic pronoun translated "they" for emphasis and remove any confusion who the subject is. The emphatic pronoun occurs again in the next verse "they" being sent out.  For reference both pronouns are masculine plural pronouns.

Fourth, the Holy Spirit speaks to this group of men to "set apart" two men from their number. See the previous list back in verse one.  Both Barnabas and Saul are in this list of prophets/teachers functioning in the local church.

Fifth, now to our main verse.  Who are the pronouns?  Who "fasted" "prayed" and "laid hands" on these two men?  Any other subjects appear?  Why the need to import the congregation into this except with an outside agenda to prove a particular form of church polity?  Who was "ministering and fasting" back in verse two?  These five men two of which are to depart. Who sent them out?  Obviously, its the prophets/teachers from the previous context.

Well known commentaries agree with this straight forward reading of the text.  Witherington writes concerning the emphatic pronoun, "they are 'set apart' for the task by this church's leaders." (emphasis mine) (Ben Witherington III, The Acts of Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary).  MacArthur likewise agrees, "the leaders laid their hands on them"  (emphasis mine) (John MacArthur Jr. Acts: The MacArthur New Testament Commentary). Consider also Peterson in the Pillar New Testament Commentary, concerning verse three he writes, "the preceding verse stresses the role of the prophets and teachers at Antioch in sending off Barnabas and Saul" (emphasis mine) (David Peterson, Pillar New Testament Commentary: Acts of the Apostles).

Sixth, lets assume for the sake of argument the congregation did this.  Did the entire local church congregation lay hands on them? You can't change the context to say only some (the pulpit committee) laid hands on them (i.e., the local church congregation).  The same subjects perform both verbs. Do we see this today? Are we even willing to consider that a plurality of lay elders is God's chosen means of accountability and leadership in local churches (and they select leaders). To be fair John Pohill, who provided the book of Acts study notes for the ESV Study Bible states, "they...probably refers to the entire congregation" (ESV Study Bible, p. 2109). Pohill's "probably" terminology matches his commentary notes, "It is not clear who laid hands on Paul and Barnabas" (John Pohill, New American Commentary: Acts, 1992, p. 290). Another more recent author Jonathan Leeman, an elder at Capitol Hill Baptist Church, takes this to be the congregation as well, "As they [probably the congregation] were ministering..." (Jonathan Leeman, Don't Fire Your Church Members: The Case for Congregationalism, 2016, p. 108). On the other hand, please note both author's degree of certainty "probably." 

Seems pretty clear from the context.  The functioning elder/teachers (Eph 4) in the local church sent out from their number two men into the ministry outside their local congregation.  I just don't see a congregational decision or vote in this context or in a previous article.  So why the need to vigorously defend congregational polity. From my own personal experience having been in fundamental baptist churches for near 25 years, its not based on a careful exegetical handling of the texts but a collection of proof texts.  So its got to be something else. But what? Is there a balance? Are we potentially too quick to throw out texts?  

Does this product or conclusion match the biblical theology of this topic as revealed in the rest of the scriptures?  Yes. I'd more than happy to see a congregational laying on of hands but I just don't see it the NT context. It's always an elder/pastor performing this function. Let's compare: 

Acts 6:6, "and after praying, they laid their hands on them." Context seems pretty clear this was done by the apostles/elders upon the seven men picked out by the disciples. We'll revisit this text in a later thread on servant/deacons.

1 Timothy 4:15. "Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed on you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery." A office for service given to Timothy by these same means by a group of elders (plural) (same underlying Greek term as elder, πρεσβυτέριον).

Again 1 Timothy 5:22, "Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily..." This command/exhortation was given explicitly to the head of a local church--Timothy.

And again, 2 Timothy 1:6, "I remind you to kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands." Who's the recipient? Timothy.  Notice who laid hands on him?  Who wrote the let? The laying of my hands.  Paul the apostle. Same man from the group in Acts 13.  Wonder where he saw that actually practiced before?

So for the congregational position to hold true.  The subjects can change within the verse despite the grammar.  The context can be avoided or ignored. Two separate emphatic pronouns can change in the same context. And the entirety of the same topic as revealed in the NT is to be ignored.  Does this fit?  If so then you have congregational decision making here in addition to references of church discipline found elsewhere (Mt 18, 1 Cor 5, 2 Th 3). Great! Then be consistent and let the whole congregation lay hands on the pastor/elder when sent out (don't forget to also fast and pray). I'm assuming this includes both the men and women laid hands on them also. 

So what's this got to do with pulpit committees?  Did you see one in the text?  That's my point. With such a strong and emphatic testimony to a plurality of lay elders making local church decisions it would not hurt to go through NT passages that actually address congregational decision making and the areas specifically given to them. If anyone has a responsibility to find other elders and call them it is the elders of the church.  They as men leading the local church have this task, responsibility, and obligation.  Sad thing is that most local church pulpit committees are filled with both men and women unqualified to serve as elders (but they are somehow qualified to know what to look for).

We will have to follow up with more texts, examples, and baptist fundamentalist history.

Read, enjoy, and comment as you fill led.

New Testament Local Church Polity: Elder or Congregational? Part Two

Series Part One

This issue is important as to how God's church governs itself.  What does the New Testament tell us about how decisions are made within the local church?  Part One of this short series discussed the NT data commonly used to teach congregational polity.  This article will take up the other side of the coin focusing on the NT data used to show a plurality of elders in the local church.

By way of reminder, we need to remind ourselves what verses are appropriate to consider in this conversation.  But how do we determine what is appropriate?  Two key ideas govern this process.  First, some verses are what is called "descriptive."  These types of verses "describe" what was actually happening in first century churches and surrounding culture.  Second, there are verses called "prescriptive."  These verses actually tell us or give to us commands concerning how the church or believers are to function today. 

So what verses are interpreted as teaching a plurality of elders within each local church?  The primary source of evidence (at least from a descriptive view) comes from the book of Acts.  The primary verses come from chapters 14, 15, and 20.  Consider the following:

Acts 14:23 "and when they had ordained them elders in every church"

Acts 15:4 "they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders"

Acts 20:17 "and called the elders of the church"

The primary important concept in these verses is that that term for "elders" occurs in the plural and the term for "church" appears in the singular.  At face value, this is interpreted to mean there are multiple elders each local church.  Evidence for this also appears after the book of Acts within epistles written to both local churches and to individuals.  These are as follows:

1 Timothy 5:17 "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine."

Tit 1:5 "that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee"

Jam 5:14 "the elders of the church"

1 Pet 5:1 "the elders among you"

Each of these verses is interpreted in similar fashion as teaching that there are multiple elders in each local church.  Question: then why do some churches only have one pastor?  Is it because the church is too small?  Is it because no one else is qualified within the local church?  Or is it possible that these and other verses can be interpreted as teaching each local church only needs one elder in each local church?

I invite you to search this out.  I will address this issue in a third and final article in this series.  Just some thoughts to consider before the third article:

1. What is ordination?  Associated to this should we ordain every elder in the local church?

2. What is a senior, associate, or youth pastor?  Why these adjectives and what NT precedence if any?

3. What verses teach we should pay elders, and how to decide which ones to pay or not?

4. What is a lay elder, teaching elder, or ruling elder?

5. What are bishops, overseers, pastors, or elders?  How to identify titles and roles?

These are some rough thoughts with (has been pointed out already) may include some grammatical issues.  Sorry for those.

New Testament Local Church Polity: Congregational or Elders? Part One

Who actually makes decisions in the local church? The congregation or elders?  What does the New Testament actually say regarding this issue?  The question sounds simple enough but is actually harder to answer than one might think.

Here are some basic thoughts to consider on this issue:
1. What NT texts describe events occurring in the first century? (Descriptive or Normative texts--fancy words for what was going on in the first century context)
2. What NT texts actually prescribe to us what the church should actually do? (Maybe not a command as such but think along these lines)

(Oh, by the way have different positions don't agree on how to define numbers one and two above).

So with that in mind let's consider the actual NT biblical data.  This article will consider the standard texts used to defend congregational polity.  This basically means that the actual members of the church are making the decisions within the church.  We will consider the following texts: Mt 18, Acts 6, 13, 15; 1 Cor 5, 2 Thess 3, and lastly 1 Tim 5.  These will suffice for now in discussing one side of the issue.

Matthew 18:15-20 involves a context of disciplining a sinning brother "if thy brother" (v. 15).  The context includes three steps: first, confronting the person alone.  Second, confronting the person with someone else.  Third, our concern is that the last stage is to bring the issue before the church (v. 17).  So the last stage in the disciplining process is  bringing the issue before the congregation "the church."  The pronouns in the passage are 2nd person plural "you" not referring to individuals (steps one and two) but step three.  Nearly every book or journal on church discipline includes this passage.  This adds initial weight to the congregation making the final decision (here in the context of discipline).

Acts 6:1-7 includes the popularized texts for the selection of the first NT deacons (the verb form appears as "serve" in verse two).  The apostles have their given tasks.  The people are to select the people to fill this serving role (deacons) if necessary.  The plural noun "you" and "brethren" both refer to the congregation.  They chose seven men for this service.  Verse six does not specifically identify who "prayed" and "laid hands" on those selected.  Either way, the people did the selecting of the seven individuals.  If this passage is only normative, then all the later passages for elders (plural) are in jeopardy also.

Acts 13:1-5 includes the selection of Paul and Barnabas for missionary work (regularly identified as Paul's first missionary journey).  The two men are identified by the Holy Spirit (v. 2).  Someone prays and someone then lays hands on the two men before they depart.  If this parallels Acts 6 then perhaps the laying of hands (v. 3) was done by the people.  The plural verbs point to a corporate commissioning.  Strangely enough even the notes of the ESV Study Bible refer to the pronoun "they" as the "whole congregation."

Acts 15 addresses what is commonly called the Jerusalem Council.  This context involves both the congregation and leaders in tandem.  The church decides to sent representatives (v. 2).  Paul and Barnabas are then sent by the local church congregation (v.3).  These representative are then received by another local church congregation and their leaders (v. 4).  When the decisions are final addressed and discussed by both Peter and James it is agreed to by the congregation with representatives sent (vv. 22-23).  This passage adds weight even when doctrinal issues are stake the congregation is involved.  The decisions are not just dictated to them or their thoughts ignored.

In 1 Cor 5 church discipline is under ("if  any man that is called a brother," v. 11).  The pronouns are in the plural, which could be applied with some degree of consistency throughout commands in the epistles to local churches.  They have the obligation as a congregation (plural members) to remove the unrepentant sinning brother "put away" (v. 13).

2 Thess 3 also appears in the context of local church congregation discipline.  The pronouns here again appear in the plural "you."  The command is tough to obey, nevertheless it is addressed to the congregation not just the leaders "ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly" (v. 6).  The congregation has a responsibility to make the decision in confronting and removing a sinning church member.

Lastly, we shall consider 1 Timothy 5:19-20.  Great care is need in confronting the sinful choices of church "elders."  The pattern from Deut 19 "two or three witnesses" enforces that idea that mulitiple people will be need in sin confrontation (Note same pattern back in Matt 18).  Note the pattern that when "elders" sin (not just any church member) they are to be confronted "before all (v. 20).  Seems to identify the idea of congregational involvement.  I've seen this played out before in local churches when elders have to be confronted.  Note also  the motive "that others may fear."  Seems most natural to take the others as congregation members.  Interestingly here the ESV notes add the phrase "the rest of the elders" potentially making the connection with verse 17.  However, the notes state it could refer to "the rest of the congregation" with the phrase "before all.''  I would suggest the weight shifts toward the whole congregation with both phrases combined.

These texts are enough to at least identify congregational decision making within the local church or among the believers.  Part two will address the texts used by advocates of a plurality of laymen elders.

Hope this helps in this area.  This is only a collection of thoughts.  Definitely not a 30 page, footnoted research paper.  But in essence these texts have to be downplayed, ignored, or never taught to help establish a plurality of elders system within a local church context.  Even if you disagree with the congregational role then maybe you would at least acknowledge accountability is needed for leaders within a local church.
Till next time.