How old should a deacon be?

Deacons are servants not officers, and not pastors. Thus your position is unbiblical. When a church is without a pastor normally a pulpit committee is formed to look for another pastor. It is not the deacons that are most qualified to preach or fill the pulpit. Often they don't possess those spiritual gifts. The gifts of teaching and preaching are often found among the church members who are not deacons at all.

There is a church not far from here that is in that exact position. Their deacons are primarily from business backgrounds, but very spiritual men nevertheless. The treasurer is a deacon. He is an immigrant to this country and does not have a good command of the English language. He is not a teacher nor a preacher, but a whiz at accounting. That is his gift. The secretary is a deacon, not necessarily a good teacher or preacher. And so the list goes on. Deacons don't have to be qualified to fill the pulpit. That is not one of their qualifications.

On the other hand the church does have "preacher boys," i.e. those that are in Bible College studying for the ministry, and do possess the gift of both teaching and preaching. They are temporarily filling the pulpit, and are doing a good job at it. They are not the deacons. They are preparing for the ministry. Perhaps the Lord will call one of them to that ministry; one never knows.

Deacons are servants; that is all. There is no "office" of a deacon. You won't find the word in the Greek.

 

trainbrainmommy I see your frustration and I know what causes that. The problem is that the Baptist churches in general have taken a position on deacons that is not biblical. You as a member have trusted them and now believe that deacons have authority and should fill in when a Pastor is absent for what ever reason, but this is not God's design for the church and thus the problem. Actually a church should have what is called elders (pastors) that are men who are in the place of authority along with the Pastor and if the Pastor is out they would fill in.
If you look at in the qualifications in 1 Timothy for Pastors (elders) and for deacons you will see that the main difference in the two is that a Pastor must be "apt to teach" which is the qualification for authority. The deacons are nothing but servers. They were never intended to have any authority. It is true that in some churches elder (pastors) are both deacons and elders and in those cases can step in.
It is unfortunate that there are so many churches that have went their own way instead of God's way and leave the people in the hands of those who are not biblically qualified to overseer the church in times of crisis, but that is what we are seeing today.
So it is not about being practical, but about being biblical and if a church does not have other elders along with the Pastor they are not biblical and put themselves in a place where God cannot work as He intended. If you are in a church that uses deacons as those in authority then you are in a church that is not following the bible in that area. But please understand this is the standard practice in a Baptist church. Most have decided to follow their own will instead of that of the Lord, so you are stuck with this problem unless the church is willing to surrender to the leadings of the Lord.
I would point out something from another post. DHK replied to you and says this "There is no "office" of a deacon. You won't find the word in the Greek. He is correct. The KJ writers have added that word and it should not be there in verse 13. The NKJ has corrected that and it reads correctly. So most likely the improper translation in verse 13 is one reason that many Baptists consider the Deacon as being part of an office and having authority which is not biblical. I know that even though I hold that deacons should not have authority in the church I am often times guilty of falling back and using the KJ version of rendering and saying the terms "office of deacon" which is not biblical. I need to take better care in my usage.

 

Originally Posted by trainbrainmommy
So when your church is without a pastor, everyone is "in charge" or no one is "in charge".

NO. When you have no pastor, someone has to step up and be a leader - responsible and in a position of authority.

Your "that's not biblical" response is nice. But not very practical.


I am amazed. We know things that are biblical, yet refuse this because we do not see being Biblical as being practical?

In other words, it is saying, "God, I'm in charge, your Word isn't practical, an hypothetical situation may arise, and so we are going to do as we will."

Amazing.

BTW, the deacons should step in, as servants, to serve the church in such a hypothetical situation (yes I'm certain some could come up with instances of this in actuality). They should already be doing this in all situations.

Perhaps to solve this unbiblical methodology and issue, you need to have in place a plurality of pastors?

Being Biblical about things, as you've stated it to not being practical, reminds me somehow of King Sauls attitude towards Gods instruction to him.

 

I agree they are not pastors, but they are officers. If they are "only servants", then each and any believer would qualify as we are all called to serve, but Paul had the same requirements of them as the Elders.

 

I agree with you that it's rare, but we have several young men were training for various ministries now in our church and I've got to tell you, I've been absolutely amazed by the wisdom and Godliness these guys have shown.

 

It's not only nice, it's Biblical. Read through what Paul commanded about deacons in 1 Timothy 3. He mentions them twice as serving.

But the truth is that the Pastor ain't in authority either. He is the undershepherd of the flock, but Christ is the authority. As a Baptist our polity is that the church is the final human seat of authority.

I am thankful that our deacons are servants. That makes them leaders according to what Jesus said. Luke 22:24-27,

If you take Acts 6 as the beginning of the deacon ministry (and I do), notice they were in charge of dining and feeding. If you wonder what that was the Apostles made it clear that they were appointed so that the Apostles would not have to wait on tables. They were called as the pastor's helpers.

Now if the church decides to give authority to the deacons, they can. Baptist congregations have the final say.

Your church may be different that most other churches who see the deacons as authority, but I'll make an informed guess that in your church the deacons run the pastor too.

 

Yes, If he can meet the biblical qualifications for a deacon.

 

In our congregation deacons must be a minimum age of 25 y/o. I think it's a good policy.

No.

 

That is why the scriptures require that he be a proven leader.

 

Does not the scripture also require children?
Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. (1Ti 3:12)

 

Agree, they are servants, they are leaders. Why else would scripture have requirements?

 

These men/boys do not meet the qualifications set in 1 Tim 3. They would not hold the office of deacon in our church. If they wanted to work in the church and serve others they would be encouraged to do so. They would be mentored to be ready for the office of deacon if that was their desire/calling. They could not hold the office until they met the scriptural qualifications. Not my rules, God's rules.

 

Um the qualifications listed in Timothy and Titus mention a deacon being married and managing a home and children so I think that is an indication that he should at least be of the age where can marry and can run his own home as well as be old enough to father and raise children since you can father them at 16 but probably don't have enough life experience and wisdom to raise them well.:thumbs: