Church Government
What the New Testament teaches on how churches should be governed
APPENDIX All scripture quotes are from the NKJV unless otherwise stated. Because of certain things written and spoken on this topic of late, it is needful I write more and give my answers to arguments not addressed in the body of this work. JAMES 3:1 The argument is that ALL and EVERYONE in the body of Christ should be teachers. That all can take turns in the church to teach or be elders. With this argument comes the idea that James is NOT contradicting this notion, but is saying that people should not become "GREAT teachers" or "be not GREAT BIG (DEAL) teachers." Teacher with proud swelled heads of vanity and dictatorial authority. But is this the truth of the matter. Was James meaning an "attitude" of mind, or was he simply telling his readers that many should NOT ASPIRE to want to be ELDERS/overseers (who must teach - 1 Tim. 3) in the church congregations? The truth is found from the Greek. This is one instance where the peculiarities of the Greek language can cause confusion. "polus"(many) can mean "great big" or "much" (but not "deal"). However, the word in James 3:1 is not "polus"(singular) but "polloi" (plural). As Zhodiates says: ".....(II) In the pl.masc. polloi......means many. With nouns of multitude it means great, large." (i.e. a great large multitude.) In James 3:1 the plural "polloi" IS followed by a "noun of multitude," namely "didaskaloi" (teachers). (i.e. be not a great large multitude of teachers). Here's how the NRSV puts it: "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness." You may want to look up this verse in many other translations. I have not found any that translate it as "great big deal teachers" or conveying an attitude of mind. If James was trying to convey a meaning of "great big deal" teachers he would have used something along the lines of "hyperlian" (as in 2 Cor.11:5 for "superlative") or, another word with "hyper-" or other in it. THE WORD - HIERARCHICAL The question of the use of this word in regards Church Government keeps being raised. There is I believe some confusion in some minds as to HOW and as to WHAT is meant by this word in the context of CG (church government). Some are saying GOD is hierarchical - always was and always will be, and has always governed as a hierarchy and will always so do. Some say God is not under the NT (New Testament) governing in a hierarchical manner, and never did even under the OT (Old Testament). Both sides accuse the other of being theologically incorrect. What is happening here is the misunderstanding of how each side is using the word hierarchy and what context it is used in. The GODHEAD (God) is indeed hierarchical. It is written, "God is the head of Christ." Jesus Himself said, "the Father is greater than I." And, "the one sent is not greater than he who sent him." So God has always ruled as a hierarchy - from the TOP DOWN, and always will so rule. God the Father is supreme in authority, then comes Christ Jesus, second in authority. Then it is written, "Christ is head of the Church." And as Jesus said it is the Father who will determine who sits on the right and left hand of Christ, in the Kingdom. The question then is, WHERE does the hierarchy go, if it goes anywhere, in relationship to the physical members of the NT church in this age? And this is where all the debate about Church Government really lies. The debate is not really over the hierarchy of God per se, but: Is the NT church to be hierarchical in human structure of persons? Or, trying to make this as clear as I can to the reader, the question is: Does the Bible, especially the NT, teach that the church Jesus built is to be STRUCTURED and GOVERNED like the human hierarchy of the Roman Catholic church - one single flesh and blood human who has all and final authority over all other elders and ministers and lay persons on matters of doctrine, ethics, morality, and administration? This is the argument and question, not whether God rules hierarchically, but whether the physical ministers and lay persons within the NT CHURCH are to organize themselves in structure as have the people and ministers of the Roman Catholic church, and/or, is the NT church run on a democratic form of the congregational persons voting into office elders and deacons and doctrines etc. Has God decreed for the NT church that it is to have ONE supreme physical man as head, with all final authority over all things that pertain to the running of the church? This is the question that concerns many today in the Church of God. This study has addressed THAT question, and I believe given the truth of the matter as found in the plain teachings and examples of the NT. ANCIENT ISRAEL - DID THEY HAVE A HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM? Among all