Apostolic leadership

In a previous post I copied an article on leadership from the House Church Blog. Now, I do it again. I found an article by Mike Steele on "The Apostle Who Is A Father" that really is worth reading. I wonder what my friends think of his view?

The Apostle Who Is A Father 

By Mike Steele, DAWN Ministries

Leadership in the Church has been a hot topic over the last two decades. Books are everywhere on the subject and magazines expound the new and latest innovative concepts from the experts. The prevailing view from this direction is one of a need for greater administrative and organizational skills. Of course there is helpful information in these books and articles, for we are admonished to do things decently and in order. And surely we want to be as effective as possible in fulfilling the command of our Lord to make disciples of all peoples.

Still, these books and articles trouble me. They seem to imply that leaders who build efficient organizations and reproducible models will become our heroes. They are the ones who will see their kingdoms expand and who will receive the accolades of men for their ingenious plans and programs. They will be honored at banquets and given the highest positions in organizations because of their exceptional managerial and administrative abilities.

Business Leadership
Today’s leadership models tend to  fall into two categories. Based on the success-oriented model of the business world, the "bottom line" is the motivation in this form of leadership and strategies and measurable outcomes are the rule.  Churches who use many of the business principles are successful when they have a large growth rate and a growing staff. There is a program for every person and the senior pastor presides over a staff of the "best and brightest" innovators in the Kingdom. People come from around the world to sit at the feet of the "most successful" leaders who are compared to CEO’s of the top fortune 500 companies.

They see God through the passage of the talents and seek the highest return on investment for the Kingdom. They only invest in proven strategies with results that can be verified. The "sure thing" is the way to please the Father. Everyone’s activity is measured against the bottom line and their promotion and acknowledgement is based on meeting or exceeding the goals. Great ideas and large organizations come forth but run the risk of missing the mark of focusing our efforts on people and their growth and relationships. In some cases we are known by what cause we pursue and support, not by our love.

Team Leadership
Team leadership is a great step in the right direction. Multiple leaders (facilitators), are valuable and more comprehensive in scope when they utilize each other’s gifts and strengths in a complementary way to equip and release everyone in the Body of Christ for the work of the ministry. Like a hen brooding over her chicks, this team of leaders can bless, encourage, prepare and release vast multitudes of people into the harvest field.

Again, the business world has preempted the Church in this area and tons of books have been written to show us how to develop team leadership. These books espouse everyone working together toward a common goal. While there are many nuances to this form of leadership, in many cases the leader of the team is benevolent, a facilitator who catalyzes the group and seeks to "get the most" from each team member so they, together, can reach some goal for the benefit of the organization. Team members are rewarded for their contributions to the effort. Outcome is the bottom line and relationships are built on the ability of each team member to perform. Acceptance and recognition is based on your proficiency in adding to the outcome of the team effort. While this has merit, it does not exemplify the type of mutual love and benefit derived from a commitment to people over task.

Apostolic Leadership
There is, however, another powerful tide of thought that seems to me to be more biblical and therefore much more desirable than leadership models being espoused. For in the last decade much has been written and organizations formed to accelerate the move of the Church back to an apostolic form of leadership. Prominent here is the viewpoint that the Church must resurrect the leadership role of the apostle and the development of the five-fold ministry.

While I wholeheartedly give praise to the Lord for this move back to leadership principles given to us in the New Testament, I believe that the apostolic gift is yet to be clearly understood in this generation. Some feel the major thrust of the apostle is to set things in order. Some say it is the missionary/church planting gift. Some speak of initiating and oversight. Some speak of the need for an all-controlling person to steer the ship. Rather than listening to God as an apostolic team (family), we move based on the instincts of one.

My concern even here, however, is that these apostolic groups and viewpoints place their emphasis on a top down style of leadership that is dictatorial if not benevolent in its application. While they emanate from the order of reference to the leadership gifts listed in the fourth chapter of Ephesians, this passage is interpreted through what is typically a Western image of leadership.

The apostle leads out on behalf of God in a sort of top down, almost blind obedience to the person holding the office of apostle. This parallels the role of the pastor as exhibited in the most modern congregations. In their zeal to reestablish the apostolic, some have merely transferred the tasks and responsibilities of the pastor and singular leadership to the new title, apostle. While they speak of team and the five fold ministry, they view the other gifts of Christ as subservient to the apostolic gift. Rather than developing an apostolic team to facilitate the equipping of the saints for the work of the ministry, some are becoming the "new" pope and lording over the people. In this paradigm, the clergy/laity distinction still exists and the control factor is still present.

