Worship leaders are essential.
It's the congregations role as a whole to worship God. Not a man on stage
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Worship leaders are essential.
It would depend on size of Church.
But I agree about the paid positions.
Worship leaders, in today's church, are like those elders who rule well, labouring in the word and doctrine...worthy of double honour as pertains to income.It would depend on size of Church.
But I agree about the paid positions.
For those who don't know how to worship?Worship leaders are essential.
A lot of little churches in Australia really don't get much at all to pay expenses.
It's the congregations role as a whole to worship God. Not a man on stage
For those who don't know how to worship?
Worship leaders, in today's church, are like those elders who rule well, labouring in the word and doctrine...worthy of double honour as pertains to income.
See Psalms 150...
Playing with instruments is important when we worship the Lord.
Playing on musical instruments is an integral part of how we worship the Lord. Again, Psalms 150.If you turned off the music and the church can't worship then there is something wrong with that.
My church of the past really wanted your tithes.
How about yours?
There is nothing wrong with repeating the words when singing unto the Lord....as long as it doesn't become empty.LOL I would kindly disagree. most worship songs now have 7 lines and 11 words. All repetition.
still Hebrews 7:8 stands out. Especially the “of whom it is witnessed that he lives on.” Revelation 1:18.I'm in agreement with you here except for the bit about Abraham, he was on his way back from the slaughter of the kings. He didn't go hope and gather a tenth of his crops, he stop on his way home in Salem current Jerusalem, and tithed the king there.
That is only one example of what you are referring to.
My church of the past really wanted your tithes.
How about yours?
That is only one example of what you are referring to.
I consider that there are other repetitive songs that are very edifying...
Such as "Come and take control (repeat ad infinitum)"
The younger generations do not only pay attention to the words in songs so as to formulate doctrine. You can find that in any sermon.
But the younger generations need to express their worship of the Lord in such things as dance.
As such, singing songs that contain doctrine and which emphasize teaching doctrine are not fitting. Again, you can find doctrinal teaching in any sermon; and I would say that that is even the more fitting place for it.
We are a worship generation; and as such the songs that we sing are formulated as songs of worship to the Lord and are not intended to be sermons in and of themselves.
You've raised some good points. Those who do not labor in the Word and doctrine should not even be among the elders.
Does this really work? I have never been a part of a church big enough have that many elders or formal ministers so I cannot speak from even observing such things. There were problems in small churches, but not quite the same.And if there were always a plurality of elders, then the rest of them would have to address this issue and ask that brother to focus on another ministry.
In small churches of my experience the pastor often or usually worked at a full-time secular job to earn a living for self and family. I would hope that every minister holding a formal position would do the same [decline compensation] rather than expecting full support from the congregation. Is that too idealistic of an expectation? I wonder if Paul had to make most of his living from tent making or did the people to whom he ministered contribute largely to his support?Since this matter pertains to compensation for those who devote themselves fully to the ministry of the Word, it would not apply to faithful brothers and sisters serving without expectation of compensation. And those who are self-supporting and still minister the Word would decline any compensation.
The Holy Spirit should do so, but in practice is this the case? I belonged to one assembly where they insisted that people pay a tithe so that the ministry could function. I was too ignorant at the time of the things of God to understand God's will in such things. I could afford it so I simply paid a tithe. Years later my understanding was increased. I continued to make a large contribution because I have become convicted to do so. What people give or don't give depends on their own material situation as well as where they are in their walk with God. I don't believe we should ever insist that people pay a certain amount or percentage, but...it is not up to me any where now... except in my own home. Only me and my wife now!The Holy Spirit would show the assembly who is a genuine laborer by the quality of his ministry. And then the Christians could recommend better compensation, or generous compensation.
Yes I probably understand the historical situations better than some of the current situations today.It is not for the laborer to declare what he deserves. It is up to the rest of the Christians to compensate fairly and justly.
The apostles did not see the elders as "employees" of the church, but as those appointed by God to be in spiritual leadership. So it would not be an issue of legality, but of spirituality. Again, they did not see just one man as being the shepherd of 100 or 200 people. That's why they called it a "presbytery" (a group of presbyters or elders).
You are speaking of how it should and I agree with that. I simply do not trust men. There are undoubtedly some men who are trusting God in churches but there are too many leaning to heavily on other things. Being in that situation without some real faith could be a real problem, couldn't it? Will God always supply the material needs of a faithful man of God? I believe that He will, but some people may have different views as to what is needed.That would be the basic living wage for a person in that position. God did not envision preachers as being beggars in the assembly. Hence "thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn". The ox was free to eat what he needed. Therefore 'For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.' (1 Tim 5:18)
I'm not against certain instruments in the worship service - but in no way should it be a rock band setting. I'm part of the younger generation (mid 20s) and to be honest it's scary to see the direction the church is / has been heading to with its seeker friendly methods. I do not believe that worship leaders should be paid - it is not a job.
Worship leaders have to learn their trade just like anyone else.
You stop paying music ministers, and all you will have left to do that work will be those who are unskilled as it is at playing musical instruments....which will make for mediocre worship as pertains the the aspect of the musical instruments.
In small churches of my experience the pastor often or usually worked at a full-time secular job to earn a living for self and family. I would hope that every minister holding a formal position would do the same [decline compensation] rather than expecting full support from the congregation. Is that too idealistic of an expectation? I wonder if Paul had to make most of his living from tent making or did the people to whom he ministered contribute largely to his support?
I don't believe we should ever insist that people pay a certain amount or percentage,