What is it to be ordained

[Brother Paul]

What is ordination

A recent thread has led me to ask what others think…don’t answer until you read all five questions and think about it a bit…thanks!

If a person graduates Bible School or attends a Seminary are they somehow more qualified in God’s eyes to minister to the flock or to the unsaved?

Does approval by an institution or denominational organization actually constitute qualifications for actual ordination?

Because a person graduates Bible School or Seminary are they automatically born of God?

What constitutes being “ordained” in God’s word?

Who ordains and what is required?

Take your time but please weigh in…

In His love
Brother Paul

 

[james1523]

What is ordination

A recent thread has led me to ask what others think…don’t answer until you read all five questions and think about it a bit…thanks!

If a person graduates Bible School or attends a Seminary are they somehow more qualified in God’s eyes to minister to the flock or to the unsaved?

I will give the point of view as someone who is in the genuine church and not in a denomination. A theological qualification often makes one more qualified in both the eyes of God and the eyes of men. But it is not a substitute for a calling. God may call a person without qualification, and a person with qualification may never be called by God. A person who has qualification and is called by God, is more useful than a person without qualification and a calling. Such was the case of the apostle Paul, a well educated and gifted man, with thorough knowledge of the scriptures. But the apostle Peter, a fisherman, also was ordained to a similar position. But God did not use Him as extensively as Paul in the matter of completing the Scriptures. But God still used Peter to save many souls. But God did not use uneducated Peter to complete the New Testament. God needed a well educated and knowledgable man such as Paul to complete the New Testament.

Does approval by an institution or denominational organization actually constitute qualifications for actual ordination?

God does not approve of human institutions or denominations so the answer must be no. Those who disagree can please respond by showing in the scriptures which human institution or denomination Jesus Christ started or which denomination the apostle Paul ordained others in?

Because a person graduates Bible School or Seminary are they automatically born of God?

No... it's well known that atheists graduate bible schools and seminaries with theological degrees. There are ordained pastors who have the degree but don't even believe in God.

What constitutes being “ordained” in God’s word?

In the wordly system, ordinations are achieved by achieving relevant theological qualifications. But according to the bible it is an appointment to a position by God. A clear example is given by Acts 13:2 and onwards. Ordination in the Bible is appointment to a particular position or task, accompanied by calling of the Holy Spirit and laying on of hands by the apostles or elders.

Who ordains and what is required?

The Holy Spirit and the apostles/elders ordains. What is required is a clear and definite calling from the Holy Spirit, and recognition of this fact by the church.
Having a calling from the Spirit that is not recognised by the church is not genuine (a number of denominations/cults have started because an individual has a supposed revelation or calling from God, that is not tested or approved by the church) , and vice versa a calling recognized by the church but without calling from the Holy Spirit is a meaningless ordination.

 

[Hekuran]

In the wordly system, ordinations are achieved by achieving relevant theological qualifications. But according to the bible it is an appointment to a position by God. A clear example is given by Acts 13:2 and onwards. Ordination in the Bible is appointment to a particular position or task, accompanied by calling of the Holy Spirit and laying on of hands by the apostles or elders.

Agree absolutely with your description of ordination as an appointment by God. I think your description of the worldly system is overstated. I don't know of a church in which a theological qualification is sufficient for ordination. There are many that require theological training for pastors, priests, leaders, but I doubt if any would consider an academic achievement enough to qualify a person for leadership.

Every church has some structure of authority - and that is assumed in the description of elders and apostles.

I don't see a fundamental difference between the processes described in Acts and that of most churches today.

 

[james1523]

Agree absolutely with your description of ordination as an appointment by God. I think your description of the worldly system is overstated. I don't know of a church in which a theological qualification is sufficient for ordination. There are many that require theological training for pastors, priests, leaders, but I doubt if any would consider an academic achievement enough to qualify a person for leadership.

Every church has some structure of authority - and that is assumed in the description of elders and apostles.

I don't see a fundamental difference between the processes described in Acts and that of most churches today.

You are right, it is not enough, but it is often essential, and in fact a graduate degree (of any kind) is often required just to enter seminary training.

The fundamental difference is that in the book of Acts was one church per city ( Jerusalem, Corinth, Philipi, etc) however most churches today are organizations bearing the name of a city, nationality, doctrine, or person, within the same city.
Is it well known that within a single city is Anglicans furthering the cause of Anglicanism, Catholics furthering the cause of Catholicism, Baptists furthering the cause of baptism, etc. Each has similar but different requirements in order to be ordained.

