I think we are getting off subject. The question is are the gifts of evangelist, preaching/teaching (Eph. 4:8-13) given by the Holy Spirit as an office to the institutional church or are they given to individuals (like the charisma in 1 Cor. 12:4)?
In other words can an individual have these gifts and operate as an itinerant teacher, evangelist or church planter or are the gifts given by the church "with the laying on of hands (ordination)" and removed by the church as it wills? We are not speaking now of over sight or accountability but the actual gifts themselves, (individual or institutional?).
Why do you wish to divorce the two? What compels you to do that other than a fondness for certain independent "preachers"?
Clearly the gifts are spoken of in terms of the church, the visible church that is. The letters where these ideas are developed by the apostle were written to real, "institutional" (I prefer the term "visible") churches. They were not written to individuals. In fact they were written to churches who had identifiable leaders responsible for oversight within the body. And the body by its leaders was to exercise control and authority over all the gifts.
So back to my question, why the need to distinguish "individual" from "institutional"?
Oh, like that never happens around here! ;-)
I think there should be accountability within the broader context of the church. I think it provides credibility and a safety net to insure sound doctrine is preached.
I think both. (How's that for being diplomatic?)
There is biblical evidence of both the individual operating as an itinerant teacher and with the authority resting with the formal church. Apollos and Paul both started their ministries without the formal approval of the church. People had to take Apollos aside and correct his doctrine but he was teachable even in enjoying a thriving ministry. They certainly didn’t have to do that with Paul. Timothy and Titus, OTOH, were bought up in a more formal setting being properly instructed.
Topcat is correct that a very formal, structured approach is the best approach. Otherwise you have 10,000 Apollos running around creating all sorts of confusion. There are areas for doctrinal disputes to be sure but look at all the doctrinal confusion on this board. I don’t know a great deal but there are certainly traditional doctrines that I’ve always thought ALL Christians believed. I’m shocked to see people denying the atonement, claiming clear verses are “mysteries”, and believing God favors just about anyone who says they love God. Many Christians simply tossed traditional doctrine out the window simply to suit their fancy. I’m just beginning to understand that people really need to have a structured, methodical approach in being brought up in the faith.
To be perfectly blunt, b-d, I never really felt like I grew in any bible study by the Navigators, Campus Crusade, or any other similar group. Usually you go through a 20 page book with maybe a hundred scriptures to think about, and, POOF, you now can witness to others. Just memorize the word using the handy memorization pack, which you can purchase at a reasonable price, and start sharing the Four Spiritual Laws at the mall. If you’re fortunate to have someone pray with you (if not, what’s wrong with you), then you go through a 20 page book with them. Hit the big topics (prayer, witnessing, tithing, memorizing) and you’ve got it (oops, go to church too). I’ve only learned late in life this isn’t what it’s all about.
Apollos was teachable and this is a sign of a true Christian; being able to discern truth. He knew what they were stating was true. God can and does rise up individuals to do His will. But if He does, that person isn’t going to be spouting things like “God wants to make you rich.” and (at the risk of sounding judgmental) true Christians should recognize it.