Who Is The Pastor?

Who is your Pastor?

The Pastor according to the New Testament

INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of the last academic year we received a phone call asking to speak to the pastor of the church. When I replied that we had no single pastor overseeing the church, the caller became rather nervous and soon concluded that she was not going to visit due to the absence of a pastor (among other things), despite her tacit agreement with our doctrinal statement. Usually the first question among visitors to our morning meeting on the Lord’s Day is, “Who is your pastor?” The focal point in modern church life today is not the choir or the building (usually called a “church”), but the pastor or clergyman. If he is a particularly gifted speaker, a good communicator and teacher, people will flock to hear him. Members of that congregation will express how they have been blessed with such a gifted man of God. He is everything to them. Many in American Evangelical and Bible churches will confess that it is the pastor’s teaching that draws them to attend any given Christian communion. However, a close examination of the Scriptures and the history of the church paints a different picture of the significance and position of pastors, hence the title of this paper, “Who is Your Pastor”.

The following paper will contrast the Biblical Pattern for the Pastor and pastors taught in the New Testament with the prevailing practice in Protestant and Roman Catholic churches (among others) that a single pastor is the leading teacher and the principle authority over a congregation of believers. The assumption is that, since this has been the practice in Christendom for a very long time, that this it must have biblical authority. It is never questioned. In fact any investigation into the validity of this pattern is deemed a threat to some. Thankfully though, “the word of God is not bound” 2 Timothy 2.9. We will examine some of the history and tradition of the single pastor view in light of the often overlooked teaching from the New Testament as to the identity of the Pastor and the pastors leading to the Christ honouring conclusion that the Lord himself is the Pastor over His own flock and that under-shepherds should function within the Biblical bounds for the edification of the body of Christ Ephesians 4.12. Many of Christ’s “under-shepherds” are indeed godly men, who love the Lord’s people and use their gifts to the glory of God. It is hoped that such might prayerfully read this little paper that they might more effectively use their gifts in the manner prescribed by the primitive church.

It is beyond the scope of this paper to fully develop church polity (the role of apostle, pastors, elders, bishops, priests and deacons). That has been done adequately by others (note a bibliography for further reading) at the conclusion. The intent here is to exalt the person of the Lord Christ and to demonstrate that He is the one who deserves the preeminence amongst those who gather to His blessed Name. Furthermore, it is hoped that this paper might help those who visit Assemblies gathering to the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and ask, “Who is your pastor?” to discover His identity and give Him his rightful place.

DEFNINTIONS OF THE WORD “PASTOR”
Dictionaries are not Scripture. However, the bias in English dictionaries over the centuries has been theologically misleading. They are based on common usage. Since the word pastor is generally understood as the head of a church, any translation which translates the Greek word into pastor, perpetuates this understanding. Shepherd [the more objective word] carries with it the spiritual or Biblical significance of the ones gifted to do the work, that of feeding the flock.

DEFINITION 1. [Merriam Webster]
”Etymology: Middle English pastour, from Middle French, from Latin pastor herdsman, from pascere to feed – more at FOOD: a spiritual overseer; especially : a clergyman serving a local church or parish”

COMMENT: “Feed the flock of God” Acts 20. is an important responsibility given by the apostle Paul. Note well, that the responsibility for feeding a single assembly (or church), was not given to the pastor! That may surprise many. Nor was it given to the bishop. Paul called the elders [presbyter, spiritually mature] (plural) and charged them with that task. However, the definition given by Webster ignores the plurality taught in the Acts in favour of the practices of Christendom. The common practice influenced the editors in their definition for the noun “pastor”, “a clergyman serving a local church or parish”. This definition assumes the notion of a clergyman and the existence of a local or parish church as the standard for the role of pastor. However, such assumptions make no appeal to the Scriptures, merely what is practiced in Christendom, which practice we will examine later. Elders in Acts 20.28 and elsewhere were in the plural [See also 1 Peter 5.1]

DEFINITION 2. [Oxford English Dictionary]
“A shepherd of souls; one who has the spiritual oversight over a company or body of Christians, bishop, priest, minister, etc; spec. the minister in charge of a church or congregation, with particular reference to the spiritual care of his flock.”

