This will be the last one, I think, nice round Christian number of seven, so it will be good to stop here and then do a conclusion tomorrow.
As Jesus began his ministry, he set aside twelve men to have a more focused relationship with and to be his right hand men. Not only were they close to Jesus, but they were seen by others as leaders in his ministry. Jesus never rebuked this.
Then Jesus died, rose from the dead, then sent them out to spread the Kingdom of God. As we see their interaction and practices in Acts, these men were clearly leaders and instrumental in leading the newly born Church of God.
One of the first crisis moments in the Church was that some widows were not being served. The twelve realized that they couldn’t devote themselves to prayer and teaching AND serve bread (remember, there were thousands of people in the Church in Jerusalem by this point). So they told the Church (baby Christians by our estimation) to choose seven men to “serve tables.”
So as I go into this post, don’t misunderstand me. There is strong biblical evidence for Christian leadership, its validity and its role. Those of us in more “organic” settings may pride ourselves in a different leadership model from time to time, but there is no specific leadership structure explicitly formulated through the New Testament. Sometimes groups had no distinct leadership, sometimes they were elders and bishops or an apostle, but there is no one formula we can unequivocally point to. Leadership itself, however, is a very biblical role and is very useful in the Church.
The problem is not that there are leaders. That is a natural point of growth in the Kingdom of God and even designed by God himself. The problem becomes how those leaders practice and use their role.
We’re going to start with the Nicolaitans. They are mentioned twice in Revelation by Jesus through John. To the church at Ephesus, Jesus commends them by saying, “you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.” And then when rebuking Pergamos, Jesus says, “you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.”
There is no evidence I’m aware of to explain exactly who these people were, so I’m beginning with something of a stretch here, but stick with me. The world “nicolaitan” means “to conquer the people”, literally. To be intellectually honest, they could have been a heretical group associated with some dude named Nicolas (probably not St. Nick), but Jesus twice says he hates their doctrine and practice. And if the very word, Nicolaitan, has any bearing on their practice or doctrine, then God literally hates the doctrine and practice of having power over people, as if to conquer them, in the Church.
Well, instead of continuing on teaching something of a biblical stretch, let’s get into explicit teaching from the scripture to help you see what I mean.
Nothing is more clear than Jesus’ own teaching in regards to leadership. In Matthew 20, Jesus details his ideas of leadership: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Christian leadership, therefore, is to give, to serve, to give of your own life, not to receive glory or stature or to be served. Jesus teaches again on this in Matthew 23, in speaking on the “scribes and Pharisees”, he tells them to do what they say (because of their position in Moses’ seat) but “do not do according to their works.”
What were their works? He expains: They “bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’”
To state that many men in ministry today act just like this is so obvious to be tragic.
Jesus also gives his followers, if we are those, what to do. “But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
Too much of modern “Christian” ministry is caught up in exalting oneself. Too little modern ministry and leadership is of the sort that refuses to take formal titles and teaches that there is one Teacher and one Father, and that to take those titles, as we just read, is to – at the very least – mislead the Body of Whom they truly belong to. Jesus also says of the scribes and Pharisees that abuse their position, “they shall receive a greater condemnation.” If you don’t believe in greater condemnations, then you should.
You can easily point to scriptures in which Paul calls himself an apostle, or Agabus in Acts is deemed a prophet, or how James talks about how people shouldn’t desire to be teachers, because teachers will be judged more harshly by God (as they should). And we should look at these scriptures to see the full testimony of truth.
But we must be careful not to take these scriptures and then completely ignore very clear teaching by Jesus. The mention of a “greater condemnation” alone should make us deal with this as honestly as we can.
When Paul calls himself an apostle, he defends himself as such based on three criteria. First, it was a calling given by God. Paul makes it clear that his apostleship is not something given by men, but by God. Second, he gives a rundown of his lifestyle, given over to persecutions, in danger of death, treated like scum of the earth, things like that (not well dressed or well fed, mind you). Thirdly, evidence of his apostleship is in the testimony of the people he has led into a saving and free knowledge of Christ, letters “written on hearts.”
So we can see that leadership is, therefore, not a position of title but of FUNCTION. We see this also in Ephesians, where the “five-fold” ministry idea comes into play, that some were given, by spiritual gifting, roles of apostle, some prophets, some pastors, some evangelists, and some teachers. Why? “For the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.”
And with this function of edification also comes the ability to rebuke and correct as the Spirit leads and gives place. We cannot forget that, either. But we are also able to teach and even rebuke one another by the Spirit, maybe not to the same degree, but woe to those who grieve the Spirit because they don’t allow the Body to minister to itself in such a way because of some worldly idea of position.
To give scripture for this, in Galatians, Paul tells the story how he spoke to those apostles in Jerusalem: “whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man.” Paul then goes on to detail how he rebuked Peter for being a Judaizer.
Also, Paul rebukes the Corinthians for saying, “I am of Paul.” As you read his letters, he considered the fact he had to defend his apostleship a carnal, shameful thing. If anyone calls himself an apostle, be skeptical. The fruit should be evidence enough.
Again, it is all about function. Let’s quickly look at 1 John, where the apostle John states that “the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.” But wait, isn’t John, technically teaching and instructing in this very letter? He absolutely is.
The difference is, what is he using his gift and role to perpetuate, more of a focus on himself or on Christ, specifically here the Christ within? On Christ.
I remember a conversation where a young man who was very close to me (I love you, Chris!) passionately tried to get me to call myself a pastor while we were at dinner. My only answer was, “you can call me pastor if I’m a pastor to you, but I will not hold the title.”
I don’t care what title you hold, but if it is not a gift given by God; and you don’t live the self-sacrificial lifestyle of such a calling; and there is no fruit in other people to give testimony to that calling (i.e. changed lives given solely unto Christ), then your title means absolutely nothing in the true Kingdom of God.
Oh, it might have some bearing in worldly authority, but that’s because it’s been worldly given and it is worldly operated, and some honor is due to worldly authority, but that is as far as it goes.
Now that we understand biblical leadership is one of function, to gather a people solely unto Christ, to edify them into fullness of maturity and ministry by the Holy Spirit, we can see how the practice of power over people is abusive to the calling of leadership by God.
A couple more scriptures before I close. In 3 John, the apostle deals with a specific individual: “I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us.” This guy had such a power trip that he wouldn’t even receive doctrine from John the Apostle, whom Jesus loved.
Also, in describing to Timothy the criteria for elders and bishops, he warns Timothy not to make a new believer, or someone immature in their faith, an elder or else they might become arrogant and fall into the same trap as the Devil. How often do we see a young believer full of zeal and then equate that into a readiness for some leadership position? Many ministries based in immaturity and pride have begun right there.
When a leader draws men to himself, to his teaching, to his ministry, to exalt himself or create a successful career path, when he places heavy burdens upon those in his care and does not rather set men free, when he begins to love special perks and expects others to serve him, when even the good things he does only to be seen by other men, then he is abusing his position, God given or not.
To repeat myself from earlier, there is no special leadership structure that fixes this, despite what some will tell you. I’ve seen such abuse in house church to mega church and everywhere inbetween. I’ve seen more neo-traditional pastors, as unbiblical as that role might be, be amazingly godly and righteous leaders.
And yes, even based solely upon the reactions of Jesus to the Jewish religious leaders of his day, I believe God hates it with a passion. And if God hates this, am I supposed to give it any place? God help us all to take this as seriously as we can, to search our hearts deeply, not to point fingers but to cleanse ourselves of the pride that would feed such an abomination.
Let us all, instead, endeavor to encourage and marry every soul we meet unto Christ and his Body, their life, instead of ourselves or our ministry, and let us give to serve, not be served, to humble ourselves so that we can be exalted by Christ himself, not by man. I have faith that he is able to do such.
Peace.