This isn’t the example of the ultimate apostle, Jesus Christ, who emphasized to his apostolically-gifted disciples that "He who seeks to lead must become the servant of all." When Jesus on one occasion called his disciples together, He said to them, "You know that in this world kings are tyrants, and officials lord it over the people beneath them. But among you it should be quite different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must become your slave. For even I, the Son of Man, came here not to be served but to serve others, and to give my life as a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:25-28).

The Heart of the Father
With these many, conflicting voices gaining a hearing, can we ever come to consensus on what is the ideal? Did God give us a universal principle for leadership?

From my understanding of the Scripture, this ideal can be expressed in the concept of "The apostle who is a father." I believe the answer can be found in the heart of Father God. It is embodied in the saying "A weeping father crying out for his sons to overtake him." It is the blessing of a father that is irreplaceable in the life of those who will lead the church in the next move of God. I pray this would become the heart of leadership in the Church in America.

It is exemplified by fathers who mentor, empower and release their sons. These fathers are not controlling, but with wise counsel and wisdom "that comes with age" they impart to their heirs the way of the Kingdom. Continuously willing to resource and support the emerging generation and their call from the Holy Spirit, they encourage them to step out further into the vast arena of those seeking to have an intimate relationship with the Father.

We see this heart of the Father expressed as early as the creation story in the book of Genesis. After creating a perfect place for His son Adam to live, God involved him in everything on the earth. Their relationship was intimate. God knew every need his son had. It was God who acknowledged that his child had no suitable partner. It was God who created Eve for Adam.

In chapters 2-3 we see the Creator of the universe longing for relationship with His creation. His desire is to commune with His son. He has created a perfect environment for His children and He wants to walk with them daily.

The heart of the Father is revealed in Genesis 3:9 when the Creator of the universe and all mankind , the omnipotent, omniscient God over all, is found seeking his son in the garden. Adam, my son, where are you? I want to be with you. I want a relationship with you. I want to care for you.

We see the heart of the Father revealed in deep travail. God is seeking out and wooing His son Adam back to himself. God has every right to destroy Adam but instead He is looking to come back into intimate relationship with His creation. He cries, "Adam, my son, where are you?"

Reconciliation and intimacy are at the heart of the Father. Even in his sin, God makes clothes for Adam and Eve. God is the author of love and life. It is in this desire to reconcile and be reunited in intimate fellowship that God the Father sends His Son Jesus to sacrificially give himself in order to be reunited with His children. This is the ultimate payment, His Son. That’s how much God wants to be in relationship with us. That is the Father’s heart.

In our society the definition and expectations of the role of father have been severely misunderstood. Throughout history, the definition of and act of being a father has been misused and abused in various ways. Because of the distortion of the role of the Father in current western society and many societies around the world, we must seek to restore the heart of tenderness and compassion revealed in the scriptures. This "heart" is exhibited in the "mystery of the ages," God sending His Son to reconcile us to Himself. It is exemplified when God seeks out Adam in order to restore their relationship. In another scripture passage it is seen in the heart of the father of the prodigal son when he immediately restores his son to full fellowship upon his return.

Over the course of history, men have confused the role of the father with the role of a warrior, a general, a businessman and many others actions and activities. These roles are real and there are times a man will function in each one of them. Not many have talked about distinguishing when to be one or the other. In many cases he is certainly one or more of these on a daily basis. But he does not treat his children based on these roles. He treats his children based on his role as a father.

The picture God paints of His Church is one of a Bride, a family, a living and breathing organism. It is a life, not a war to win or a business to control. The Bride is not made up of employees with a goal toward a more profitable bottom line.

The Father in the Home
Having become successful in the area of business, many go home and begin to apply the lessons learned to our family and personal lives and things just don’t work out. Business models, hierarchical leadership and strategic plans do not a leader make. It is the heart that is at the core of the issue and it is the heart that is easily deceived.

Our measurements for success rarely include travail on behalf of our children to become more in Christ than we have become. Rather, we focus on their achievements and work to prepare them for the work. In many cases our focus becomes the return on investment. So, our children must excel to go to the most prestigious colleges to make the most money and gain the most prestige. Genuine service and unconditional love are factored out of many of our "success" strategies. We sometimes forget that love does not expect payment in return. It sacrifices its own desires and dreams for the dreams of another. It is selfless and humbly serves. It is a platform from which another is lifted to even greater heights. It is not based on what you get, but what you give.

Measuring Greatness
He who wants to be the greatest must become the servant of all. John the Baptist modeled this for us when he relinquished his rights to Christ. John stated, "I must become less and He must become more". Scripture reminds us to consider one another greater than ourselves.

