BaptistLife.Com Forums.

Delving into the question of the spread and the meaning of the terms "presbyter" and "presbytery" when employed by Baptist churches or writers referring to Baptist entities. Who uses these terms? What do they mean by them? The beginnings of answers are in the thread about .

We've reintroduced the term "elder" in the SBC. I never heard of elders in SBC churches 40 years ago. Now almost all new churches have some kimd of elder system. No more pastor and deacons. Now lead or senior pastor, elders, and deacons. I've never heard the elder group referred to as a presbytery, mainly to stave off criticism that we're becoming Presbyterian churches, I suppose l

I have seen where ordination councils were referred to as "the presbytery that recommends the ordination of _________."

Its odd in that it kind of leaves Baptist historical usage to adopt Presbyterian usage. I don't see much scriptural evidence for equating Deacons with Elders, or replacing one with another. Presbuteros in the New Testament seems to me to refer to clergy and not laity.

But hey, if some Baptists want to become Presbyterians, makes me no never mind. But if they are going to do it, they should do it right. In the Presbyterian Church they have a Board of Elders and also Deacons, those don't fill the same role. But when Baptists do it they seem to conflate the two.

In my church tradition a presbyter or the presbytery has nothing to do with Presbyterians or Presbyterian practice. A presbyter is an elder. Either mean the same thing, a preacher who is ordained. If speaking of one ordained minister, the choice would seldom be presbyter, but almost exclusively elder. If speaking of a group of elders who form a council for the purpose of ordaining another preacher or constituting a new church they are commonly referred to as a presbytery, but sometimes an eldership. It is interesting to me to find this usage unusual to you all.

On the other hand, the elders among the Reformed Baptists (including those in the SBC that William mentions) are usually "ruling" elders who participate in the running the affairs of the church.


* "my church tradition" -- we're just country missionary Baptists who may have hung on to some things more urban Baptists have dropped.

Our presbyteries don't govern either. We are governed congregationally, and ultimately even the ordination is at the will of the local church. But the church authorizes the presbytery to act as a counsel to examine and lay hands on the ordinand, subject to the approval of the church. (At least the way we do it; the presbytery does their examination of the candidate, recommends to the church to ordain, or not, and then the church votes for the presbytery to go ahead with the ordination, or not.)

None of our presbyteries are any kind of standing organization. They are called together for the specific task to which they give counsel.

Or could it be, the NT comments on elders, overseers, deacons, etc. was never intended to be normative for all time?

Different times suggest different organizations and any church should be free to try whatever they want.

About Lynden WA, they apparently have - pretty dominant is a small town. It was that way in 1970 when I was going to UW and 8 Lyndenites lived with me a in Christian Mens House.

The Friends congregation would say that Paul was an apostle, and there is no apostolic office in existence any more. In some friends meetings, there may be a mechanism for indicating individuals who have accepted a call to serve as an elder or church leader, but in this particular one, there was not. There wasn't any transfer of membership from group to group, when you moved or started attending a different group, you were considered a member when you decided to join and give your testimony. In the time I attended, all of those involved in church leadership were from that local body. All volunteer, no paid staff except the custodian and the clerk, who was the secretary answering the phone during the week.

By the way, I think all denominations have suffered from adopting business models over New Testament Church models. This means that pastors are thought of as employees and not church leaders in many congregations because they pay you a salary. (This happens some in any denomination.) And churches are thought of as non-profit businesses over ministries.

How far would the Apostle Paul gotten with the church of Corinth if he were an employee of the church? When he told them about all the things that were wrong with their worship, etc. they likely just would have fired him. (Not to mention he'd have never gotten past a pastoral search committee. )