When Selecting The Church's Next Pastor

Revelation 3.1:

"And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead."

“And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write”

Sardis was a wealthy city thirty miles southeast of Thyatira. In the sixth century B. C., it was one of the world’s great cities, ruled by the fabled Croesus, called Midas by the Greeks, and known for its golden treasures. However, the glory of Sardis was passed, for the city had fallen to the Persians in 546 B. C. and to the Greeks in 334 B. C. In A. D. 17, Sardis was destroyed by an earthquake and rebuilt by Tiberius Caesar. When John wrote Revelation, the local Church established on the Gospel was spiritually “dead.” This indicates that John wrote this message long after this Church’s founding, an essential consideration in dating the book of Revelation.[1]

Situated on a natural acropolis rising 1,500 feet above the valley floor, Sardis (modern Sart) was nearly impregnable. Around 1200 B. C., it gained prominence as the capital of the Lydian kingdom. Its primary industry was harvesting wool, dying it, and making garments from it. The famous author, Aesop, came from Sardis.[2]

Sardis means “escaping ones” or “the ones who got out.” I indicated there is no direct evidence that these seven letters to the angels of the seven Asian Churches necessarily represent periods or phases of Church history. However, some similarities exist between what Churches have gone through and periods of history, for no other reason than because there is nothing new under the sun. Such similarities would result from congregations being tragically led into decline by pastors like this Church in Sardis.

With that noted, that there will be some similarities between the Sardis Church’s experience and a critical turn in Church history. If this Sardis situation is similar to a period of Church history, it would probably correspond to when Protestantism escaped Rome and the Papal religious system.

“These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars”

In this letter, the Lord Jesus Christ introduced Himself as the Possessor of “the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars.”

Seven is frequently a significant number in the Bible. In addition, we have already seen that the phrase “seven spirits of God” represents the Holy Spirit of God. The reference for that would be Isaiah 11.2:

“And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD”

As well, there is Revelation 1.4:

“John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne”

The seven stars refer to seven messengers, which I consider the seven pastors of the seven Churches. The Lord Jesus Christ reminded His preachers that the Holy Spirit, Who empowers the Gospel ministry, and the man who physically leads the Church’s ministry conduct their ministries under His leadership.

He said to that pastor, “I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.”

This was the first pastor mentioned thus far in John’s Revelation who received no commendation from the Lord. There was no praise, no slap on the back of any kind. Instead, the Lord Jesus began His message to this man with a strong pronouncement:

“I know thy works” Apparently, this man was not lazy. But our Lord’s omniscience was again emphasized. He knew.

“that thou hast a name that thou livest” The man had every external appearance of being alive. He was hustling and bustling.

“and art dead.” The man was dead, in some sense of the word, and did not even know it. This can happen in a Church, as well. William Barclay observed that a Church “is in danger of death when it begins to worship its own past ... when it is more concerned with forms than life ... when it loves systems more than Jesus Christ ... when it is more concerned with material than with spiritual things.”[3] May the Lord spare your congregation from that kind of death. Such might have been the case with this pastor. Either that or the Lord Jesus Christ was letting the pastor know in no uncertain terms that he was lost. Lost? Many Churches vote into the pastorate unsaved men. The complete absence of any attempt by the Savior to persuade this man to repent and clean up his act may be the strongest evidence that he was a lost man, but for the next couple of verses. My opinion tends toward surmising that what we have here is a lost man in the pastorate. He was going through the motions, functioning in an orthodox ministry, with the Church possibly thriving because the pastor was clever and had organizational skills, without actually knowing Jesus as his Savior and possessing eternal life. This is a pattern I have observed over decades of pastoral ministry.

Congregations must carefully scrutinize the conversion testimony of any pastoral candidate of a Church. Care should be taken carefully to how the candidate declares he was converted. Question him, interrogate him, interview him, and examine him. Then come back at him a week or two later and do it again. Please do not call anyone to be the pastor based on his speaking skills, based upon his past successes, based upon his organizational skills, or based upon his sense of humor. Hire a private investigator to thoroughly check him out in every conceivable way by doing a background check, running a credit report, and questioning his neighbors, relatives, former employers, and past subordinates. Then, when you ask him about his doctrines and practices and satisfy yourselves that this is the man God would have you to call, examine his conversion testimony all over again more thoroughly than you have ever evaluated anyone’s testimony. Why? You do not want anyone like the pastor in Sardis to be your pastor.