The fruit of the Spirit is at the heart of leadership. Since we are being led by the Head of the Church, Jesus, we seek to emulate that which so characterized His life. In this list of "fruits" or "evidences" of the Spirit we find no reference to administration, oversight, power, control, manipulation or the like. Instead we see love, humility, gentleness, kindness, a sacrificial life that models the heart of the Father. These are the characteristics of genuine spiritual fathers and mothers. It is a servant’s heart, poured out on behalf of those God has called you to father and mother.

The Kingdom of God is an oxymoron. Become great by becoming small. Become a leader by serving. He who is the greatest must become the servant of all. I once heard apostle John Kelley describe an apostle in two words, "foot washer." The idea of being in charge and in control comes from a western cultural mindset and constrains rather than releases the apostolic gift into the Body of Christ. These words are not easy to put into practice but I believe they hold the key to the future move of God through His Church.

As a whole, the Church has missed the call to raise up sons and daughters with the heart of the Father. The definition shared earlier, "A weeping father crying out for his sons to overtake him," is sadly missing from our vocabulary and practice. Relationships and investment in peoples’ lives is the bottom line. Church is family and God is our Father. This is exuded through our acts of blessing, not cursing; giving not taking; releasing not controlling.

We need organizations and leadership. When the Lord brings his body together there will need to be administrative skills to facilitate process. Let’s just not confuse them with the role of leadership or of fathering.

In Houses that Change the World, Wolf Simson compares exploiting leadership with empowering (fathering) leadership on page 208.

Exploiting leadership                                Empowering leadership

Give them functions                                       Let them function

Make them believe in you                              Believe in them

Require submission                                        Delegate authority

Make them a part of your plans                     Further God’s plan for them

Use them                                                        Invest in them

Take what they have                                      Give them what you have

Preach at them                                                Discuss with them

Require appointments                                     Spend time freely with them

Hold back until you retire                              Give them the keys now

Let them serve you                                         Serve them

Accept their praise graciously                         Praise them

Demonstrate master hood to them                  Transfer master hood to them.

The need to see the reemergence of the heart of the father in our leadership style in the next decade is more than an exercise in theological correctness. The Church in the United States continues to lose ground in its effort to "make disciples of all the peoples." The Church is increasingly viewed as irrelevant and not to be taken seriously by those it is trying to reach. Leadership books tell us that the only way to turn around your organization/company/ministry is to employ the latest techniques in administration and management. Rather, to this writer it becomes apparent that the spontaneous expansion of the church will require a shift into a new (really, very old) way of leadership modeled after the family and the role of fathers and mothers.

With the heart of the Father as a foundation, and while emulating the servant leadership of the Lord Jesus Christ and empowered by the Holy Spirit, we will be able to grow together in a fuller understanding of the apostolic gift, its role and function in the Body. We will be able to perceive all that God would reveal and release through those who walk in the gift of the apostle. With this foundation it will not be hard to recognize those God will set apart for the office of the apostle. We will see the office filled by those who, in time, distinguish themselves by their humility and gentleness, their servant’s heart and their sacrificial lifestyle-weeping father’s crying out for their sons to overtake them.

AND we will in the process become much more effective in the process of obeying that majestic command of our Lord to "Go, and make disciples of all peoples."

Leave a Reply

Comments

22 responses to “Apostolic leadership”

  1. Nick Howes Avatar

    Great article. I saw it on the house church blog but didn’t give the time to read it. Having done so now I am stirred, challenged and helped by what it says. More than that though, I feel immensely grateful that I have been blessed to serve alongside just this kind of apostolic ministry. Thanks Erling, we really appreciate you and all our friends in Bergen and enjoy the shared journey of faith.

  2. Tim the Enchanter Avatar

    This a really great article Erling. The chief aim it seems of many charasmatic evangelical churches (and probably others) is to view leadership and especially apostleship as a kind of pinnacle which can be attained. We need something truly biblical and radical in this realm to forge a new way for churches to grow organically, rather than, as he puts it; ‘top down’.

  3. Are Karlsen Avatar

    I think the writer is trying to mend a flawed concept, the concept of leadership. In opposition to the concept of leadership, there is the Kingdom of God-concept of servanthood.
    Church leaders of today are thinking it is possible to combine leadership with servanthood. It is not. Leadership is hierarchical. Servanthood is not. Leadership is exclusive. Servanthood is not.
    The writer think we can use servanthood to reach some other and higher goals. He says: “Become great by becoming small. Become a leader by serving.” His goal is to become a great leader. But our goal has to be just to become a servant!
    The writer also says: “We need organizations and leadership.” I ask: For which purpose? The first question we have to ask, is: What is the nature of the church? To day our churches is corporations. Then his assertion is correct. But the biblical churches were not corporations, they were fellowships. That is why the Bible is not talking about “organizations and leadership”.
    Further, he says: “Rather, to this writer it becomes apparent that the spontaneous expansion of the church will require a shift into a new (really, very old) way of leadership modeled after the family and the role of fathers and mothers.”
    Well, that will bring us directly into a traditional, clerical system, like “the office of the apostle” the writer here is describing. But there is no “offices” in the biblical church, just functions based upon individual calling, gifts and skills, acknowledged by the fellowship.
    Jesus: “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.”
    Somehow we are not able to understand the “social revolution” of the gospel. At the heart of this revolution, is the leadership of the Holy Ghost, not of men.
    We have to let our structures reflect the values of the Kingdom of God and return to the biblical church paradigm, away from the historical church paradigm. We have to reject the concept of leadership, and adopt the concept of servanthood. Without compromise.

  4. Erling Thu Avatar

    Dear Are! Please read the article once more! I think that your aversion to certain words, like leadership and organization, blind you for the heart of the message in this article.

  5. Are Karlsen Avatar

    Dear Erling! I did as you kindly requested. It seems necessary to emphasize that it is not the word leadership I am questioning, it is the concept of leadership.
    And especially the concept of apostolic leadership. Those are two words that together make a devastating and unbiblical religious power, which will destroy all efforts to establish an equal fellowship in a christian communiy.
    Regarding organization, the question has first to be about the nature of the christian community. When that is decided, you may tell if an organization is necessary. Personally I think the biblical records does not describe an organization, but an organism, headed by Christ through his Spirit. An organization is only necessary if you want to exercise human power.
    Consider that Paul did not establish an organization of people obeying himself. That was a phenomena the church fathers established some decades later.
    Yes, I can see the writer´s good intentions. But we have to prove that we have understood that the Kingdom of God is not of this world, by relinquishing using power terms like leadership, apostolic and office. Not only the words, off course, but the wordly ideology that empower these terms. I am off course not denouncing the function of the apostle, but then you have to translate the term, which in fact is quite prosaic.
    We have to learn from the biblical restraint and warnings about such terms. Jesus said we are just brothers or siblings and should not use religious power terms when adressing each other. Paul is consequent in using the term brother or sibling.
    If we insist in using religious power terms, we will inevitably end up in a traditional, religious hierarchy.
    This I think will be the future spiritual battlefield. The religious hierarchy, it is.

  6. Erling Thu Avatar

    Dear Are! I understand that you question the concept of leadership, but I don’t understand how you can do that as long as we find that concept expressed in the Bible in many different terms. I understand that many of the leadership terms can be used as a power terms in a hierarchal system, but that is not the way of the Bible. Why can’t we use Biblical terms in Biblical ways? Why can’t we fill these terms with true spiritual content? Why can’t a Biblical ideology empower these terms that are used in the Bible? To me these terms taken from the Bible are not religious power terms but terms of spiritual content.
    I don’t understand your critique of the author of this article on apostolic leadership. Like you he doesn’t believe in religious hierarchy. Like you he believes that the church is an organism and not an organization. Like you he is concerned with servanthood and not of having dominion over people.
    We don’t find the term “Apostolic leadership” in the Bible, but the concept is certainly present in the entire New Testament. I think the article you are criticising explain what apostolic leadership is all about in a wonderful way as spiritual fatherhood.
    Here you will find a list of Bible verses about leaders in the church. They should certainly challenge us.
    Mark 10:43 But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant,
    Matt 20:26 But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant,
    Luke 22:26 But among you it will be different. Those who are the greatest among you should take the lowest rank, and the leader should be like a servant.
    1 Cor 3:21 So don’t boast about following a particular human leader. For everything belongs to you—
    Eph 1:21 Now he is far above any ruler or authority or power or leader or anything else—not only in this world but also in the world to come.
    1 Tim 5:22 Never be in a hurry about appointing a church leader. Do not share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.
    Heb 2:10 God, for whom and through whom everything was made, chose to bring many children into glory. And it was only right that he should make Jesus, through his suffering, a perfect leader, fit to bring them into their salvation.
    3 John 9 I wrote to the church about this, but Diotrephes, who loves to be the leader, refuses to have anything to do with us.
    Acts 15:22 Then the apostles and elders together with the whole church in Jerusalem chose delegates, and they sent them to Antioch of Syria with Paul and Barnabas to report on this decision. The men chosen were two of the church leaders—Judas (also called Barsabbas) and Silas.
    1 Cor 4:6 Dear brothers and sisters, I have used Apollos and myself to illustrate what I’ve been saying. If you pay attention to what I have quoted from the Scriptures, you won’t be proud of one of your leaders at the expense of another.
    Gal 2:2 I went there because God revealed to me that I should go. While I was there I met privately with those considered to be leaders of the church and shared with them the message I had been preaching to the Gentiles. I wanted to make sure that we were in agreement, for fear that all my efforts had been wasted and I was running the race for nothing.
    Gal 2:6 And the leaders of the church had nothing to add to what I was preaching. (By the way, their reputation as great leaders made no difference to me, for God has no favorites.)
    1 Thess 5:12 Dear brothers and sisters, honor those who are your leaders in the Lord’s work. They work hard among you and give you spiritual guidance.
    Heb 13:7 Remember your leaders who taught you the word of God. Think of all the good that has come from their lives, and follow the example of their faith.
    Heb 13:17 Obey your spiritual leaders, and do what they say. Their work is to watch over your souls, and they are accountable to God. Give them reason to do this with joy and not with sorrow. That would certainly not be for your benefit.
    Heb 13:24 Greet all your leaders and all the believers there. The believers from Italy send you their greetings.
    1 Pet 5:3 Don’t lord it over the people assigned to your care, but lead them by your own good example.

  7. Are Karlsen Avatar

    Hello Erling!
    I think the concept of leadership is a interpretation projected into the Scripture by the historical churches. They are using the Bible to defend their hierarchical structures, like you are using it to defend leadership, which is nothing but a variation of those hierarchical structures.
    You says: “Why can´t we use the Biblical terms in Biblical ways”. Then I will reply that the biblical way is to not use them at all, as Jesus clearly has forbidden us to do that.
    I also think christian leaders are reluctant to realize the power they have in peoples lives. That power is concealed behind religious rhetorics. The catholic dogma is openly teaching the clerical hierarchy (as many neo-pentecostals like Ulf Ekman and the new christian mystics), but the churches based upon the revivals in the wake of the reformation, have traditionally rejected that dogma. Now, however, we see here a development towards the hierarchy of the historical churches, with terms like elder, pastor, priest, prophet and apostle. Even pentecostal pastors are using the term priest and priest shirts to underline their identity and authority.
    To my point: The term apostle or apostolic is completely useless according to biblical values. If we want to use a term like it, we have in any case to translate it. To the first christians that term had a simple, prosaic meaning. If we do not translate it, we take advantage of its mystic meaning, encumbered with a lot of religious power.
    As for the Bible verses, I see you are quoting New Living Translation, which seems to be biased, as in Mark 10:43: “Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant”.
    The New King James Version says: “… but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant.”
    That translation correponds well with the Norwegian translation, too: “Den som vil bli stor blant dere, skal være deres tjener, og den som vil være først blant dere, skal være alles slave.”
    I don´t think this word of Jesus gives support to the concept of leadership. As for the other verses you are quoting, Sjur Jansen has made a thorough review (in Norwegian), in this post:
    http://byggemennesker.blogspot.com/2007/01/ikke-ledere-i-urmenigheten.html

  8. Erling Thu Avatar

    Dear Are, we seem to have different starting points in our approach to leadership. In the Bible the Triune God is called Lord, King, Ruler, Prince, Leader, Pioneer, Master etc. Therefore I conclude that the concept of leadership originate in God and must be good.
    However, we see in life that many of the good things given us by God have been thwarted because of the Fall. Sin has marred the beautiful world God created in so many ways. Leadership is one of those things that has been affected by sin and therefore has been used to subdue, exploit and use people. But leadership as a concept originates with God:
    “for through him (Christ) God created everything in the heavenly realms and on earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can’t see—such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world. Everything was created through him and for him.” (Colossians 1:16NLT)
    Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience (Romans 13:1-5).
    But Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.”(Matthew 20:25-28NLT)
    Jesus does not negate leadership, only the wrong practise of leadership!

  9. Sjur Jansen Avatar

    ”But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant,”
    The Greek text does not use the word leader. It is two Greek words in use:
    1) Protos = first (in dignity). Paul also uses this word opposite: The greatest/first (protos) among sinners. No leadership here.
    2) Megas = great
    Earlier in the text Jesus talk about leaders in the society. In Greek: kateksusiadsusin = persons that give orders, has the power.
    The meaning is: If you want to be great (protos/megas), you can not be a leader (kateksusiadsusin), you must be like a servant.
    The word leader is not in use in the long list Erling show us, if you read the Greek text.
    And when Paul talks about follow authorities, the meaning is that Christians should pay tax and follow the law in the country.

