Speaking from the congregation ...

[.tim]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

Never interrupt, question or disagree with the MOG. 

Church isn't supposed to resemble a New Testament style assembly of believers where multiple people can share a prophecy or teaching.  It's a place where you go to sit down, shut up, and listen to one person who has exclusive rights over the interpretation of scripture and whose job it is to indoctrinate, er, teach you. 

Sort of like the Pope, only local instead of universal.  Sure, unlike the pre-Gutenberg/Luther days, you get to read the Bible on your own.  You just don't get to interpret it in a way that contradicts the Pope, er, MOG's views.  If you think differently than your local MOG, shut up and keep it to yourself, or go find a church where that MOG teaches what you believe.  And then sit down, shut up, and listen to him, instead. 

Hmmph.  The nerve of some people. 

 

[.tim]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

Never interrupt, question or disagree with the MOG. 

Church isn't supposed to resemble a New Testament style assembly of believers where multiple people can share a prophecy or teaching.  It's a place where you go to sit down, shut up, and listen to one person who has exclusive rights over the interpretation of scripture and whose job it is to indoctrinate, er, teach you. 

Sort of like the Pope, only local instead of universal.  Sure, unlike the pre-Gutenberg/Luther days, you get to read the Bible on your own.  You just don't get to interpret it in a way that contradicts the Pope, er, MOG's views.  If you think differently than your local MOG, shut up and keep it to yourself, or go find a church where that MOG teaches what you believe.  And then sit down, shut up, and listen to him, instead. 

Hmmph.  The nerve of some people.

So, if someone stands up and starts speaking clear blasphemy the pastor should be quiet as well?

 

[MrsRow]

maybe let the man finish or if he must be interruptied , do it respectfully, "i'm going to have to stop you there, sir...." and then gently say something like "I appreciate your enthusiasm, but that isn't what is believed or taught here...."  and then kindly from scripture explain why and remind the man that he is loved and that the Pastor would be glad to explain and reason from the Scriptures with him if he needs further teaching in private counsel.

 

[TimbauxRioux]

what Mrs Row said ... respectfully stop him from talking.

Just throwing this in... a pastor needs to be very careful so as not to appear that he is taking advantage of his ability to address an issue or subject knowing full well that no one can respond.
When the congregation feels the pastor is doing this, they will want to speak before the congregation, just as the pastor has.

Another crazy story, but true... we had a revival planned and the pastor was dead set on bringing in this guy who was the most philandering preacher i ever knew. We went back and forth at the business meeting,. and the pastor was getting his butt handed to him by several men.. but insisted his friend was "changed' (about ten different affairs in one church). Well the pastor used the following sunday to make a one-sided argument to allow his friend to come preach revival.

In the midst of all this, so badly, i wanted to stand up and speak my mind..

I am just saying this because sometimes church members get the impression that the pastor is using his authority and speaking time as an advantage, giving him more time to speak than those on the other side.

good topic...tim. It will be interesting to see what others say ( and if they can be civil in discussion)

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

Never interrupt, question or disagree with the MOG. 

Church isn't supposed to resemble a New Testament style assembly of believers where multiple people can share a prophecy or teaching.  It's a place where you go to sit down, shut up, and listen to one person who has exclusive rights over the interpretation of scripture and whose job it is to indoctrinate, er, teach you. 

Sort of like the Pope, only local instead of universal.  Sure, unlike the pre-Gutenberg/Luther days, you get to read the Bible on your own.  You just don't get to interpret it in a way that contradicts the Pope, er, MOG's views.  If you think differently than your local MOG, shut up and keep it to yourself, or go find a church where that MOG teaches what you believe.  And then sit down, shut up, and listen to him, instead. 

Hmmph.  The nerve of some people.

So, if someone stands up and starts speaking clear blasphemy the pastor should be quiet as well?

Of course not.  The MOG is the only one allowed to speak.  The laity is too stupid to recognize blasphemy, so it's too dangerous to take the risk. 

This is obviously a misprint:

29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge.

 

[PFFlyer]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

1 Corinthians 14:29-33    Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.  If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.  For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.  And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Let him speak, and let  his spirit be subject to the prophets.  If we are motivated by a God-given desire for truth, we need fear no man's words.  We can discuss anything that comes before the assembly with the perfect confidence that the Comforter will lead us to the answer. 

Incredible freedom in the Spirit!

John 14:26   But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Believe it!

 

[prophet]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

1 Corinthians 14:29-33    Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.  If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.  For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.  And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Let him speak, and let  his spirit be subject to the prophets.  If we are motivated by a God-given desire for truth, we need fear no man's words.  We can discuss anything that comes before the assembly with the perfect confidence that the Comforter will lead us to the answer. 

Incredible freedom in the Spirit!

John 14:26   But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Believe it!

Bbbbbbut-but-but then the people will figure out that they don't need me lording over them.
Then they'll start investigating why I need so much salary, when I dont do much all week, and am as capable as them of working.

 

[PFFlyer]

Bbbbbbut-but-but then the people will figure out that they don't need me lording over them.
Then they'll start investigating why I need so much salary, when I dont do much all week, and am as capable as them of working.

;D  Yeah, think of that..just one LORD.  Think it could catch on?

 

[bgwilkinson]

Of course not.  The MOG is the only one allowed to speak.  The laity is too stupid to recognize blasphemy, so it's too dangerous to take the risk.