What kind of man do you want to deal with your grandchildren about their eternal destinies? What about the man you want to guide your grandchildren to Christ? It is rational and reasonable for someone to love and be loyal to the man who guided him to Christ. Anyone who does not love and exhibit loyalty to the pastor who guided him to Christ, his father in the faith, is likely not truly converted. But what about the man who replaces your present pastor? You will want to be as sure about him as ever about anything you have ever considered. Why so? Suppose you are not careful, cautious, and critical in your evaluation (not of the man’s personality or gifts, but of his relationship with Jesus Christ). In that case, you may end up with the kind of pastor being rebuked here or worse. If that happens, do not lay the blame at Jesus’ feet but at your own.

---

[1] See footnote for Revelation 3.1 from Tim LaHaye Prophecy Study Bible, (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000), page 1368.

[2] See footnote for Revelation 3.1 from John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible, (Nashville: Word Publishing, 1997), page 1996.

[3] Quoted in John Walvoord, The Revelation Of Jesus Christ, (Chicago, Illinois: Moody Press, 1966), page 80.

This installment is titled “The History & Theology of Calvinism” by Curt Daniel, Chapter 48, The Order of the Decrees.

Those of you who have been to Bible college or seminary will likely recall the lengthy discussions you engaged in over coffee about the order of the decrees. During such talks approaching a half-century ago, I remember there was usually a great deal of heat and little light. Some Bible colleges are so insecure that even discussions of this topic are out of bounds, against the rules, and grounds for dismissal, which is the Christian college version of an ostrich with its head planted firmly in the dirt. This installment of Ministerial Musings is offered to shed a little bit of light on the topic. 

The chapter is divided into seven parts; The State of the Question, The Three Main Reformed Positions, Amyraldism, Supralapsarianism, Infralapsarianism, Alternative Theories, and Conclusion. 

The State of the Question: Five paragraphs. “The state of the question revolves around three points: (1) whether the decree of election was logically before or after the decree of the Fall, (2) whether the decree of election was logically before or after the degree of the atonement, (3) whether the decree of creation was logically first or last in the order of the decrees. The issue is a matter of logical sequence rather than chronological arrangement. 

The Three Main Reformed Positions: Three paragraphs. Amyraldism is Low Calvinism., also generally called hypothetical universalism. Supralapsarianism is mainstream Calvinism. Infralapsarianism is High Calvinism. The positions are more difficult to define concerning their adherents than is usually recognized, requiring more caution and information than most who quickly attach a label.

The author refers Hyper-Calvinism without pointing out something important for those of us who are IFB’s to recognize because it is tangential to the thrust of his book. The late John R. Rice intentionally mislabeled Hyper-Calvinism and improperly linked Hyper-Calvinism to those not deserving the label.

Throughout his career, Rice chose to identify as Hyper-Calvinism, the position espoused by CH Spurgeon. He did this while ignoring Spurgeon’s long career in London opposing hyper-Calvinism while conducting a vigorously evangelistic ministry as a professed Calvinist.

He also frequently reprinted the sermons of so-called Hyper-Calvinists (who were not) and edited their manuscripts to remove terminology he disapproved of without ever (to my knowledge) informing his readers. Sadly, the man who most effectively encouraged personal evangelism in the 20^th century engaged in that practice. 

Amyraldism: This word is a moniker for four-point Calvinism. The seven paragraphs treating this subtopic are well worth the time of every Gospel minister wishing to hold a position that is not based on a misunderstanding of the issues involved. 

Supralapsarianism: Sixteen paragraphs develop this subtopic. The sovereignty of God is not a topic of controversy among Baptists, yet many Baptists are unwilling to discuss or study the order of the decrees that God sovereignly exercises. Surprising to the uninformed, this understanding of the order of the decrees has been held by both Calvinists and Hyper-Calvinists. The individual who does not understand how it is even possible for both Calvinists and Hyper-Calvinists to subscribe to this position understands neither position and does not recognize how these two positions differ from each other. 

Infralapsarianism: Four paragraphs. This is by far the mainstream Reformed position, bearing on the atonement. Since every view of the atonement is in some sense an advocacy for a limitation of the atonement, the order of the decrees deserves serious study and prayer. 

Alternative Theories: Twelve paragraphs. The order of the decrees was a topic Martin Luther did not seem to have discussed. The later Lutherans did. The Arminian order of the decrees is (1) creation, (2) permission of the Fall, (3) universal atonement, (4) sufficient grace to all, and (5) election by forcing faith of those who persevere to the end. 

Conclusion: The author’s opinion regarding the order of the decrees follows:

1. Decree to create mankind

2. Decree to permit the Fall

3. Decree to choose some sinners to salvation

4. Decree to pass by other sinners in reprobation

5. Decree to send Christ to die for the elect

6. Decree to send the Holy Spirit to efficaciously apply redemption to the elect

7. Decree to harden the reprobate

8. Decree to glorify God through the glorification of the elect and the damnation of the reprobate

Not Only Rick Warren

Rick Warren was certainly not the first, but he so far has been the most prominent of well-known pastors to endorse congregational leadership by women since Aimee Semple McPherson. My thoughts are derived from Revelation 2.20.