  10. Sjur Jansen Avatar

    ”But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant,”
    The Greek text does not use the word leader. It is two Greek words in use:
    1) Protos = first (in dignity). Paul also uses this word opposite: The greatest/first (protos) among sinners. No leadership here.
    2) Megas = great
    Earlier in the text Jesus talk about leaders in the society. In Greek: kateksusiadsusin = persons that give orders, has the power.
    The meaning is: If you want to be great (protos/megas), you can not be a leader (kateksusiadsusin), you must be like a servant.
    The word leader is not in use in the long list Erling show us, if you read the Greek text.
    And when Paul talks about follow authorities, the meaning is that Christians should pay tax and follow the law in the country.

  11. Erling Thu Avatar

    Dear Sjur, I am just quoting from NLT because that is the version of the Bible that I am reading at the moment. And all of the verses I quote is about leadership. The meaning in Matthew is: If you want to be great (protos/megas), you can not be a leader who gives order or dominate people, you must be a leader who is like a servant.
    I think we may agree that God is described as a leader or Lord or king etc in the Bible, as Jesus is our Lord and Master. Therefore the concept of leadership originates in the Godhead and there is nothing wrong with that concept of leadership.
    Among us who follow Jesus leadership is shown in serving and not in dominating one another. We submit to one another, and we hold the others in higher esteem that ourselves. But there is no room for dominating one another.
    In my Norwegian pages I have posted some articles on leadership. It would be nice to have your comment on those articles.

  12. Espen Avatar
    Espen

    This is a question that is turning in my head at the moment.
    Firstly it depends on the definition of leadership. If to be a leader only is to be someone who is taking the initiative and then followed by others, I guess it is not a problem to be a servant and a leader. But if being a leader means that you have authority over other peoples lives, then this is a more difficult question.
    Two definitions of authority (in this context); “the moral or legal right or ability to control” (Cambridge), or “the power or right to give orders and enforce obedience” (Oxford).
    To me it is clear that God has this authority over men, and a nationstate over its subjects. And maybe even a husband over his wife (1 Peter 3,6). But can a christian have authority over another christian because he is an apostle, a prophet, a pastor or an elder?
    I’d like to find out.

  13. Erling Thu Avatar

    Dear Espen,I think understand your question, and I think we can find the answer in the Bible. The two definitions of authority you have found in the dictionaries are useless when we speak of leadership among the people of God. The word of God says:
    Care for the flock that God has entrusted to you. Watch over it willingly, not grudgingly—not for what you will get out of it, but because you are eager to serve God. Don’t lord it over the people assigned to your care, but lead them by your own good example. And when the Great Shepherd appears, you will receive a crown of never-ending glory and honor.(1 Pe 5:2-4 NLT)
    Please notice these expressions that the apostle uses when he speaks to the leaders of the church:
    – Don’t lord it over the people
    – the flock that God has entrusted to you
    – the people assigned to your care
    – because you are eager to serve God
    – lead them by your own good example
    Christian leaders are not allowed to dominate people by lording it over them.
    God is the one who entrusts Christian Leaders with a flock to care for. God is the one who assigns people for leadership functions.
    Christian leaders are to lead people by their good example.
    As far as I understand God has called some people to be leaders. He has not given them the right to control, give orders or enforce obedience. However, he has given them a task in looking after and care for people in order to help them mature in Christ. He has made them responsible, in a certain way, for the well-being of the flock. And God will hold them accountable for how they accomplish their task.
    The question is not how much authority I can have, how much right I have to give orders, but how I serve people. Christian leadership is servant-leadership after the example of the Master and Lord Jesus Christ himself.

  14. Espen Avatar
    Espen

    Thank you Erling for your response. If I understand you correctly this means that you don’t think that leaders have a right to have authority over other christians.
    Even if the definitions of authority above came from secular dictionaries, this is also how I understand authority in the Bible. The problem is who has authority. And I agree with you in that christian leaders (or others) does not have that over other christians.
    Then a leader really is free to be a servant, because he only has to think of what he can do for the others, not what they can do for him (or “his” vision for the church).
    I guess then that we have to be really careful not to create structures that demand leaders with authority over other people, and in that I think I agree with Are and Sjur that it has to be the church in the house, only headed by Jesus.

  15. Espen Avatar
    Espen

    But then I have a new question, for Are and Sjur, and for you Erling; what does it mean to submit ourselves?
    I have thought it synonymous with to recognize someones authority over you (which BTW is one of the definitions Websters dictionary gives for it). But if the conclusion above is correct, that cannot be true. And also, when the Bible say “submit yourselves to one another” (1 Peter 5,5), that would be a bit complicated.

