spazzo47

my main ministry interest is church planting. One of the things that attracts me to planting churches is that new chruches typically will approach the teaching in different ways and attract different people. Mentoring allows that to happen. When you have more than one person delivering the message, you get different persepctives from the pulpit. As long as the pastor is sure that the message is sound, then the more people that can deliver it, the more people will be reached. As others have said, there's also a very real need to reproduce so that the next generation will have leaders, but if spreading the gospel is all about relationship, then to me, the important reason is to have people who can connect with different groups. I ahve a pastor who would love to do nothing but preach on Sunday morning and mentor. That's one of his giftings and because of that, I would probably say he needs to put a lot of his time into mentoring. I think that every pastor should spend at least some time mentoring, but it's also going to vary based on the strengths and giftings of the pastor as well as the challenges at the church. My pastor is at a church that's trying to find a permanent place to meet and has major financial problems. While I think it's important for him to have those mentorship relationships to keep him going, I think the time he spends on that has to be balanced against the time he's required to handle the other stresses of the church as a whole. I worked iwth another pastor who was great at the business end of things, but struggled with connecting to people. He had two people who identified themselves as wanting to go into full time ministry. Half hour to hour long one-on-one meetings was enough for him, though I would have wanted him to have one of those ministry people to try and mentor more people.

Paul is sharing where his strength comes from, the power of CHrist and the Gospel itself. It's designed to first motivate him to remember the promises of God. Every once in a while, my pastor will do that with me, he wants me to name a promise that God gives in the Bible and claim it for myself. What my pastor is doing is making sure that he's not spoon feeding me anything that I can ignore, but that I actually do know what the Bible says. It doesn't always work well because I can't quote verses, just the ideas in them. What Paul is doing is reminding Timothy of the power of the Gospel. Paul knows that Timothy knows the Gospel and what it says, and he's not there in person to make Timothy say the words and create a pep rally moment (like my pastor tries to do). But instead, Paul is reminding Timothy of what he needs a reminder of and he's speaking from his own personal experience of where his strength to go through these tough times come from. When I first started preaching, my pastor told me to use illustrations from my life because it shows the congregation that I beleive what I'm saying. I don't know that Paul was intentionally doing that, but because I think Paul was preaching to himself as much as to Tmiothy, I think there is a little of that at least.

I spend a lot of time on-line and though I credit myself with taking on people in news discussion boards about the place of God in the leadership of the country, the truth is, I shy away from identifying my beliefs in other areas where I "know" the people I'm talking to. I wrote an epically long fan fiction once where I posted a portion of the story twice a week, so I got to dialogue with several people who were reading the story. There was one time that a 16 year old girl asked how my two main characters could get engaged without living together first. She asked that question a few times before I finally told her that I didn't believe that it isn't right (though in this case, the characters totally would have been living together -- they in no way shared my morals)There were other incidences like that where it would have been appropriate to share my beliefs. Sometimes I took those opportunities, most of the time I didn't. We are called to have faith that God will take care of us when we choose not to show cowardice in our relationship with him. To go with the fan fiction story above, God did give me several openings with the 16 year old girl. She started giving me advice about what to do with the story, so we exchanged Emails and had some really good conversations. One was one year around Christmas when she was asking about the meaning of Easter and Christmas. She told me she didn't want to make any spiritual decsions until after she graduated from college and could figure out what she believes. She should be 2-3 years from that now. I wish I would have pushed her a little more, but also have faith that I helped plant or water a seed that will grow into something in the future. The easy answer to how to combat the fear is to say have faith. I think with fear, the best strategy that I know is to just face it. In this area, that means starting by praying for openings and the guidance to take them. I read a book once (probably about chruch planting or growth) that said God isn't going to send you people until you are ready for them. I think that's true for us too. The book was talking about having systems in place to help the people grow and mature. But I think the same is true about us. God's not going to give us opportunities to share our faith until we're ready to take them. The best preparation we have is to pray for those ops and to study the Word. There are other things like practice telling your story, but I also beleive that especially if you've been a Christian for a long time, not everyone is going to need to hear the same story (I officially accepted Christ as my Savior when I was 6. There's not a lot to tell there. HOwever, in the 26 years since then, I've built a pretty big repetoire that may not make me connect with everyone, but I should have a pretty good swath of people).