the debating over this topic, there has now risen another question: Did God institute a human hierarchical system in ancient Israel? Some say it is clear God did do so. Others say He never did. Those on the side of "no He never did'' say that Exodus 18 was only of human institution - namely Jethro and Moses without God in the picture. They claim that God gave His Spirit to other men (i.e. Num.11) so Moses was NOT the "chief" among the physical Israelites. They say that the supreme "one man rule" of the Kings of Israel was of human request and not the desire of God. I have great difficulty accepting their arguments and reasoning not the least is just a simple reading of the OT. It seems clear to me that God DID, most of the time RULE or tried to rule (if the people would respond) ancient Israel through the leadership, guidance, and inspiration of a DOMINANT authoritarian leader that had final authority in matters of God and the ways of God. Let's go back to Exodus 18. Was this JUST of men? Or was it also of God? Was this ONLY an idea of Jethro? Or had God given it to Jethro (at least backed him in it) and did He inspire Moses to adopt Jethro's advice? Notice what is missed by many, it is found in verse 23. "If you do this thing, AND GOD SO COMMANDS YOU, then you will be able to endure...." Jethro did not want Moses adopting his idea and suggestion without consulting God about it! Obviously Moses did consult God and God did approve because we then read "So Moses heeded the voice of his father-in-law and did all that he had said"(v.24). The account in Deut.1 would also bear this out. This pyramid structure of government - Moses as "top chief" - the supreme in authority over other lesser rulers of people, who were over still lesser rulers - this Roman Catholic structure of OT church government - WAS FROM GOD, it was ORDAINED of Him, sanctioned and set in order of Him. Just because the empire of Babylon, or Egypt had an established religious "priesthood" does not mean God could not establish His own priesthood for Israel if He so chose. God's probably came first, and other nations copied, for Satan is the great counter copier of the truth, but he perverts it. God giving His Spirit and rulership ability to others besides Moses is only wise and just. But that does not take away the plain truth that Moses was HEAD and SUPREME human authority over all other humans in the organized state/church of Israel. It was Moses who commanded them at that time to do the things they needed to do (Deut.1:18). He still maintained the number one leadership role under God. All the hard matter they were to bring to him for settlement. I have no trouble with that fact, because it is clear from reading the OT that God, organizationally, did operate DIFFERENTLY with different people at different times. After Moses, the supreme human authority over Israel was passed to Joshua. After Joshua there were a number of individual leaders God used from time to time to guide and judge Israel. The Lord even used a woman, one single person, to judge Israel - Deborah. She lived in mount Ephraim and "the children of Israel came to her for judgment" (Judges 4:4,5). Samuel was the last of the judges to directly under God, lead and rule and guide the nation and church of Israel. Again, I just can not see any other way but to accept the fact that from reading the story of Samuel, he was chosen by God to be the ONE human authority over all other humans (including the priesthood) in the state/church of Israel. He was directly inspired and talked with God as did Moses. Sure it was the people of Israel who humanly wanted a KING to reign and rule them, and not God's desire, but the CHURCH government side of the state/church of Israel still had its Levites, priesthood, and HIGH priest who was "chief" over the other priests. Yes, there were others who had the "spirit of the Lord" - who worked in the state religion of God, did the Lord's work and served the people, yet there still was a high, top of the line, priest. The example of ELIJAH and ELISHA is a classic. There was a school of prophets, many were "with" Elijah, but to me it is evident from just reading the story, Elijah was TOP GUN, with top authority under God in doing the work of God. When the Lord called it a day for Elijah, Elisha was chosen to take over number ONE position in the work of God. So, by and large, under the OC as God dealt with Israel and Judah, especially in religious matters, there was most of the time, a human structure of rule that was Roman Catholic in nature (as shocking as that seems to some today). And this worked for God towards His people for that time BECAUSE 1) He often directly, verbally, and in some cases VISIBLY, inspired and talked to the one head man over His work, i.e. Moses, Samuel, Elijah. 