  16. Sjur Jansen Avatar

    Erling
    It is many things that God can do, but people can not do. At the same time it is things that God can do, that also people can do. Of course. What is my point?
    You say that God is called Lord, King, Ruler, etc. Therefore you conclude that the concept of leadership is good. You say that because Jesus is a leader, we can be leaders. But then others can say: Because God make the rules, and that concept is good, then also we can make the rules. Is that ok?
    My point is that I think your argument is a shortcut to say yes to leadership in churches. I think the picture is not that simple.
    I like that you mean that people, and what you call leaders, in church can not give orders to each others. But I do not follow you completely about explaining leadership. You use word like King and Ruler to explain leadership in church. They can give orders.
    In English Bibles the word leader is in use to translate too many Greek words. The text does not compare leaders in the state with leaders in the church, and then try to explain two different types of leadership. The text does not compare two cars and then say that the first car is red and the second car is blue. But it sounds like this in English Bibles because the word leader is in use for two different Greek words.
    By the way, ”the five-fold ministry” is not in the Bible. Look here: ”And He gave [1 some to be apostles], and [2 some prophets], and [3 some evangelists], and [4 some pastors and teachers].”
    If you want five, you must use the word ”some” one more time, like this: [4 some pastors] and [5 some teachers]. But the Bible is not like that.
    I think 4 and 5 is together, and this is the same as bishops, and this the same as elders, and this is the same as people in the church that open their homes so that the Christians could have gatherings.
    I think the meaning is not a number, like 3, 4, 5 or 6, but plenty.
    If it was only 4 (or 5) types, and all 4 were leaders, I wonder: Were all the leaders like a father? This you must explain. Why is the apostle called a father, but not the evangelist? I can have only one father, but I can have many brothers and sisters. Does this mean that only one of the leaders was like a father, and the other leaders used another concept of leadership? Which concept?
    I think the point is that in the church it is many brothers and sisters, and no fathers. Only God has that position.
    But it is possible to use the word father to explain who told the gospel to you the first time. He is your father in believe. Paul uses the word son sometimes in that meaning. He also compares “fathers” with useless “teachers”. If I remember correct, also this word is not perfect translated in English. The Greek word is not teacher, but slaves that brought boys to the school. This kind of slaves also gave the boys food and teached boys to behave polite. Then Paul say that this kind of teaching is not important compared to the gospel. This is a different use of the word “father”. The point is: It is not important to invite a friend into the church, give him food and teach him to behave like a good Christian. It is much more important to tell him about the gospel. And you do not need to be an apostle to tell people about the gospel.

  17. Sjur Jansen Avatar

    Espen
    You talk about Peter’s letter and say that maybe husband can have authority over wife. I do not understand Peter’s letter like that. I think Peter is showing an ugly list with bad power that Christians must deal with.
    1) The non-christian state.
    I that time the state gave many people a safe life. At the same time the state was ugly and could kill you for nothing. Peter’s advice is to pay tax and not start a war against the state. It is better to try to change the state with love.
    2) The non-christian slave-owner.
    Same advice. If you run away, the police would arrest you.
    3) The non-christian husband.
    In this culture women could not take education. Men compared sometimes women with animals. If a woman ran away, I think she would have a very hard time to survive. Same advice from Peter. Do not start a war against the culture. But give your husband respect and love. Maybe this will make him a Christian after a while. And then he will understand that both are equal in the marriage.

  18. Espen Avatar
    Espen

    Sjur,
    Peter uses the example of Sarah and Abraham. Sarah could not say that she had a bad husband. To me it seems probable that Peter says that even if you have a non-christian husband, you still owe him your respect, as if it was a good christian husband. The same with masters; good or bad, christians or non-christians, obey them.

  19. perfilip Avatar

    Espen: I like your questions and the humble way you come across! To that concerning authority in human relations I’d like to add a couple of verses in addition to those that you’ve already mentioned:
    It is clear that authority in Biblical terms also has to do with that of leaders:
    “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority” (Hebrews 13:17)
    and even worldly authorities:
    “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities” (and following verses – Roman 13:1)
    To me it seems as obeying the human authorities (as mentioned above) is a way of submitting to Christ himself (who has ALL authority in heaven and earth…) – or rather: a CONSEQUENCE of us submitting to Christ!
    blessings, brothers 😉

