Biblical Eldership

S.C.A.N.

This meeting is to address the issue of church government. This acronym is here for us to make sure that we are not promoting our own opinion, but that we are adhering to scripture only. This acronym means that all men will agree that the bible is Sufficient, Clear, Authoritative, and Necessary. Any man that doesn’t believe this might want to ask himself does he want to be here tonight. Also all friendships go out the window for this meeting the bible calls us to put God first and everything else under that, for that is the cost of discipleship (Matt 10: 34-36, Mark 8: 34-38, Luke 9: 23-27; 14: 25-34).

Charges Against Elders:

I myself only charged the elders of 4 things. However Pastor Baker extracted those thing that I claimed that lead me to those charges. So, Pastor Baker listed 13 separate charges. Some of the claims fall under the umbrella of the 4 charges. So for the sake of not having us go back and forth I have addressed each charge separately along with the bullet points for each charge. For example, I said that we are guilty of biblical malpractice that would fall under discipleship. If we had proper discipleship and intentional fellowship along with biblical eldership then biblical malpractice would diminish. So I will start with the first charge, and the supporting bullet points that led me to that charge, specifics pertaining the charge; and then I will have 2 to 3 questions that will follow. I will not ask about anyone in the congregations personal information. However, the church belongs to God, and elders do not have the right to hide how their internal core works in any decision making (i.e from picking elders to making policy). All church members have the right to know and all decisions must follow biblical protocol. I also, expect clear and honest answers. However, I only want B.C.V. ( Bible Chapter Verse) to defend yourself.

First Charge: The Strong causing the weak to stumble as it pertains to conscience. (Romans 14, 1 Corinthians 8: 1-13; 10:28-33 1 Corinthians 32-33, 2 Corinthians 6:3).

Point 4 God has required that we operate in the Spirit (John 23-24). This point was just a reminder that our spirit is very important, this was not a charge against the elders.

Point 5 The improper way that we handle Co-Vid 19. This issue doesn’t need to be rehashed, because the elders did the best they could responding to the virus. The issue has more to do with the line that was drawn in the sand when it came to caution (i.e. mask wearing) and the extension of not starting certain groups. The mask is not the focus off this conversation however, the harsh reaction of people who didn’t wear the mask, and the wanting of policing people to wear the mask

Point 6 would tie into point 5, when this last crisis was handle did the elders consider everybody, or did their decision making line up with their ideology.

Point 7 and Point 8 would be totally accurate if point 4, 5, and 6 are valid based on the question that are being asked below

Where all church members told they had to wear mask, and did all church members agree?

Has any elder or deacon seen anyone coming in or walking about without a mask, and if so did you instruct them to do so?

What passage of scripture persuaded the elders to call a church member and instruct that member if they and their family didn’t comply to wearing mask ; that they were not allowed to come back to the building?

Is not wearing a mask a sin?

If a potential ex communication for sin is to take place, would that issue need to go in front of the congregation? (Matthew 18)

Second Charge: The Lack of Discipleship: Disciples should be followers of Christ . So to disciple properly one must be obedient disciple. Meaning that a true disciple will adhere to the teachings of the apostles and their doctrines.

Point 3 The spiritual needs of the church would be teaching and preaching. Our Pastors are wonderful Pastors ( Steve, Jay, and Jeff). However, all elders are pastors, are all or elders equip to teach (1 Timothy 3:2). Please remember not to use precepts as a teaching outlet. Precepts clearly promotes the facilitator model, so it can allow women to teach men, which is also unbiblical ( 1 Timothy 2:12). Teaching means does each elder have the ability to breakdown scripture and exegete not eisegesis. Homiletic is the art of writing a sermon and preaching it, all elders are pastor/teachers, but not all are pastor/preachers.

Point 4 falls in here as well, but it has already been addressed.

Point 8 is accurate because not following the bibles command of disciple-making, is not Christ-centered.

Point 1 and 2 tie in together, true disciples would address the biblical issues first not the business ones. They wouldn’t run there church like a C.E.O. runs a company. The wouldn’t be democratic in there decision making

1. I have witness a democratic voting system throughout the church. Does our elder-board run the same way or are they in agreement (one mind one accord ) when making decision? (Acts 15:22-25, Philippians 2:2)

If the elder board is split on decision making do they go to the bible and pray so that they can be on the same page?

Has there any been decisions made with in the last past year in which the Elders didn’t pray and consult with Gods word? If so what ?

What is the primary vision for this church?

Charges 3 & 4 Favoritism & Unqualified: We should never lean towards a individual because we know that person well. Also when we select anyone for eldership that person should meet all the qualifications. If a person in eldership is making decisions based on their own ideology, that person is not qualified. If that person has acted unjustly deliberately, and has not repented and sought forgiveness, that person is not qualified. If that person says one thing to a persons face and then another to someones else, that person is not qualified. If that person is not of a sound-mind for whatever reason that person is not qualified.

This last past incident shows a self-willed mentality. When you force people to do things your way and not that of scripture that is self-willed. That sin lead the elders to ex-communicate a family from worship. Also that same attitude produced control, in which the elders have taken most of the deacon oversight. The elders primary concern should be spiritual oversight, not money, building maintenance, security, and most physical things etc… The Deacons are supposed to be honest spiritual men in which they are trustworthy to manage there responsibilities.

The above actions are not just

The elders have been double-tongued. I have experience the elders shake my hand and tell me great job to my face, and then go behind my back and say they didn’t like a teaching or a preaching. For example, Pastor Steve wrote in my letter that I was heretical. However, when i approached him and asked him was I heretical he said “ you know what you lost be bubba, I think that you were unclear on what you said, I didn’t agree or understand it.” He said he didn’t agree not once did he say that what I taught was false. I was told a great job recently by Skip and Russ at the recuse mission, but then to find out they both said they didn’t like it behind my back. If my teaching is false, why then do I still teach, why then do I still lead. The fact that I have done both, with no checks and balances into what I am doing, with no fellowship to get to know me better, shows a form of hypocrisy.

Sober-minded: When all the elders were picked were they all sober-minded. Sober-minded doesn’t just mean a person that is a drunkard, but it means that the person was in there proper mental condition. For example the person wasn’t suffering from anything psychological. If the elder board allowed someone who could be suffering from mental trauma to be an elder, the that is non-biblical, an until that person was loved on properly in restored then they would be unqualified. Has the elder board done that?