2) God had judges that were filled with His Spirit (Num.11). 3) God instituted the URIM and THUMMIM for often judgments and decisions (see a Bible Dictionary). I have no difficulty in accepting that God did work under the OC with Israel on a human pyramid structure of rulership. I believe that is QUITE EVIDENT from a reading of the OT. BUT the question is: IS GOD WORKING ON A HUMAN PYRAMID - ONE AUTHORITARIAN, ALL POWER, MAN - WITHIN HIS NT CHURCH? The body of this study has addressed that question and answered from the pages of the NT Scriptures. JESUS - THE SAME YESTERDAY, TODAY AND FOREVER? In showing that the NT church of God was never to be organized with any ONE single human being, having all power and all authority over all ministers and members of the church, further confusion in some minds has been thrown up by those who find it difficult to accept the truth that God does CHANGE the way He does things from time to time. The confusion arises from people "shouting out" the verse in Hebrews 13:8, "Jesus Christ, the SAME yesterday, today, and forever." I will now spend some time and space to answer this. Recently within the church of God, this verse has been one of the most MISUSED and MISUNDERSTOOD verses of the NT. In the context of Church Government, those who see that God used a human pyramid with Israel under the OC, cling to Heb.13:8 and say God must then be using a human pyramid structure of government for His NT church under the NC age. So they must try to fit the NT scriptures into their idea and really do some magic tricks with some pretty plain verses, that would blast their notions out of the water. Then on the other hand those who see the truth that the NT scriptures teach no such doctrine for God's church as a Roman Catholic structure of ministerial pyramid authority and "rank" system, they, based upon Heb.13:8, must try to prove that God NEVER EVER had a human pyramid system in ancient Israel under the OC age. Both sides are missing the bulls eye and causing confusion in people's minds. They are running with only one leg on TWO counts: 1) They do not see or have forgotten, that God DOES CHANGE things at times in His plan, as His plan unfolds from age to age. He does make adjustments and amendments from time to time as needed and as He sees necessary, according to His will. 2) They do not see what the MAIN TRUTH and PURPOSE is for Hebrews 13:8 God does CHANGE and is not the same in certain things. Most of you know it, so don't jump too hastily to say I'm contradicting Heb.13:8. When did God institute circumcision? Was it with Enoch? Or was it with Shem? Was it with Noah? NO! It was with ABRAHAM and his seed! Before Abraham it was NOT THERE as a covenant for God's people! With Abraham and Moses it was! No male could become a full OC Israelite unless they were circumcised in the flesh! No male could partake of the Passover unless circumcised! So important had physical circumcision become to Israel under the OC that some were teaching within the NT church that it was still necessary to "be saved." The issue had to be brought to a head in the Jerusalem conference of Acts 15. The NT shows plainly that physical circumcision is NOW under the NC of no religious concern (Rom.2:28,29; 1 Cor.7:19; Acts 15; Gal.6:15). God has CHANGED circumcision (physical) from a MUST under the OC to a NOTHING under the NC. Whatever way you slice it, there has been a change in physical circumcision from the OC age to the NC age, and all of it was instituted and de-instituted BY God! God has not always been the "same" in some respects. The law of TITHES was a certain way to a certain TRIBE under the OC. That was decreed and instituted by God. Now the NC makes it very clear that there is a CHANGE, and that change is decreed and instituted by God. See Hebrews the seventh chapter. Note the very word 'change' is used in verse 12. There was a certain type of priesthood involving a certain tribe(Levi) under the OC. Now under the NC there is a NEW high-priest from another tribe, with a new priesthood of His own (see again Heb.7 and note verse 12). All this was decreed and instituted by God - a CHANGE for Him, not the same as before! Remember the God of the OC was the one who became the Christ of the NC (you may want to read the article that proves that truth). Under the OC physical animal sacrifices were instituted by Christ - God. They were a MUST for all Israelites under the OC. Now under the NC there is a CHANGE - animal sacrificing is NOT DESIRED or required by God (see Heb. 10:1-18). There is NO Levitical priesthood, and NO temple. Animal sacrifices CAN NOT be offered to God, even if those two physical requirements were in place the NC shows it is NOT required in this age. God has CHANGED the way He does things, He is not always the same in all operations of His plan. Under the OC vows were