Hence when we speak of the process of ordination within a denomination, we are talking about the process of becoming a leader within a division of the body of Christ according to an organizational and divided process, and not true biblical ordination by the elders/apostles as per the book of Acts. When a person is ordained as an Anglican minister, for example, they become the minister of Anglicanism, not the minister of Christ.

 

[Hekuran]

Is it well known that within a single city is Anglicans furthering the cause of Anglicanism, Catholics furthering the cause of Catholicism, Baptists furthering the cause of baptism, etc. Each has similar but different requirements in order to be ordained.

I live in a city of 10 million people. Bringing all the worshippers together (1/2 million+) is simply not logistically feasible.

In any case, competitiveness is not my experience of many denominations in a single city. There are Anglicans Baptist, Roman Catholics, Pentecostals and independents all working for the Kingdom of God. All are flawed in many ways, as any group of people inevitably is. In vital areas of ministry, such as evangelism, youth work, care for the sick, working for justice and lifting up people in poverty, the different churches work together well.

You have completely overstated the "divided process". Usually when someone within a denomination is ordained as a minister of God, leaders of other denominations will be present to pledge their support and to work together. The denominations are distinct, but by and large, what is held in common is a far bigger factor than the differences.

 

[james1523]

I live in a city of 10 million people. Bringing all the worshippers together (1/2 million+) is simply not logistically feasible.

In any case, competitiveness is not my experience of many denominations in a single city. There are Anglicans Baptist, Roman Catholics, Pentecostals and independents all working for the Kingdom of God. All are flawed in many ways, as any group of people inevitably is. In vital areas of ministry, such as evangelism, youth work, care for the sick, working for justice and lifting up people in poverty, the different churches work together well.

You have completely overstated the "divided process". Usually when someone within a denomination is ordained as a minister of God, leaders of other denominations will be present to pledge their support and to work together. The denominations are distinct, but by and large, what is held in common is a far bigger factor than the differences.

The issue of the denominations is not really about practicalities, it is about identity. The denominations do not exist because of practicalities about meeting together. They exist because a group of Christians decided that their way was better than another way, and decided to identify themselves as something more than simply "Christian". As the practices and administration of such a group became more set in stone, this group became a religious organization, and a denomination was formed. A wall was created around these brethren of this particular denomination, within the larger body of Christ, and distinctions are formed between themselves and other brethren. The situation is a matter of convenience, not necessity, by which a believer may choose which particular style or type of service they would like to attend.

The church in Jerusalem in bible times was also very large, thousands added one day and more thousands the next. Yet they were identified simply as "the church in Jerusalem". There were no denominational distinctions between the brethren within that city as there are today, and they were all simply known as "Christians". You will find no where in the new testament, a letter from the apostle Paul addressed to a denomination. We note that he always refers to the church by the city name in which they dwell - Ephesus, Rome, Corinth, etc. In his mind ,all the believers within a particular city were part of the one and same church, and in fact they were. But today, the majority of Christians consider themselves to be part of different churches within the one city. This situation is what is called sectarianism, and is something the apostle Paul wrote against. On a matter of principle, the denomination's existence is a visible reflection against the spiritual truth that God's church is one body, which itself is a visible reminder that "God is one". Should an unbeliever view the Christian church today, they cannot see that God is one, but that God is divided into many different groups of believers.

What you have described is Ecumenism, an attempt for greater unity between the denominations .But it is a kind of false unity, it is hand shaking over the fence, because each denomination still retains its distinction from the other. No one is really willing to drop their denominational identity, drop the fences, and be known simply as Christians.

Here is a fundamental difference: The ministry of the elders and the apostles in bible times was to the whole body of Christ, that is, every believer within a particular city, village or town. The ministry of denominational ministers today is primarily within that particular denomination and to those that attend the particular denomination. For example, if there are 3 churches of different denominations in the one street, the preacher or pastor of one denomination, will never conduct a service in the other. It is often not allowed by the organization, or the pastor or congregation is not accepting of the other. This situation is vastly different to the situation in the early church, by which believers met from "house to house", and not according to denominational preference.

