Does the New Testament pattern of a plurality of elders in every church preclude the position of senior pastor?

In the New Testament, the normal pattern is for churches to have a plurality of elders (Acts 14:23; Phil. 1:1; Jas. 5:14). Does this mean that no single man among them should be called the “senior pastor” and possess a larger measure of relational and institutional authority?

1. The terms for elder and pastor (as well as overseer) are used interchangeably in the New Testament (e.g. Acts 20:17, 28). So the elder and a pastor are one and the same.
2. That said, the New Testament does hint toward a distinction between elders that seems to make room for what we know as a senior pastor. Specifically,
3. In 1 Timothy 5:17 Paul says, “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.” The Greek word for “honor” Paul uses clearly indicates that he has financial compensation in mind, and he singles out for that compensation certain elders who particularly labor in preaching and teaching.
4. So there were likely some elders who were supported full-time by the flock, and others who worked at another job. It seems unlikely that the elders Titus appointed on Crete (Titus 1:5) could have been fully financially supported by these young congregations. But maybe one or a few would have been.
5. These are mere hints, but they suggest that churches have the liberty to designate one man as their primary teacher, pay him accordingly, and expect that he will accrue a greater measure of authority because of his role as the church’s primary teacher. Such a “senior pastor” should still be regarded fundamentally as one of the elders, but he will naturally have a distinct role among them and the congregation.

(Much of this material has been adapted from Mark Dever’s sermon, “The Pastor.”)