COMMENT: How revealing to observe that the most definitive dictionary of English in the world likewise provides the commonly accepted meanings to the word PASTOR without regard to the accurate Biblical pattern. Note the verbiage, “in charge of a church”. This shows the common bias, that a man is the head of a congregation, whereas The New Testament teaches that Christ is the head of the body which is His church. Moreover, spiritual care is said to be of “his” flock. Never does scripture allude to the commonly accepted notion that such or such a church or congregation is Rev. Smith’s Church. All too often a pastor is heard referring to “my people” or “my church” or “my flock”. The venerable Oxford English Dictionary plays into this notion. Finally, the connection made to pastor as “, bishop, priest, minister” declares the Roman catholic origin to the generally accepted thought of church “offices” which is fully manifested in the Church of England, Episcopal, Methodist and other Protestant communions which have inherited the ecclesiastical heritage of Rome in opposition to the clear teaching of Scriptures.

DEFINITION 3: [Arndt and Gingrich A Greek-English Lexicon]

“poimen: shepherd, sheep-herder. 1. lit. …Of the shepherds at Jesus’ birth Lk 2:8, 15, 18, 20…2. fig. b. of those who lead the Christian churches…B Christ 1 Peter 2.25”

COMMENT: This excellent, definitive scholarly resource traces this word though its use in the NT as shepherds of domesticated animals and then those who lead the Christian churches to the Lord Jesus himself in 1 Peter 2.25, “For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls” Note the present position Christ hold over his Flock. He is called “the Shepherd” (same word translated elsewhere “Pastor”) We shall see in the next section why Shepherd is to be preferred. Nevertheless, according to the commonly accepted role of pastor, there is no contextual reason not to translate the word Pastor here. Christ is the Pastor over his Flock. Yet how few view Him as the Pastor? He is also called the Bishop, which means Overseer. The risen Christ is not far off, inactive and incapable of legislating or administering the activities of His own Flock. A casual reading of the Book of the Acts demonstrates that the risen Christ was very active amongst His own via the Hoy Spirit. Many will accept these roles for Christ, yet they believe that he has somehow delegated this responsibility to others. No, he is alive and well and active amidst the twos and threes gathered to his Name. “I am in the midst” “Under-shepherds” have their place , but to the exclusion of the Christ. None can take His unique Place.

BIBLE TRANSLATIONS and THE WORD PASTOR
The Bible is not a dictionary. However, it conveys meaning from the way words are translated from the originals. The Greek word poimen may be translated shepherd or pastor

In the following passages, in the old testament and in the new note the bias toward an ecclesiastical tradition which is not rooted in the Scriptures but in the Roman Catholic Church and was added centuries after the church was established in the 1st Century by the apostles.

The revered Authorized [King James 1611] Version was a translation supported largely by the Church of England, not by the Puritans. The Puritans favoured the Geneva Bible. This is significant for many reasons. The Puritans were Calvinists, evangelicals who mistrusted the ecclesiastical Roman Catholic leanings of the Church of England. It should be remembered that they ultimately fled England for Holland to escape religious persecution from the Church of England. The Authorized version translated several Greek words according to validate the existence of Church offices, such as Bishop, Pastor and deacon.

Authorized Version [King James 1611] “The LORD is my shepherd.” Psalm 23.1

Authorized Version [King James 1611] “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;” Ephesians 4.11

Geneva Bible 1557 [earlier editions] “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, shepherds and teachers;” Ephesians 4.11

These should have been translated Overseer, Shepherd and Servant. This has had no small impact on the polity or views on church leadership for the past 4 centuries since most could not read Greek or had access to lexical tools, but relied on the English text.

OLD TESTAMENT VERSES NEW TESTAMENT ORDER
1. The Old Testament people of God, earthly Israel, were governed by the theocracy (divine rule) as to their civil government. As to their religious life, they were led in worship by the Aaronic priesthood. At that time there was a distinct division between the general people of God and the priests, made up of the family or tribe of Levi. From that tribe there were various orders of priests, carrying out the worship and service of the temple. There was also the position of high priest, the first being Aaron, the brother of Moses. In sharp contrast to the Old Testament people of God, (Israel) who had a priesthood over them. The common could not enter into the holy place or the holy of holies in the Temple (formerly the Tabernacle). This is clearly set forth in Leviticus and in Hebrews 9 and 10.

”Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God. But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people” Hebrews 9.6-7 It could be said that there was a division between the priesthood and the people in the Old Testament.