Kinda like when the MOG shouts "only the KJV is the Word of God", "the NIV is Satan's Bible".

The sheeple respond with, "Preeeechet Brother".

They don't recognize blasphemy when they hear it.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Last night one of the men in our Church stood up and spoke from his heart. The only problem is that what he said didn't fall inline with what the pastor believes on the particular subject. In such a situation what should a pastor do? Should he quiet the man immediately or let him say his thing and let God work with people.

I ask because I believe it was a teachable moment and perhaps if he quieted the man and addressed the topic head on he would have taken advantage of a teachable moment. But, on the flip side, by being quiet he allows people who agree with the man who stood up not get angry ....

1 Corinthians 14:29-33    Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.  If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.  For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.  And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Let him speak, and let  his spirit be subject to the prophets.  If we are motivated by a God-given desire for truth, we need fear no man's words.  We can discuss anything that comes before the assembly with the perfect confidence that the Comforter will lead us to the answer. 

Incredible freedom in the Spirit!

John 14:26   But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Believe it!

^This.

 

[Bruh]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one. 

 

[Bruh]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one.

So you do not believe in "joining" or becoming a "member" of a "church"?

If I believe he is wrong, I don't join. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one.

So you do not believe in "joining" or becoming a "member" of a "church"?

If I believe he is wrong, I don't join.

What's to join?  I am already a member of the body of Christ, which is the church. 

 

[christundivided]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one.

I've appealed to the church discipline method mentioned in 1Corinthians 6:3 several times in my life over doctrinal disputes. Never had one deacon or pastor ever agree to let the dispute be heard among the members of the church. Not once. Never.

They knew they were wrong and they didn't want to face the charges among their members. They were cowards and manipulative control freaks. They are not alone. It obvious from the various posts found in this thread and others here recently.... that this is the general method used to squash decent from church members. 

 

[Biker]

I've done this myself before, but it was probably worse because it was as a Pastor of the church. We have many pastors/edlers.

I taught against what the church believes.

After it was said, it was too late to take it back. It was ignored...well meaning it was not brought up.

Upon becoming a member, I promised not to conflict ... sort of..I said what do you mean? Then he just dropped it. A hint maybe

I will say what I want regarding free will and calvinism. Although I prefer to avoid those conversations. This particular incident wasn't about that though.

Regarding the OP, I'd let them finish..then depending upon what was said, maybe just give a quick, meek reminder to the flock that a part of his speech doesn't coincide with what the church believes. Then thank him for sharing what was on his heart, and let him know how much he is liked.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one.

I've appealed to the church discipline method mentioned in 1Corinthians 6:3 several times in my life over doctrinal disputes. Never had one deacon or pastor ever agree to let the dispute be heard among the members of the church. Not once. Never.

They knew they were wrong and they didn't want to face the charges among their members. They were cowards and manipulative control freaks. They are not alone. It obvious from the various posts found in this thread and others here recently.... that this is the general method used to squash decent from church members.

I know you meant "dissent", but they not only squash dissent, they squash any open input at all from their church members, even if it is meant to add to the edification of others. 

They insist their voice is the only one to be heard. 

Any pastors who cannot tolerate speaking from the congregation either know they're lazy and their teaching is crap, or are so insecure about the spiritual authority behind their teaching, they are unwilling to allow any open additional edification or publicly aired scrutiny.  They refuse to trust the Spirit. 

Edited for "grammer".

 

[christundivided]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one.

I've appealed to the church discipline method mentioned in 1Corinthians 6:3 several times in my life over doctrinal disputes. Never had one deacon or pastor ever agree to let the dispute be heard among the members of the church. Not once. Never.

They knew they were wrong and they didn't want to face the charges among their members. They were cowards and manipulative control freaks. They are not alone. It obvious from the various posts found in this thread and others here recently.... that this is the general method used to squash decent from church members.

I know you meant "dissent", but they not only squash dissent, they squash any open input at all from their church members, even if it is meant to add to the edification of others. 

They insist their voice is the only one to be heard. 

Any pastor who cannot tolerate speaking from the congregation either knows they're lazy and what their teaching is crap, or is so insecure about the spiritual authority behind their teaching, they are unwilling to allow any open additional edification or publicly aired scrutiny.

I agree completely.

I don't know what I was thinking in using decent. My mind was playing tricks on me..

I don't know why people feel its so important to protect themselves by acting in such a way.

I do know of a few reasons but they are worthless and prideful.  I've heard it time and time again....I haven't worked this hard to build a church based on what I believe to have it split. I haven't been a deacon or pastor for 20 years to have things I've taught be questioned. I've been punched in the face for standing against the teaching of tithing. I've been threatened for standing with some church members who were told they needed to take a bath by a deacon board... just to name a few. It's all about control.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

If a person sat with the Pastor and discussed a few things before joining, I wouldn't think that a person would have to stand up in the middle of his sermon and try to correct him.

That's one of the problems with your assumption.  The second problem is the assumption that the mannagawd, er, I mean "pastor" would entertain the possibility that he's wrong about something. 

To that, all I have to say is BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... GASP BREATHE AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!  Yeah, right, that's a good one.

So you do not believe in "joining" or becoming a "member" of a "church"?

If I believe he is wrong, I don't join.

What's to join?  I am already a member of the body of Christ, which is the church.

It seems there were local assemblies in the NT and they had some type of membership and accountability....hence Paul's instruction to the church at Corinth about disciplining a member.