Evangelists in Scripture

I think the following paragraph can be a useful tool in how we address/discuss/debate the different topics that face the church today.

Thomas Campbell in "The Declaration and Address" noted that we often reach conclusions from biblical data using inferences. In the 13 propositions, Campbell set the principle of deductions and inferences when "fairly inferred or deducted from scripture" may be taught as doctrine. However, he went on to say that these deductions or inferences should not be made a test of fellowship. His reasoning was that even though biblical teachers reached their conclusions using solid hermeneutical principles, there may be some who simply do not see the connection. As a result, the conclusions reached by deduction or inference should not be binding on others beyond their capability to make the connection. (Michael Hines, June 2009, Restoration Herald)

The reason Michael Hines made this comment was an ongoing discussion in the Restoration Herald concerning the Evangelist and the Elder/Pastor in the church.

Michael Pemberton is an Evangelist with White Fields Evangelism and strongly believes that the located minister is in fact the Evangelist in today’s church. In his view the Evangelist is a valid office within the church based on what Paul told Timothy. He sites 2 Timothy 4:1-5 as the work of this office. He sites Ephesians 4:11-12 as evidence of the office itself.

In Pembertons view the office of both elder and evangelist must coexist since in his view each is to appoint and ordain the other. He sees the evangelist as the one who is to rebuke and discipline the sinning elder and the elder the sinning evangelist. No elder is appointed and ordained by elders he says. To Pemberton the command to Timothy to "do the work of an Evangelist" is evidence that Timothy was in fact an Evangelist

Hines on the other hand, says that to draw such deductions and inferences based on only three mentions of the Evangelist in scripture is at best weak and a defense of ones own paid position in the church. The three instances mentioned are Luke’s identification of Philip as an Evangelist in Acts 2:1-8, the admonition by Paul to Timothy to "do the work of an Evangelist in 2 Tim 4:5, and the Gift of God in Eph 4:11. From these three passages it is deduced or inferred that there is an office of Evangelist. Since it is his opinion that there is no other reference in the NT of this title and absolutely no writings in either the second or third century of any such office, we should be careful in drawing such inferences.

While he thinks it can be legitimately inferred that such a role existed in the early church, there may be better explanations of the use of the term. The clearest example we have is Philip (actually called an evangelist) who spread the good news (which the Greek implies) and was what Jesus commanded all the disciples to do in the great commission but never as a located office. Paul he says was simply reminding Timothy that part of his responsibility included what some might call "soul winning" along with setting things in order in the Ephesian church as his representative or delegate. There is no indication that this was to be a located office within the early church. More accurately we may see this functioning as a church planter today.

One would see this church planter as the establisher of new assemblies, appointing the elders and then moving on but in no way as a located minister of salary working along side of or either over or under such elders. Hines concludes with this. "In my view, those who argue for the term Evangelist recognize that the New Testament says nothing specific about the one "man minister leader" in the early church yet want to defend their role as a paid servant". Stranger still, as has been my position, is the lack of any qualifications for said office or any criteria in which to judge this mans ability or competence to hold this office if it exists. Simply saying he should be held to the same standard as the Elder/Pastor is a noble goal but again there is no scriptural support for this either. If a man meets all the qualifications and desires of Eldership, then he is an elder and not an evangelist.

Keeping in mind the first paragraph and not making this a matter of any test for fellowship. I will be curious to see how this plays out over the next few months. What do you think?

John