2. The New Testament People of God (the Church) are a priesthood. Every believer is a priest having equal access to God. [1 Peter 2.5-9]. There are no intermediaries or intercessors between the believers and God other than Christ, Who holds the office of High Priest [Hebrews 9.11] over His Church. [See also Ephesians 5.23 and 1 Timothy 2.5]

The New Testament teaches the most liberating of doctrines, THE PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS
”But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:” 1 Peter 2.9
However, a misunderstanding of the Church’s priesthood and a mixing of Law and Grace will bring about the basis for the clergy and laity system which enslaved Christendom for 1,000 years and continues to limit the Spirit’s ministry in the hearts and lives of true Christians who would express their worship in the liberty of the Spirit.
The apostle Paul makes it abundantly clear in the New Testament that we are not under the dispensation or administration of the Law. We are under God’s dispensation or administration of Grace.

“ye are not under the law, but under grace.” Romans 6.14

“we are not under the law, but under grace” Romans 6.15

“ye are not under the law” Galatians 5.18

The Old Testament priesthood with its orders of priests and system of sacrifices have been discontinued. All the former legal system is fulfilled in Christ. The greatest doctrinal problems encountered in the New Testament, which were largely dealt with by the epistles were the tendency to return to the Law or the practices of the Law. The Epistles of Hebrews and Galatians particularly deal with the tendencies.

Since the days of the apostles, the mixture of the Old Testament Priesthood with the New Testament functions of apostles, evangelists, pastors and deacons has brought about the system known as the CLERGY and LAITY. This system supports the notion of the “office” of Pastor OVER a single congregation (or local church). The development of this system will be detailed in the next section.

CLERGY OR LAITY
One of the most disturbing developments early in the church age was that of the CLERGY and the LAITY split in the churches. This developed in the third and fourth centuries but was not the pattern in the Acts or the primitive church.

Andrew Miller writes, “Clericalism, then, we firmly believe sprang from Judaism. The Judaizing teachers boldly affirmed that Christianity was merely a graft on Judaism….Ignatius (one of the so-called “Church Fathers” in the third century), writing to the church at Ephesus says, ‘Let us take heed, brethren, that we set not ourselves against the bishop, that we may be subject to God…It is therefore evident that we ought to look upon the bishop even as we do upon the Lord Himself’ This is amazing to Protestants, however it is still the way the common Roman Catholics look upon their leaders. The ultimate extension of this mind set is the manner which the pope or ultimate pastor is viewed. He can do no wrong and is infallible (at least when he speaks ex-cathedra). While this system developed further in the middle ages, and flourishes today in Rome and her offspring denominations, the spirit of it often filters down into even Bible churches where some pastor are elevated to places far beyond the intent of the Scriptures. One man, an elder of a Baptist church was heard to say, the only man who has the right to interpret the Bible is the Pastor!

“ Scripture teaches that every believer is to be subject to those in authority in government (Romans 13) and even in the assembly. “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God” Ephesians 5.21 Hence, one who has the gift of pastor or shepherd in the true sense should submit himself to other believers. This is so different from the religious world where men hold sway over other men in an inappropriate manner. Furthermore Scripture teaches “Obey them that have the rule over you [better translated “TAKE THE LEAD AMONG YOU” (note the ecclesiastical bias of the KJV)] and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.” Hebrews 13.17 However, it is a far cry from the ecclesiastical power executed in the Roman Catholic and other religious bodies where men hold the souls of other men in their thralldom and threaten such with excommunication from heaven or favor with God.

The Greek word KLEROS means 1. lot (i.e. pebble, small stick, etc;) or 2. that which is assigned by lot, portion, share [Arndt and Gingrich] In New Testament times a stone or a small stick was used in making a decision. This was done in the choice for the successor to Judas. It was made by lot or choice. The hand held the sticks. It would be agree upon that the shortest or the longest would be the winner. An appointed person would make the choice or draw the stick. It is used in the New Testament of that which is God’s choice or chosen people.

1 Peter 5.3 reveals the KLEROI (KJV heritage) belongs to God, “God’s Heritage” God’s lot, his personal possession. The elders (NOTE THE PLURALITY: not the pastor or the elder, but the elders) who feed the flock are not to be lords over them. The flock or people of God were not pastor “Jones or Smiths” church, as we often hear in the religious world. How often clerics refer to “my people”? No official or even apostle much less pastor or elder is ever seen calling a church or assembly, “mine”. Such language is foreign to the New Testament. The only one who has the right to use this kind of verbiage is the Lord himself; “If my people who are called by my name shall humble themselves and pray…” 2 Chronicles 7.14 or “…I will be their God, and they shall be my people” 2 Corinthians 6.16b.

Christendom has “hijacked” this term KLEROS and degenerated it into a category never intended by its etymology or usage in the Scriptures. It became an upper tier for those who were specially trained for something called “the ministry” or holy orders. They were chosen from the ranks of seminarians. They came from the ranks of those who were more educated than the common people. They were the schoolmen. They were the monks and the priests who ruled over what became known as the LAITY. The word LAOS means simply the “people”. All the people who are saved and indwelt by the Spirit of God are His people. Another word, LAIKOS, derived from LAOS is never used in the New Testament. One writer suggests that it is only used once in all Christian literature prior to the third century but even then, not used of Christians at all.

Noting the fact of the priesthood of all believers it must be stated with vigor, EVERY TRUE CHRISTIAN IS GOD’S CLERGY. There is no division or upper tier and lower tier in Biblical Christianity. There are different gifts. Every believer has a gift or gifts from the Spirit to be used in the Body of Christ for the glory of God and the edification of the same. The passages on gifts are in Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4.

THE DEVLOPMENT OF THE SINGLE PASTOR IN HISTORY
A.D. 66 [Apostolic era]
In Acts 20.30, the apostle Paul warned the Elders of the Church at Ephesus about departure from apostolic church order: “of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them”

A.D. 90 [Apostolic era]
There was early fulfillment of this prophecy recorded in III John. It seems that there were three leaders in the assembly, Gaius, Demetrius and Diotrephes. In this letter, reference is made to one who rose up from within the ranks of three elders in an assembly. Note his character and his deeds “I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating (gossiping) against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. One commentator wrote, “The aged Apostle had written to a church which allowed one Diotrephes to exercise an authority common enough in later ages, but wholly new in the primitive churches. Diotrephes had rejected the apostolic letters and authority. It appears also that he had refused the ministry of the visiting brethren (3 John 1.10), and cast out those that had received them. Historically, this letter marks the beginning of that clerical and priestly assumption over the churches in which the primitive church order disappeared. (Scofield Reference Notes 1917 edition)

AD 100 – 500 [Post Apostolic era]
In the last section, reference was made to “that clerical and priestly assumption over the churches.” This began to accelerate during the post apostolic era with the rise of the Clergy or the CLERGY LAITY SYSTEM

Ultimately it became the primary polity of many centers of Christendom, the Coptic, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox and the powerful Roman Catholic Church in the West. The growth of the clergy constitutes a large study in Church History far beyond the scope of this paper. However, its importance requires some mention of the salient events of these times.

AD 1500s [Middle ages]
Protestant Reformers continued with the Roman system
Liberating thousands from the of superstition and darkness where the simple gospel was exchanged for a works system which neither gave life nor liberty to the hearers, the Reformers Luther, Calvin and others continued many of the practices which had been entrenched in the Roman Catholic church for nearly 1,000 years. Rome’s hierarchical structure of Pope, Cardinals, Bishops and Priests (later Pastors) found its way into the polity of the Church of England, Lutheran and Methodist communions and others. The names were changed, but the structure remained more or less. For our purpose it is interesting to know that the parish priest was retained in the designated form as the local church Pastor.

AD 1800s [Modern era]
The nineteenth century saw the rise of another movement in England, the Oxford Movement (or the Tractarian Movement). Cardinal John Henry Newman, bishop in the Church of England led hundreds of bishops out of ht Church of England back into the fold of the Roman Catholic Church. During this era there was a return to high church formularies and robes and an increase of clericalism. At the same time the Spirit of God raised up many who saw the truth of gathering simply, without clerical orders or rituals. In fact many of those who became known simply as brethren came out from among the ranks of holy orders and priesthood. What a stark contrast. Men like William Kelly, John Darby and others left the established church and met on divine ground. Their motto was a simple one, given by their Pastor, their Master, their Lord,

But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. Matthew 23.8-10



AD 2004 [Today]
Today’s professing churches retain the practice of the “One Man Ministry” or Single Pastor over a Single Congregation. It has become more complex as men have recognized their inability to keep up with the demands of a large congregation. There are in some places a more scriptural plurality with elders. Yet there is the existence of the “Senior Pastor”. Is this an intrusion into the Biblical title reserved only for the Lord Jesus, “When the Chief Shepherd shall appear…” in 1 Peter 5.


THE PROBLEMS OF SINGLE PASTORS
1. Displacement of the function of the Holy Spirit
The New Testament makes it abundantly clear the one who leads (or ought to lead) in all things is the Spirit of God. He seeks to choose to use whomsoever “he will” in the congregation of believers gathered to the Name of the Lord [1 Corinthians 12.11]. This is God’s ideal. The Philippians had gift. They had a plurality of leaders (“bishops and deacons” –literally “overseers and servants”. There was no false doctrine or immorality to contend with as with the church in Corinth. Yet, Paul’s care for them in an apostolic age required him to send Timothy as his legate, his representative to meet the needs which could only be done by that authority or role. Timothy was an apostolic legate there being no evidence that he was a pastor.

In Darby’s comments on his tract, “Notion of a Clergyman” he underscored the results of that system as it pertains to resisting the work of the Holy Spirit, “It is a question of the dispensational standing of the Church in the world – a statement that that depends wholly on the power and presence of the Holy Ghost, and that the Notion of a Clergyman contradicts His title and power, on which the standing of the Church down here depends. It is the habitation of God through the Spirit. Scripture is clear, that if the Gentiles do not abide in God's goodness, they will be cut off like the Jews.

2. Misplaced Affection
To be sure, the Lord Jesus taught us, “This is my commandment, that ye love one another as I have loved you.” But is love or devotion to be directed to one group or person more than another? This reached a level of excess in an article in a Christian publication recently entitled, “Nine ways to love your Pastor” in which the following was suggested; ‘write a note telling the pastor how good a particular sermon was.” and ‘Remember birthdays and anniversaries of each member of the pastor's family. Find reasons to celebrate—like the anniversary of your pastor's arrival at your church as well as other memorable milestones. Occasionally include the entire church in the festivities.’ among others things. These were called “pastor pick-me-ups” Another asked, “"How can a church show love and appreciation to its pastor?" The answer was, A church can pay its minister well. Another book was written on How to Keep the Pastor You Love Jane Rubietta explores the "flip side" of pastoral care--caring for your pastor.

3. Misplaced Dependence
It is necessary when young in the faith to have guides. This is taught everywhere. One must walk before one can run. Yet Paul strongly challenged the Hebrews who were stunted in their spiritual growth with these words,

“For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe”

When persons are spoon fed, there may be the tendency to rely on the teacher and not study on his own. How often we hear “The pastor said so” or “My pastor teaches this or that”. A faithful pastor is to be commended if he is faithful to the Word of God. But, what of growth? What of development? Paul told Timothy, “Study to show thyself approved unto God.” Was that admonition for the clergy? Was it for a leader. Timothy was a representative for Paul at Ephesus. He had apostolic work to do to establish the churches. But the admonitions given to Timothy are for us today, “…a workman that needeth not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth.”

Perhaps the reader has recently visited a hall where Christians were gathered. You witnessed a simple meeting. There was no entertainment. There was no apparent leader. As a sincere true believer in Christ, you appreciated the fact that there was order. You were reminded of the Scripture, “let all things be done decently and in order” 1 Corinthians 14.40 Yet, you noted that there was no raised platform, no pulpit, no elevated desk. In fact, no single person was “running” the meeting. Various men stood and gave thanks to God for His Son. Others spoke to the Lord Jesus and expressed their appreciation for his lovely person and his suffering on the cross. Still others gave out hymns which were sung by all in great dignity and reverence. At one point, another gave thanks for the simple emblems on the table in the center of the room, a loaf of bread and a single cup of wine which was passed between the believers in remembrance of the One who was said to be “in the midst”. Another arose and brought a challenging yet worshipful address to the saints, which was followed by a closing hymn. There was no chaos. There was no rush or discord. How can this be? Who was in charge? Where was God’s man? Where was the pastor? Let the reader be reminded that the Lord is not only “in the midst” but on the throne on high. He through instrumentality of the Holy Spirit desires to use whomsoever HE wills in the exercise or conductance of the meetings of the saints. 1 Corinthians 12.11 Those with gift, evangelists, pastors, teachers, administrators etc. are to be sensitive to the leading of the Lord the Spirit and use their gifts to the glory of God.