You have mentioned that denominations work together to advance the kingdom of God. Yet denominations have also hindered the advancement of the kingdom. The matter of denominations has also hindered the growth of the church and delayed the Lord's return (if we believe that the bible reveals that His return is linked with his church achieving evangelism of the entire world). One particular denomination evangelizes a certain area, and another denomination follows and re-evangelizes the same group of people according to their new doctrine or practice. This has resulted in wasted time and confusion. Instead of all the denominations working together to address the un-evangelized areas, each denomination is concerned with propagating its particular doctrine or practice into the areas which are already evangelized. For example, there may already be a Lutheran, a Baptist and a Roman Catholic church in the one area. But this is not enough according to the Pentecostals (because speaking in tongues is important, right?), so the Pentecostals form a new church on the same street, and a 4th church is added to the area. If there is one church in an area, any new believers that come to that area, should join the church that's already there, and not form a new church. There is no example in the bible of Paul or anyone else starting a new church in a city, because they were not happy with the church that was already there. The churches have problems and arenot perfect, but this does not give authorization to form a new church . The Corinthian church was not perfect, they had issues with disorder and spiritualism, but Paul did not tell them to start a new church within the city. He told them to fix the problems they already had. "Church planting" a denominational church in an area in which a church already exists, is an unbiblical practice. In fact, they are not planting a new church, they are planting a new sect.
We should be clear of the difference between a church and a sect: a church is a group of believers. A sect is a sub-group of believers, within a group of believers. If we can see that the bible reveals a church to be the group of believers within a city, then clearly any sub-group of believers within that city is not a church, but a sect. Ordained ministers of denominations minister primarily to the sub-group within a city, and this is a fundamental difference between the church in the book of Acts, and the church today.

So an ordained minister should consider if their ordination leads them to be a minister to a sub-group, or to the entire city? Peter, John, James, Paul and all the apostles (major and minor), ministered to the group, not to the sub-group. They were inclusive of all believers within the city in thought, word and deed, and never exclusive. An ordained minister of a particular denomination, will only travel to, meet with and conduct services in the same denomination. They will never travel to another city to conduct a service in the church of a different denomination, and neither will he allow an ordained minister of a different denomination to conduct a service in his church. I am speaking of the general situation, in traditional denominations - Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, and realize there are exceptions to this rule.

 

[Hekuran]

@james1523 OK, I'm not going to add any more to what I've already said, as we are on the edge of an unhelpful to-and-fro. Changing tack a bit: whatever stand we take on the worth or otherwise of denominations, unity is important. Would you mind writing a little about how your understanding of church and unity works out in practice. How do you live out unity with other believers?Thanks

 

[james1523]

@james1523 OK, I'm not going to add any more to what I've already said, as we are on the edge of an unhelpful to-and-fro. Changing tack a bit: whatever stand we take on the worth or otherwise of denominations, unity is important. Would you mind writing a little about how your understanding of church and unity works out in practice. How do you live out unity with other believers?Thanks

Thankyou Hekuran for our civilized discussion. I will try to give my understanding of how to live out unity with other believers. As a general principle I can say that it something that is not achieved in and by ourselves, but only in and by God. Perhaps you could reply with what is your view of unity, and how is it achieved in practice?

1. Firstly we should realize that God is One.
The perfect example and practice of unity is God Himself, who is Trinity.
In fact if someone were to ask "what is unity"? I would say that unity is God Himself. Unity is not pretending to like others when you don't, and not trying to appear the same as others when you are not. Neither is it "handshaking over the fence". Having different personalities and opinions and preferences is fine, and we don't have to like everyone - just don't let these things divide us. Unity is not the same as cooperation. Genuine unity is fellowship in the Holy Spirit (God) with other believers. If we want to have unity, then we must have God Himself.
When God is present, disunity vanishes.
God wants us to be one with each other because it is a reflection of Himself, and a testimony to the world:

Jesus prayed that his believers would be one just as Jesus is one with the Father.
John 17:20-23
20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

2. To be one with other believers, we must be "in God". In ourselves we each have our own opinions, mindsets, dispositions and preferences, and cannot be in unity. We have to deny our self, by walking in the Spirit, and parties, sects and divisions are manifestations of the flesh:
Gal 5:16 "So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh."

The practical way we can deny ourselves is to walk in the Spirit by praying continually, giving thanks always, rejoicing in all circumstances:
1 Thess 5:18 "give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus."
Eph 6:18 "And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord's people."