  20. Espen Avatar
    Espen

    Hello Per Filip,
    I totally agree with you about the worldly authorities. But about the church the question is a bit more difficult… I find it hard to compare worldly leaders and church leaders, especially because of Mt 20,25 (see discussion under Christian leadership).
    If I understand the greek lexicon at studylight.org correctly, Heb 13,17 can also be translated “Let yourself be persuaded (obey) by your leaders (or ‘those who go before you’) and do not resist them (submit […] authority).
    (If there are someone proficient in greek reading this I would appreciate your thoughts… I am not a theologian 🙂
    My present understanding is that if the leaders give you an advice, follow it, that is better both for you and for them. For you because their advice is probably a good one, for them because your well being is a responsibility God has given them (=servant) and it is less painful to be resposible for someone who cooperates.
    But that does not (or that is the question) give them any authority over you. Maybe this verse could be relevant (I don’t know if Paul here is thinking of a conflict with christians or non-christians):

    And the Lord’s servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will. (1 Tim 2,24-26 NIV)

    As an ‘appendix’, not directly relevant, I like the attitude Yun displays towards his government:
    “Once I spoke in the West and a Christian told me, “I’ve been praying for years that the Communist government in China will collapse, so Christians can live in freedom.” This is not what we pray! We never pray against our government or call down curses upon them. Instead, we have learned that God is in control of both our lives and the government we live under. Isaiah prophesied about Jesus, “And the government will be on his shoulders” Is 9:6. ” (The Heavenly Man pgs 286-287).
    (I love this book.)

  21. Erling Thu Avatar

    Dear Espen, I don’t think is helpful to use the expression of having authority over people because we don’t find that expression used in the Bible. And Jesus has made it clear to us that godly leadership is all about servanthood. Christian leaders among the people of God are not to dominate or subdue the believers but to equip them, enable them and release them into everything God has planned for them.
    Dear Sjur, the only thing I wanted to say with my reference to God as Lord, King, etc was to show that the concept of leadership originate with God and therefore that concept can’t be bad in it self as Are seems to suggest.
    God is the supreme Ruler and the source of all authority. Men can only function within the measure of rule given to them by God and within the restrictions he has laid down.

  22. Sjur Jansen Avatar

    Espen
    About Sara: I cannot find the text that Peter is talking about. Can you help me? May be Peter is saying this as a summary or an example of Sara’s attitude. They had respect of each other. Or should have. The history about Sara and Abraham also includes that Abraham ”sold” Sara to a king, and Sara was lying to Abraham. They were not perfect, and had to deal with that.
    Peter just uses the lord-word as an example of how to give each other respect. Here is another example of that:
    When Sara is dead, Abraham want to bury Sara at a place that another rich man was the owner of. This other man, Efron, said to Abraham: ”Lord, listen to me”. He used the lord-word. Does that mean that Abraham had authority over Efron? No, they were equal. Abraham had to buy the land where he wanted to burry Sara. He was a stranger and bowed when he talked to the people at the place. One of the men among the people was Efron. Abraham could not order Efron.
    About leaders: You say: “My present understanding is that if the leaders give you an advice, follow it, that is better both for you and for them.” Why must you use the word leader? The word is not in use in NT. Why can’t you say: “My present understanding is that if someone in the church gives you an advice, follow it, which is better both for you and for them.”
    Per Filip
    About Hebrews 13:17: The Greek word is not ”leader”. It is ”hegeomai”. I have simple English, but I will try to explain my point.
    Hegeomai has two totally different meanings.
    1) ”(Respect for the) king/ruler etc.” Peter says that this kind of people (rulers) does not belong to church. This meaning of the word we can put away.
    2) ”(Respect for the) good thinking.” In other words: Respect for the gospel.
    Earlier in the text we have the definition of the word ”hegeomai”: ”[Those] who taught you the word of God.” In other words: Those who brought the gospel of freedom to this local place. The story this time is about some people in this local church that are saying that the church must have food-rules. Paul is saying in this letter that food-rules are wrong. Follow the ”hegeomai”, he is saying. In other words: Listen to people that is teaching the real gospel. The text does not say that in the church it is good with leaders that give orders: ”Today we shall sing song number 43.”
    Heb 13:7 “Remember your hegeomai who taught you the word of God. Think of all the good that has come from their lives, and follow the example of their faith.”
    When Paul wrote this letter, these hegeomai-persons (evangelists) were dead. You can’t follow orders from dead people. The meaning is not leader, authority or hierarchy. The meaning is to look closer to the gospel, look closer to the how the gospel was turning people in a good way. Follow the example, follow the gospel, follow the good thinking and this good idea, not the leader.
    Sorry about my bad use of English prepositions and other things. I am better in Norwegian:
    http://byggemennesker.blogspot.com/2007/01/ikke-ledere-i-urmenigheten.html

Discover more from Erling Thu

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading