All quotations come from ESV

TLDR: I think the modern concept of the pastor is not biblically defensible. Instead, church leadership should be a group not an individual, and all Christians should be involved in ministry, not just a handful of professionals. Saying this, here are biblical arguments for the modern pastor and my counter-arguments against.

Pastor as Shepherd

The word pastor is an alternative way of saying “Shepherd”. This makes all the more sense when you consider similar sounding words such as “pasture” and “pastoral” are connected to sheep and shepherding. 

Perhaps to clarify the ambiguity between both words, the ESV Bible translation has no references to “pastor” anywhere in the Bible, while referencing “shepherd” 111 times.

Thus, when we turn to the Bible to consider the person and role of the modern-day pastor, we will have some difficulty finding that title anywhere. However, when we open it up to the word “shepherd” there is such a role listed in three different capacities I’m aware of:

  1. Actual shepherds of sheep
  2. Elders (e.g. 1 Peter 5:1-5)
  3. The shepherd ministry of Ephesians 4:11, listed alongside teachers: “And he [Jesus] gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds [footnote: Or pastors] and teachers, [footnote: Or the shepherd-teachers] to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:11-12)

Two Options

Thus, in actuality, we have 2 possible contenders for a Biblical definition of a church pastor:

  1. An elder
  2. A gifted minister (called “Shepherd” or some call them “Shepherd-Teachers”, see below)

While some have contended that the Ephesians 4:11 ministry of “shepherd” is one and the same as the elder office, I disagree mainly because the office of elder is something to aspire to and is appointed by the church in connection with a list of qualifications (see 1 Timothy 3 and 5). Whereas the ministry of shepherd in Ephesians 4:11 is something given by Christ alongside other ministries (such as evangelist and prophet) that are never appointed or listed with qualifications in Scripture. All to say, the list in Ephesians 4:11 sounds much different than all Scriptures on elders, and thus I take it as a shepherding type of ministry different from the role/function of an elder-shepherd (even though both are called shepherds). Though, undoubtedly, there is overlap in their roles, since the word shepherd describes them both.

There is also overlap between elders and shepherd ministries in that they are somewhat closely connected (but still different than) the gift of teaching. Consider:

  • Ephesians 4:11 uses “the” in front of each ministry, but when it comes to shepherds and teachers it says “the shepherds and teachers”. This is why the ESV footnote smooshes the two together as a possible hyphenated ministry: shepherd-teacher (though note that they are still mentioned separately, with both shepherds and teachers listed as plural nouns, thus it’s probably better to view them as separate, but related).
  • In discussing the role of the elder/shepherd, they are supposed to be “able to teach” (1 Tim. 3:2) and “double honor” is given to elders “who labor in preaching and teaching” (1 Tim. 5:17).

In both cases, shepherds are not seen as synonymous with teachers. But they are closely related, suggesting some overlap. That is, the ministry of shepherd and the office of elder should have some ability to teach as part of their role, even if they are not as gifted as a pure teacher in this capacity.

Thus, we are left with 2 ways of viewing the modern church “pastor” using the Bible alone. Either we see them as an elder with a gift of preaching and teaching. Or we see them with the ministry gift of shepherding and teaching simultaneously, regardless of their elder status.

But Not Quite Today’s Pastor

Whichever you might choose as the best representation of our modern pastor, we must immediately see that either option places him as one among (not above) others. The Eph 4:12 shepherd ministry is listed among four other ministries. Likewise, elders are always in the plural because there was a group of them (e.g. Phil. 1:1; 1 Pet. 5). Thus if one views the modern pastor as a sole leader in the congregation he will have a difficult time finding any such figure in the Bible, besides Jesus Himself, the Chief Shepherd who shares his reign with no one (1 Pet 5)! That said, if you squint a little, and look elsewhere we might be able to find him in other texts or examples.

Was Peter a Pastor?

For starters, one might point to Peter as a sole leader amongst the apostles as a template for the pastor. Jesus clearly appoints him with special, unique privileges in Matt. 16, giving to him the keys of the kingdom after calling him blessed for having a divinely revealed understanding that Jesus was the Messiah. Further, in the four places where the 12 apostles are listed, Peter is always listed first and Judas Iscariot last, while the other names are inconsistently ordered, thus pointing to a recognition of Peter as a sort of leader. This leadership and I presume the keys he was given is seen on full display when he preached and led the events at Pentecost with the Jews (Acts 2) and when he led the time and teaching with the first Gentile converts to Christianity in Acts 10. Further, at least at the beginning of Acts he stands out as a clear leader, with special emphasis on his teaching, preaching, and prayers, they even called on him and John in Acts 8 to make the journey to lead the new converts in Samaria, since Peter was a recognized leader at that time. Further, Paul calls him one of only three pillars in the burgeoning Jesus movement in Gal 2:9. For such reasons, Peter is undeniably elevated as a leader and some could say an early model of the pastor amongst the apostles (and the apostles serve as leaders in their own right, like elders). With this understanding you’d have a sole leader (like a pastor) serving alongside a group of apostle-leaders (like elders). But contrary to the pastor, Peter’s unique, sole leadership is more global and seen in select places in the early chapters of Acts, as opposed to local and (ideally) long-lasting leadership of the modern pastor. In the local Jerusalem church in Acts, James functions more as a human leader (see below) and when Peter is addressing the church in 1 Peter 5, he calls himself a fellow elder AMONG you, thus leveling it out and seeing his leadership on the plain of an elder among other elders. Clearly he was appointed a leader at a special time in the history of the church, but this is entirely unique to anyone else, and thus probably isn’t the best template of a pastor in a local church (also doesn’t work as a template for a pope in a global church, but that’s a talk for a different time – see https://fmi360.com/2023/02/28/is-peter-the-rock-of-matt-16/).

Was James a Pastor?

Another candidate for the modern pastor might be James in his local leadership role of the church in Jerusalem. He, like Peter, is named as a pillar of the early church (Gal. 2:9), but unlike Peter seems parked in one location, Jerusalem. We don’t get many glimpses into his daily life as a leader, but can see him serving as a sort of moderator and leader in the critically important Jerusalem council of Acts 15. There he speaks up as alongside a group of elders (and apostles), see Acts 15:23. He doesn’t sign off on the decision independent of the elders, though, nor is there mention of him being appointed or holding a specific position of church leadership. His respect was always due to who he was, not any role he held. Thus, again, you’d have to squint a little to see this as one-to-one with the modern pastor, but it’s possibly the closest match in Scripture to that role.

Is a Pastor Somewhere Else?

Finally, there are some remaining passages that could potentially be interpreted as consistent with the modern pastor:

  • 1 Corinthians 12 discusses different roles Christians have, comparing them to parts of the body. There is 1 church just as we have 1 body, but many diverse parts work together within this 1 body / 1 church. Surprisingly, he lists “head” as one of the parts of the body working amongst other parts in 1 Cor. 12:21. In other passages, like Col 1:18, the role of head is reserved for Christ alone. But in 1 Cor 12:21, it’s a fellow Christian who dons the title head. Those defending the traditional pastor as a one person leader could interpret this body part in that way, while others (like me) would see this as a nod to gifted leaders but not the modern pastor as an office (this interpretation makes all the more sense when considering that the church meeting of 1 Corinthians was remarkably flat in that many shared ministry roles with no mention of a pastor/shepherd leading anything).
  • Another place that could hold some weight for those already accepting the modern pastor worldview is Revelation, and the letters addressed to each individual “angel” over each respective church (see Rev. 2 and 3). Because the word “angel” literally means “messenger”, some have thought this is speaking of a person who is, in fact, the pastor of the church (“called angels because they are the messengers of God to mankind,” Matthew Henry’s Revelation 2 commentary). My concern with this interpretation is that it seems unnatural to the text. Almost every English translation of Revelation interprets the word as “angel”, which has a pretty fixed meaning in the Bible, because they saw “angel” (i.e. heavenly being) as the most obvious interpretation. The angel is in fact pictured as a “star” (in Rev. 1:20), adding even more credence to interpreting this person as a heavenly being, even if it is difficult to imagine John writing a letter directed toward an angel (I think it’s pointing to the spiritual reality behind the church, similar to mention of angels over Persia and Greece in Daniel 10:20).
  • Another place people have pointed to for biblical corroboration of the modern pastor is in the “pastoral epistles” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastoral_epistles) of 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus. Though these are nowhere in the Bible called pastoral epistles or pastoral letters, the sense is that they are addressed to a sole leader of a congregation (Timothy or Titus, respectively) and thus correspond to the modern notion of the pastor. At first glance the argument seems plausible, but upon further investigation we read that Timothy and Titus actually functioned more as apostles (or we might call them missionaries, today) who were assisting Paul in establishing these churches while Paul was absent. You don’t have the concept that they are permanent fixtures at all and instead the emphasis is on establishing others there who would lead when they departed, especially appointing elders (as well as deacons, in the case of 1 Tim 3) for such oversight. See https://fmi360.com/2021/08/09/was-timothy-a-pastor/ for more details on this.
  • Lastly, as I’ve taught elsewhere (https://fmi360.com/2022/03/31/spiritual-authority-afterthoughts-2009/), God leads us through 5 spheres of delegated authority as best I can see: king, master, father, husband, and shepherd. An argument might be made that the first four of those are unambiguously led by one man, and so the shepherd should be only one man. That is, there is only one king; you can’t serve 2 masters (Matt. 6:24); you may have many teachers but only one father (1 Cor 4:15); and you only have one husband lest you be an adulterer (Rom. 7:2-3). Thus we should look for a solo pastor/shepherd such as the modern pastor would be. To me, there is some force behind this argument in regards to its consistency. But the reality is that where shepherds are mentioned as spiritual leaders it’s in connection to elders, which is always treated as a group not an individual. So Scripture has its reasons for seeing this as a break from the sole delegated authority pattern seen in other roles. We’ll have to take that one up with God and point to the Bible over logical patterns as our primary authority.

Group Leadership

My conclusion in all this is the following…

Whether it be apostles who initially provide leadership, or elders who provide more permanent leadership when apostles leave, God consistently establishes such leadership in groups of at least 2 people (Luke 10:1; Acts 14:1-4; etc.) and any concept of a single pastor tending the flock never happens in the Bible, unless you’re referring to Jesus alone. The rest of us (feebly) lead in groups as He has appointed.