My first thought at reading this question was, "if I knew that, then I could get out of this place I'm in now". My next thought was a memory of a professor I had in college who said "start". Everything starts with prayer and guiding of God. HOwever, at some point we have to do the active following things. For em personally, it's writing. I've allowed myself to get distracted from one of my true joys in life and the area that I've been using to serve my church. Part of the problem has been no need by the church, but when I take an honest look at myself, that shouldn't be an issue, I write in my free time whether they will be used for church or not. For me, starting means making a plan and carrying it out. I have that I started several months ago that at the time I was really excited about. I need to find that play (a problem since my jump drive has been corrupted and the back up seems to have disappeared) and figure out where I am with it. Begin a rewrite and go from there. One or two days working on that will get me back into old habits. In Timothy's case, I think he's worn down from spending time on administration and church politics. I see him as a guy that on Thursday night and Friday has to hurry through his sermon because the demands of the church has taken so much out of him. If his passion adn gifting is teaching, then he probably needs to go on a prayer retreat and spend a few days in the Word. I think a time of refreshining will do him a world of good. If evangelism is his gift, then I think he needs to find someplace new to hang out so he's with a different group of people that he can evangelize. He needs a new challenge. The passion is always going to be there, it's just a matter of figuring out how to tap back into it.

I think that doing service, actually getting out and volunteering, is a good way to keep focused on the important things. LOast summer there was a need in my church to fix a roof. We had a couple guys who knew what they were doing and they needed some people that htye could just order around for the day. For me that was a implimntation of the command to help the widows and orphans (I didn't know it at the time, but the people we were helping was a lady who lost her fiance who died in the line of duty and her kids). I personally enjoy doing the practical things that don't involve money, mostly because God hasn't gifted me with a lot. I think another thing you can do is live within or below your means. Staying out of debt is a good idea for a lot of reasons, but I think when you allow yourself to put something on the credit card, you're opening yoursefl up to always wanting the bigger and better, and in the end I think that's what Paul is mostly warning against, starting this cycle of wanting more and more. If you're living within what you can afford, I think you curb some of the cravings you have. I think giving money is something that you need to talk to your spouse about before doing it. Hopefully at least one of you knows what you can afford. I think in bigger investments, you can also use good Christian counsel as well as wisdom. I had a pastor who bought a few houses that he was going to rent out. He bought the houses from a guy he trusted at the church. Several of the pastors in our conference told him it might not be a wise investment, but he was determined. The pastors were right, and now he's stuck paying mortgages for a couple houses that are basically abandoned. Don't forget that teh Holy Spirit does talk through other brothers and sisters in the faith.

I lump love of money and material possessions together. I think that it starts subtley. I've always driven old cars. Until a couple weeks ago I never drove a car wth fewer than 100,000 miles on it or younger than 10 years old. As a result, while my car has never put me in debt, it has made me make several trips to the mechanic. I can remember being in college with my first car, which was deteriorating rapidly. It was the summer and we had some high school kids on campus doing a work program. I remember looking at this one kid's car that looked newer than mine and nicer than mine and getting so mad at God because mine was a piece of junk and his would never do anything bad to him. A couple years later, mine ended up in a junkyard, and I assume his did too. I got more cars with different problems, I assume he did too. But I've learned that it's not the car that makes you happy or the security you get by having it, it's the security you have when you trust the God is going to provide what you need.