(2.20) Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

After the commendation the Lord comes back with a severe condemnation of this man’s life and ministry. Notice that the condemnation stemmed not from what he did but from what he did not do, as he stood by and watched someone else do wrong without stepping in to stop it. He tolerated a woman named Jezebel. I do not know if her real name was Jezebel or if the Lord Jesus was likening her to the Jezebel in the Old Testament, who opposed the ministry of Elijah. I instead think it was the latter case.

Jezebel was the wife of wicked king Ahab, king of the northern kingdom of Israel. In addition, old Ahab is a beautiful example of a spineless jellyfish type of husband who is ruled over and patronized by a wicked and loud-mouthed wife. Notable, is it not, how frequently such a woman is so big-mouthed? That observation aside, Ahab’s Jezebel was responsible for the wholesale idolatry that swept across Israel while her pathetic husband quietly occupied the throne. As for the woman the Lord Jesus refers to in Thyatira, I doubt that her given name was Jezebel. However, she does seem to be the spiritual twin of the queen of Israel, who lived some 550 years before Christ.[1]

This woman called herself a prophetess. She set herself up as an authority. That is the chief characteristic of a Jezebel since there is no evidence that the Jezebel of Old Testament times was ever unfaithful to her husband. We know that she dominated and manipulated the man she was supposed to submit to. Therefore, a Jezebel is a manipulative wife who speaks out as an authority and runs her husband.

Several scholars, because of the wording of this verse, think this woman in Thyatira was none other than the wife of the angel of the Church in Thyatira.[2] That would mean the Lord Jesus Christ harshly rebuked this preacher for refusing to restrain his wife as she pretended she was a God-called spiritual leader. Imagine that. The Lord Jesus Christ called a preacher down for not keeping his wife in line and allowing her to pawn herself off as an anointed congregation leader, just like he was supposed to be.

I wonder what modern-day women preachers, the so-called co-pastor wives found in many Pentecostal and Charismatic congregations (and bossy Baptist pastor's wives who overstep their positions), and the female pastors in liberal mainline denominational churches say about this passage. I wonder how a man married to such a woman who rolls over and allows her to trample him with her words and deeds can live with himself. I know men whose wives are Jezebels and have no respect for them. They are pathetic and despicable excuses for manhood. I am in no way advocating abuse by any husband. I am, however, advocating authentic manhood in a man and not wimpy simpering passivity because the pansy is afraid to make his contentious wife angry with him for daring to stand up to her.

Whoever this Jezebel was, she taught and seduced Christ’s servants to commit fornication and to eat things offered to idols. To do this, she must have established herself as an authority over the plain teachings of God’s Word. However, is that not what bossy wives and women preachers do today? Sure they do. What do First Timothy 2.11-12 and 3.1-7 say?

¹¹ Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

¹² But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 

¹  This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

²   A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

³   Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

⁴  One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

⁵  (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

⁶ Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 

⁷  Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 

This Jezebel taught believers that they did not need to separate themselves from their past pagan practices. Though it may be difficult and trying for you to cut the ties to your pagan religious past, you must. Amen? Cut yourself off from Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Pentecostalism, Buddhism, and secret societies like Masons and Shriners and Easter Star and Job’s daughters and DeMolay.

The fornication here could refer to either literal fornication or spiritual fornication. She may have led the congregation into sexual sin, especially if she indulged in paganism, which was frequently nothing more than religious harlotry. Greek temples, those beautiful ones whose remnants are seen in National Geographic documentaries? They were nothing more than brothels, where sacred prostitution and sanctioned sodomy took place under the guise of worship. I speak the truth. If this woman did not lead people into committing physical fornication, it could be that what is meant here is that she led them into idolatry, which is spiritual fornication.

When the Holy Spirit is dealing with a person, if the individual wants to be saved, they ought to sever all religious ties to any false religious system to which he once belonged. To continue relations with the past is to commit spiritual fornication and adultery. I encourage Churches not to mix and mingle with false religion. This is why I am a separatist.

Where Rick Warren is now positioned is the consequence of an approach to the ministry that led to a path he began walking in high school. Sadly, there are many other pastors who are married to Jezebels or who tolerate, in the name of wokeness, Jezebels in their ministries. 

---

[1]  See note on First and Second Kings, Author and Date, John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible, (Nashville: Word Publishing, 1997), page 467.

[2]  John F. Walvoord, The Revelation Of Jesus Christ, (Chicago, Illinois: Moody Press, 1966), page 73.