In the subject of the church and its order, there are two opposite principles working in the realm of Christendom or Christianity: Man’s order and a Divine order. In man’s order there is the exaltation of man, ultimately leading to the man of sin. In the divine order there is the subjugation of man, leading to the exaltation of The Man of God’s own choosing, none other than the Christ of God presently exalted in heavenly glory. In man’s order there is always a man at the top. In the divine order there is a Man at the top. The question is, which man? What does Scripture teach concerning the Man of God’s own choosing?

“In all things He (Christ) might have the preeminence” Colossians 1.18

However, this is not the way of the churches. In the Roman Catholic denomination we hear of “his eminence Cardinal Cushing” or in Protestant domains we hear of “Reverend Smith, Pastor of the First Baptist Church of East Anglia” or similar words. Elsewhere we hear of the senior pastor or the youth pastor often mixed with reverend or other title which tends to uplift the individual to levels of importance never imagined in the Scriptures or seen among the early Christians in the Book of the Acts. In Scripture, no one is call Reverend but the Lord God, “God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him.” Psalm 89.7

May we ever keep the following before us as we think of the Person and Ministry of Christ, In all things he must have the preeminence. In other words Christ must have first place in all aspects of New Testament church life and mission.

HEAD OF THE CHURCH

The Pope is the Head of the Roman Catholic Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury is the head of the Church of England. The Metropolitan is the head of the Eastern Orthodox Church. On and on it goes with man being exalted to the detriment of Christ. What saith the Scripture? Who is the Head of the Church? Scripture must be allowed to speak: “Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Ephesians 5.23; “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.” Colossians 1.18; All evangelicals, Biblical Fundamentalists and others would subscribe to the fact that Christ is the head of the Church. However, they would then “qualify” that by the following, He is the head of the universal church body. But what of the local manifestation? After all, Paul wrote to the Corinthians, “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.” Are there then two bodies? One local (Corinth) and the other universal? No, the church at Corinth was a representation of the whole, the expression of the body. The lack of the article in the original, translatable, “Ye are body of Christ” bears this out. They were not THE Body, but were body-like or had the character of the body, hence expressing it. So, the argument that Christ is not the head of the local company of believers is fallacious. Christ is always Head and must be owned as such.

To suggest as many do that the local pastor is the head of a local company or group of believers is a grave error, usurping a place which belongs only to Christ Jesus Himself. This was akin to the problem manifesting itself in III John. In the assembly there a man by the name of Diotrephes “loveth to have the preeminence among them” The result, he didn’t received John and others who came to the assembly. This was an early example of one who usurped the place of Christ. He was preeminent. However, Scripture teaches in the strongest possible language that the Son of God should in all things have the preeminence. How sharp is the contrast with Biblical Christianity with the practices of Rome where we read of men who are given such titles as, “Vicar of Christ”, “Reverend” or even his “eminence”? Spirit filled, Scripturally informed and sensitive men quickly decry such titles hoisted upon themselves by men. It is an enigma even to find Biblical Fundamentalist leaders, who would vigorously defend the truth that Christ is the head of the church on the one and retaining the prefix Rev. in front of their names on the other hand.

"Lord, what is man?" Yes, with deep adoration,

Gladly prolong we this wonderful theme;

Jesus, divine One, Thou Head of creation,

Head of Thy church, which Thou cam'st to redeem!

CONCLUSION_WHO IS YOUR PASTOR
The Scriptures teach that there are shepherds [pastors] among the flock Ephesians 4.11. They should develop their skills by studying the Word of God 2 Timothy 2.15. These men are in the plural where they flourish and are not to be “lords [plural] over God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock [singular]. The flock [note they are also part of the flock John 10.] are to follow their lead, receive their teaching and go to them for and advice. All of this is within the scope of the Bible. However, we must never forget Who the Pastor is.

“The Lord is my Shepherd [Pastor]” Psalm 23.1 When under-shepherds have done their part, it is to Him the sheep must ultimately go to, for He is the “Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9.6 [He is a Wonderful Counselor!]



If the Lord Jesus Christ is not YOUR PASTOR, then you have NO PASTOR.

Leonard Layne
October 10, 2004