I'm bad at citing verses, so excuse me. In Matthew Jesus says you cannot serve God and money. Money and the accumulation of stuff can easily become a god in your life. It's one of those things that starts you down a road that's hard to get off of. Paul is telling Timothy and the church that they need to be content with what they have, they need to see what they have as a blessing from God and take the attitude that it is God-given because if they fall into the trap of wanting more, more, more, it's easy to lose sight of where it all came from. A contented attitude is one of humility towards God. Some of the side effects of it is that you have far less stress which makes you more able to get things accomplished. At work you're going to start achieving more in part because your attitude toward your work will be overall more positive. You're going to get along with people better. You're going to see yourself as more successful instead of constantly pushing for getting more and more. If you're content with what you have, then you're less likely to get into debt trying to get the next best thing. That alone from a practical side is going to meke your life better. I think we need to examine why we want to improve. Right now I work in a low paying job that I feel stuck in. I'm hoping to get a teaching job (or maybe work with technology in a school) this summer and move. Getting this new job would represent a HUGE pay raise and hopefully going to a city that I'll enjoy more than where I'm at. I'm not as intersted in teh bright lights, or new party scenes, or even getting a new cell phone (or an ipod, I **** after ipods). What I'm interested in is finally using some of my skills and having a job that is going to challenge me. I guess I've gotten to a place in my faith where I know God is going to provide. I know that I can live with a little less than what's ideal if I know that I am where God wants me to be and that I'm doing what He wants me to do. .

I think that people like things that make sense. It makes sense that if you do good good things should happen. So, it follows, that if you live the life of a good Christian who tithes and gives up the bad choices there should be some reward. Everything around us says that rewards come in the form of posessions and money. So the same should be said about God, God will reward us by giving us money. People who believe this don't seem to understand that money and posessions are not the only reward. In fact, God never ever promises any more than making sure our needs are met. I think the major distorion I have heard is that if we tithe, God will give all that money back and then some. I have been heartbroken in the past when my tithe put me over and I bounced checks and blamed God for not giving me the miracle that I thought was promised. I still struggle with this a little (even though I can pay my bills now), because I wasn't living a life of extravagence, in fact, I was living as cheaply as I could, and things got bad enough that I stopped tithing for a few months so I could make it. I think during that time, my faith grew as I had daily conversations with God about what was going on. I did learn what God promised (and what He didn't) and I now have an attitude of contentment with what I have (I actually feel funny driving a new to me car that is far better than the 15 year old car that blew up 2 weeks ago). I guess that act of faith was important in my spiritual journey and my relationship with God was the reward for the faith, but it's several years later and I still wonder if it was a broken a promise (and fair) that tithing cost me so much.

When my church launched 9 years ago, my pastor did a sermon on freedom in Christ. Throught he Gospel we learn that we are free from the bondage of sin. That's what Christ's death on the cross gave us. And that means that we are free indeed. God doesn't put us in little categories, He sees us as the beings that He loves and He created. I'm one of the whitest white girls ever, so I may not understand all the feelings that go with this passage. But I don't think that Paul is condoning slavery. It's a fact of life in the culture he lived in. I don't know to what extent people were thinking about the morality of slavery. If you're a smoker, I think you kind of have an awareness that it's inconsiderate, but you don't necessarily think that it's all out evil. It's a part of the society that you live in. If the morality of slavery was part of the societal conversation, I think that taking a position in this letter would have taken the focus away from what Paul was trying to get across. I don't think there's a motive in not saying something. there are times that silence on a matter can be deafening, but this just isn't one of them.

When you ordain someone, you are publically saying that you believe in the person's ability as a pastor, a leader, and an example setter. Before you make that statement, you need to be sure that the person can live up to who you think they are. I knew a pastor who met a worship leader that appeared to be everythign he needed. The worship leader was talented in his ministry area, he had pastoral experience, he had a pnated a church in the area (a real need since this pastor wanted to start planting churches. The pastor referred to the worship leader as an answer to prayer. The worship leader became the pastor's right hand man. And then 6 months later, they werent' able to work together for several reasons. The straw that broke the amel's back, as they say, was a piece of advice the worship leader gave to a couple. But htere were other problems too. The worship leader didn't want to plant, but the pastor wouldn't hear that. The worship leader was a talented musician, but he was rarely prepared for rehearsal. THat church lost a good guy and a good servant, and I think the reason was because the pastor didn't take the time to get to know him.