3. We have to love one another – 1 John 3:11, forgive offenses, bear the cross, and deny the self:
Luke 9:23 "“Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.".
This includes “turning the other cheek”.
If we practice walking in the Spirit, we will not give offense, and we will not be offended, and we will not react to the offense.

If a believer says they cannot fellowship with, meet with, pray or worship with such and such a believer, because of this or because of that, that person is not practicing genuine Christian love. Christian love implies unity, which implies fellowship.


Additional ways we can achieve practical unity:
Firstly we need the vision of what Christian unity is - to see the church and matters as God sees them. We can start by realizing that there are no denominations in heaven, and that Christ accepts all believers.
Secondly we need a change of heart and renewing of the mind, which depends upon us spending time in the Word, prayer etc.
Thirdly we need to live our life according to this vision, by practically forgiving offenses and taking practical steps to achieve unity - i.e. confession of faults, bearing the cross etc.
Sometimes we need to swallow our pride and sit next to or talk to the person who offends us or who we dislike - we may feel bad, but that is us experiencing the cross...eventually we may realize the person is not so bad after all, and begin to like them - that is us experiencing resurrection. Ideally, we should be able to see Christ in every believer and that will help us change the way we relate to fellow believers.

Acknowledge no unity accept in Christ. (Gal 3:28 "...for you are all one in Christ Jesus")
Try not to label or categorize or see any other Christian by any other name other than the name of Christ - this takes time, effort and practice.

1 Cor 1:13 "Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"

Pulpit commentary explains it best:
Verse 13. - Is Christ divided? Has Christ been parcelled into fragments? "Is there a Pauline, a Petrine, an Apollonian, a Christian Christ?" Whether you call yourselves Liberals, or Intellectualists, or Catholics, or Bible Christians, your party spirit is a sin, and all the worse a sin because it pranks itself out in the guise of pure religious zeal.

Also we should stop exalting some and putting down others, we should never consider any other believer, whether poor man or Pope, more than a brother or sister in Christ, because we all have the same Heavenly Father:
Matt 23:8"But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers.
Matt 23:9 ""Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven."
Matt 23:10 "Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ.

Some great servants of God in the past have said:
Martin Luther said, "I pray you leave my name alone. Do not call yourselves Lutherans, but Christians."
John Wesley said, "I wish the name Methodist might never be mentioned again, but lost in eternal oblivion."
Charles Spurgeon said, "I say of the Baptist name, let it perish, but let Christ's own name last forever. I look forward with pleasure to the day when there will not be a Baptist living.

I have quoted these men only to further my point. I have not looked deeper into Luthers or Wesleys words, but I should point out that the context of Spurgeon's words are not in true Christian unity. He says from "The Eternal name", sermon 27 "That, however, we care very little about; for I say of the Baptist name, let it perish, but let Christ's name last for ever. I look forward with pleasure to the day when there will not be a Baptist living. I hope they will soon be gone. You will say, Why? Because when everybody else sees baptism by immersion, we shall be immersed into all sects, and our sect will be gone. Once give us the predominance, and we are not a sect any longer. A man may be a Churchman, or a Wesleyan, or an Independent, and yet be a Baptist.

I have underlined the statements of interest. Spurgeon says unity will be achieved when everyone else does baptism the way he believes it should be done.
This is the mindset of all sects: That unity will be achieved when all the other sects become just like them... unity between Protestant and Catholic will be achieved when protestants recognize the Popes authority, unity between evangelicals and pentecostals will be achieved when all evangelicals speak in tongues, or when all pentecostals stop speaking in tongues. Sects divide themselves over such matters. Spurgeon and all other sectarians do not see that according to the bible and the practice of the early church - simple faith in Christ , receiving the Holy Spirit, and having the one and same Heavenly Father is enough!! A genuine ordained minister to the body of Christ, will not care about the sect name or wish to convert another to a particular sect. They will see all believers as one in Christ and deny sectarianism completely. Every denomination today, stands upon a point of difference as a reason for their existence. Such matters include (but are not limited to) - method and mode of baptism, belief about the nature of the communion bread and wine, the style of service, the nationality of its members, the name of the founding member, a particular human virtue (e.g. love, grace or hope). It takes some transformation and some willingness to see past all that and recognize the one body of Christ on the earth, and then live that out in our daily living.

 

[Hekuran]

Good post thanks.