Why was it necessary to make formal accusations and "try" the false teachers? I think you want to "try" false teachers in part to make it clear what they did wrong. It's easy for people to look at a situation and draw their own conclusions. I have a guy at work who tonight ranted about a verbal warning he got from the boss and the main issue was he didn't know what the warning was for. So when he rants to me, I have the opportunity to form my own conclusions about what he didn't do right. Though in this case it wouldn't be appropriate, if my co-worker were to go through a public trial, it would be clear what the wrong thing was. In this case, Paul is talking about false teachers. I think that clarity is necessary for this church. If they have believed what the false teachers have been saying, then they need to know that the false teachings would not be tolerated and what the Word actually does say. Also a public trial makes it more difficult (not impossible) for rumors to start and to spread. Why were the temptations to compromise and not go through with it so great? and Why is it so difficult to exercise church discipline today? I don't think anybody likes confrontation. There's the fear of what the other person is going to do (will they fly off the handle), the repurcussions (will they retaliate), and a fear that you might be wrong (in my experience people a lot of times have a good explanation for why they do the things they do and when you hear it you sometimes feel foolish). Besides that, it's just uncomfortable. It's not a conversation that's fun for anyone. Then there's the practical side of things. These are the elders, the people who have the most influence in the church and most likely the people who are making the church go. They contribute financially, they give their time. If it comes to ahving to remove them, how do you fill their places. I lost a lot of respect for a former pastor of mine who knew that our worship leader was sleeping with his fiance and refused to remove him from that position. His argument was we need to have music on Sunday mornings and he's the only person that is willing to do it. That is a major conundrum. In this case it was a struggling church plant that wanted to emphasize that area of worship. I'm not a whole lot better. What prompted that discussion was a conversation I had with the worship leader where he said something (I forgot what) and I didn't ask him if that's what was happening. For me it came down to it's hard having that conversation.

The people with the listed characteristics I believe are usually people who are hurting. You drink too much when you're trying to numb the pain. You get angry or violent because of pent up anger that you've been keeping. I forgot who I'm quoting, but the quote is, "hurt people, hurt people". A person who have all this stuff inside them will at best have difficulty showing the people of the church that he/she cares and at worst will do more damage to the people than good. I really think this is why the church as a whole is seen as being so hypocritical. People unfortunately do get hurt by the people of the church. These things also compromise our witness. If we're angry all the time then why would a non-Christian want to learn more about the life with Christ? What is it about us that others will see and be attracted to or want to know more about?

I think the answers here are all good ones. I dont' think I have anything to add, so let me ask a question... how long does a person have to be tested before putting them in a leadership position? I worked with a pastor who decided towards the end of his tenure (after members of his staffs didn't stay longer than abou 4-6 months) that before putting anyone in a leadership position he wanted to have them as a part of the community for 6 months -- a kind of testing period. I would have said this pastor was the problem, people couldn't work with him for more than a few months before he changed direction and therefore the church changed direction. I also sensed some emotional immaturity (it's a draw, he saw the same in me. We were both probably right). He had been working towards ordination for years before coming to start this church. So for me the question is how long do you test? I don't think there is a hard and fast rule, so I'm looking more for a rule of thumb. In the case of me and my former pastor, I think we both met the criteria. We were both God fearing and trying to do what we thought God was telling us. We were both people who had been Christians for over a decade and we had both gone through training before taking the assignment. However, I think the problems we had with each other and with the church stemmed from our immaturity. How could that have been weeded out better?

I'm single, so I don't know about everything I'm going to say, it just comes from observationand a few conversations that I've had with others. I think that leading your own family, you have the opportunity to learn things about yourself and improve who you are. If your a good parent and spouse, you're learning how to give grace in ways that I as a single person don't have to. YOu're learning how to teach and how to show pride in the things your family does. You're learning how to deal with disappointments and struggles with other people. And your ability in these areas is going to come through by your children. If they are angry and rebellious, that is a reflection on you. And when they act out, the people in the church will start to make guesses about why. that's not to say that single people can't grow in some of these areas. But the opportunities for them to are different. It also isn't to say that single people can't lead churches. Paul himself said that he thought all people should be single so they can completely give themselves over to the work of the church. However, single people have a different set of challenges and we grow in different ways than married people.

I am a female pastor, obviously I've looked at this passage and have come to the conclusion that this was an instruction for the Ephasus church at the time of Paul. HOwever, I think even now there's some wisdom in taking this at a case by case basis. I was in a church as the assistant pastor where the congregation as a whole didn't think that women should be pastors. It does cause problems. I'm told that in a Sunday School class, they were talking about women in ministry and one person said I was the first female pastor he ever saw that enjoyed ministry. I was liked at that church (I still even get to go to their Christmas parties). When I preached, people not only had good comments for me, they let me know that they paid attention and got it. But, when the lead pastor left (I left at the same time), this congregation refused to bring in a woman pastor. There was some discussion about whether the superintendent (who makes recommendations to the board that makes appointments) should thrust her on them. The pastor is in another church, and I think that's for the best. I think that if she would have landed at that church, she would not have been able to get everyone under her authority. LIke I said, I am totally pro-women in ministry. For me the most compelling argument is to look at Paul's other writings and see how many women he commended. To take these verses literally means that Priscilla would not have been able to teach Apollos at all, just Aquilla. What I find interesting is the dynamic that women are able to influence men's views so easily. If that's the case, then I would think women should almost have to be in ministry because we can influene the men easier than men can.

The biggest problem in Ephesus was the false teachings. That started infighting. I think that both are what Pauls's talking about here, though the fighting is specifically what he's concerned with. To come to a place of worship, it means communicating with God. THere are so many things that disrupt that ability to worship God, and one of them is sin. Harboring animosity toward another person is sinful because of where it leads. I heard a sermon where the pastor posed the question what's the difference between hate and murder. He argued that it's the same as the difference between **** and adultery. With these heavy burdens on us, it's impossible to come to a place in our hearts where we can worship.

It seems like I remember in the Timothy intro (or maybe chapter 1) that Pastor Ralf gave us, it said that the wrong thing being taught was that the second coming had already happened. If I'm remembering right, then I think it's important for Paul to show where we are now. Christ is mediating on our behalf, we're not currently in heaven or whatever the teaching at the time was leading the people to beleive. It also reinforces the message that CHrist is mediating on behalf of people who sin. Sinners is a pretty big group that doesn't discriminate based on geneology.

I think that the Ephesus church lost their focus and stopped teaching the Gospel. Maybe it's because of some of my church experiences, but I doubt they were even teaching Jesus to the Jews. My experience has shown that when you get into this mentality that you have to deal only wth the problems at your local church, you don't evangelize at all, a congregation will show to church and hear a sermon and then go home. That's the image I have of the Ephasus church. And that's what Paul was trying to get them to stop doing. Paul wants them to remember why they converted in the first place and take that passion to the people around them. Being Paul, he had a passion for the Gentiles, who were being ignored. But I wouldn't doubt that the Jews were as well. I also sense a bit of infighting in the church. I think that's why Paul starts with "Pray for everyone". NOthing can be done outside of prayer. Prayer also allows the prayer an "extra dose" of love and humility to deal with the situations on his heart. That's got to be the starting place for anything. I like what others have said about a good political climate being condusive to teaching the Gospel. Though there's a part of me that wonders if the opposite is true. My pastor lives in a middle class neighborhood and he describes several of his neighbors as thinking they didn't need God because things were going so well. I'm going to be interested in seeing what happens now that the economy isn't doing as well. On the other hand, having peace I think makes people more able to listen. I'm taking the really long route to saying that Paul knew about he situation in Ephesus and he is trying to nudge them back on track. Pray for peace, in part because people in general don't want to sign up to be martyrs (I think that was a very real concern in this time). Stop fighting, because I assume they were and that not only stops them from showing love, but it makes them more likely to blow their witness. And go and evangelize to everyone, because they weren't.

I think it's always good to remember our testimony. It reminds us of where we've been and how we got through it. I think that's what Paul was trying to do with Timothy when he reminded him of the prophesy about him. When I think through the events that God has gotten me through and the messages I ahve received from Him, it gives me a sense of purpose and strength that I didn't have before going out of my way to remember. Paul used a lot of sports analogies didn't he? I think this one means, stick with it and continue on fighting for the good. I've worked in churches and with pastors who I bumped heads with over a bunch of issues. In those situations I've felt completely alone and I literally begged God to let me quit. I didn't feel like it was the right to do it. If you are up against your church, especially on doctrine issues, there is no lonelier feeling or a feeling more likely to make you want to quit. It zaps all your strength and makes you want to just passive-aggressively agree with anything in order to end the constant battles. paul was telling Timothy to stick with it because he's fighting for the side of good. The "hold onto faith" question is very closely related to the above. When you're fighting your church, it's easy to feel like God has forgotten about you, afterall, if God is God and the church is God's how does so much false stuff come into it? The answer is that chruches are run by imperfect humans who make mistakes. I worked with one pastor who I think mistook his goals for God's plans/timing. It happens. At the time however, all ou see is the corruption and the problems and the people who are causing them. I thinkt he temptation Timothy was facing was being overwhelmed by his assignment. Everything here seems to be a coach telling his athlete that he really does have the energy to finish and to finish strong. Timothy seems worn down and Paul is simply trying to keep him going.

I agree with your points hausemouse. Jesus, as the embodiment of God has the same attributes as God the Father. I see this as falling into the paradox of the three in one. Jesus is fully man and fully God. So if God is Eternal, Immortal, Invisible, and the only God, so is Jesus (and the Holy Spirit for that matter). My theology might be al ittle bit off, so if I'm wrong someone please correct me, but I've always seen the difference between the three as basically their roles. Jesus came to earth and now He's the mediator between us and God. Jesus left the Holy Spirit to fill us and guide us (John has a whole list of things He does, but I'm too lazy to look it up) now that Jesus is back in heaven. I think that in the Bible when the Father is referred to, it's always God the Father, because Jesus is The Son. I see these particular verses as being a sponteneous, emotional praise of thankgiving by Paul. While everything else in his letters are very thought through and logically laid out, every once in awhile he's overcome with emotion and spits out a word of thanksgiving like this one. At least that's why I assume he's talking about God the Father versus Jesus. As forthe questions, the descriptors that paul uses gives us more of the awesome attributes of God. He's eternal, will be around forever both backwards and forwards in time. He's Immortal, can never die. He's Invisible, present but not seen except in the results of His presence. He's the only God, the only one worthy to be worshipped. When I read this doxology, I can't help but imagine Paul in a house (in my head it's always a log cabin with a fire in the fireplace) dictating to his secretary and all of sudden, he jumps up and gives this doxology with great exuberance. at the end of it, he almost collapses in a heap on his bed, giddy but nearly exhausted. Praise has to come first and foremost from the heart. It's got to acknowledge the awesomeness of God. I think those are the first things I notice about praise in these verses. It should get your heart pumping and get you excited. It should also make you look forward to the things that God is about to do.

When I was learning to preach, my pastor told me that I needed to show the congregation that I really beleived what I was saying because of how it's impacted my life. I think that's why you use illustrations of yourself and close family friends when teaching anything, not only is telling a story more interesting than giving a list of facts, but it shows that you really believe what you're saying. Everything that Paul did was to bring people closer to Christ. This was a church that had people in high positions starting to lead back to teachings of the law and endless geneologies. By telling his story, the story of a man that lived that life to the extreme and then learned hte truth, he's pulling htem back to where they need to be.

I think there are a lot of things that false doctrines can do a church, and most of them have been listed here already. What I want to add is verse 5, "The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience, and a sincere faith." I was in a church that taught the scriptures well. THe pastor was incredibly intelligent and know what the Bible backwards and forwards. One time I suggested an alternative way of doing something and he looked sick because he saw it as taking God out of that part of the service. He would never be accused of false teaching. What I think he might be accused of was emphasizing the law too much. Of the churches I have served in, this was a church that struggled most with showing love (to each other, and in two years of being there I didn't see them go out of their way to help the community around them) and really being a community. THis pastor lived in fear that a member of the congregation would leave the church over tiny issues. I think those are a couple of signs of teaching the wrong things. And I think that's a bigger problem with churches today than we realize. When all we're getting is law, it's easy for the congregation to begin judging the other members instead of supporting them. It's easy for members to divide into factions that will split the church. The other result of false teaching is the fruit that comes from it. Churches that teach false doctrines will not be producing people who are becoming mature believers.