permitted and wow to him who did not follow through with them. Under the NC there are to be no vows or swearing but a "no" or a "yes" for the Christian. There has been a change - Jesus is not doing things exactly the "same" today as before. Jesus said to the Pharisees that "divorce for any reason" was permitted and allowed under Moses - the OC. But "from the beginning it was not so." Jesus under the NC does not allow divorce for every reason, the law is changed. Jesus is not governing the NC Israel as He did OC Israel - things are not the same with Him in certain respects. The OC itself is CHANGED. Who instituted the OC? Why Christ did, the God of the OT. The OC is changed to the NC, which is based upon BETTER promises and is a BETTER covenant (see Heb.8). The OC never automatically gave the "Spirit of God" or "eternal life" to those under it. The NC gives BOTH! That is a CHANGE, that is not the same, that is a change in the way God - Christ, has acted and done things differently in different ages. Under the OC God did not give them the HEART to obey (Deut.5:29; 29:1-4) - under the NC all that has changed (see Heb.8 again). The promise from God is not the same! Now, do you see the truth of Heb.13:8? The words "the same" must be understood in the light of the TOTALITY of the word of God as to HOW Paul was using them. and the CONTEXT Paul was using them in will also give us the correct understanding of what is the "same" about Christ in the past, present, and future. Let's look at the context of Hebrews 13. Verse 7, Paul tells his readers to remember (look to, esteem, take note of) those who rule (lead - mrg. reading) them. He tells them to remember those ministers who have led them and spoken the word of God to them. He tells them, "whose FAITH FOLLOW." Did he mean by those words - doctrine, certain technical ideas of theology? I think not, for sometimes even God's true ministers have incorrect doctrines at times (remember how we observed Pentecost on a Sunday for 40 years or more before finding we were wrong). The context again shows us what Paul meant by the words "whose faith follow." The next words and sentence make it clear, "considering the outcome of their CONDUCT." They were to consider their CHARACTER OF PRACTICAL DAY TO DAY LIVING. Paul was not first of all concerned with small points of doctrine, of course he knew that God's leaders they were to remember, would have the correct BASIC doctrines of God right, or he would have warned them about false leaders coming as wolves in sheeps clothing. That was not his concern in verses 7 and 8. His concern was they look to and follow the faithful servants of God in their CONDUCT of character and living, which matured or evidenced (outcome) in "Jesus Christ - the same yesterday, today, and forever." The true leaders of God (whatever they may have had in small errors of doctrine) speaking the true word of God, were trying to set the right example of faithful living in holy character of daily conduct AS JESUS CHRIST HAS ALWAYS DONE IN THE PAST, IN THE PRESENT, AND WILL IN THE FUTURE FOREVER. This is what Paul wanted them to see and follow in those leaders - the HOLY RIGHTEOUS CHARACTER OF CONDUCT AND PURITY OF LOVE, JUSTICE, PEACE, MERCY (all the fruits of the Spirit) that was the sum total of Jesus Christ from past eternity to future eternity. He started to talk about DOCTRINE in verse 9! He was not talking about theological issues as the changing from the OC to the NC and what was not the same with them, or other "not the same" as before doctrines, in verses 7 and 8. Verses 7,8 are concerned with HOLY RIGHTEOUS CHARACTER in daily living not about doctrinal changes God may have made from one age to another age (i.e. circumcision, baptism, covenants, tithing, priesthood, vows etc.). When Jesus was dealing with Adam and Eve, when He was dealing with Enoch, when He was dealing with Noah and others under THAT age, when the doctrine of circumcision, Levite priesthood, rigorous animal sacrificial system and other OC laws of Israel were NOT in effect, He - Jesus - was HOLY and PURE and RIGHTEOUS and JUST in all His CONDUCT towards those He was governing. When Christ was dealing with Moses, the people of Israel and all under the OC (with instituted laws of physical circumcision, tithing to Levi, a priesthood, sacrificial system, vows, divorce, and the like, that would change later), He was HOLY and PURE and RIGHTEOUS and JUST in character towards those He was ruling in THAT age. When Jesus deals with those He is leading today under the NC with its changes from the OC, He is still HOLY, JUST, PURE, and RIGHTEOUS in CONDUCT and MIND as He has always been and will always be for eternity. Also with all this the PLAN and PURPOSE of God in creating mankind has always been the same, yesterday, today, and forever. That spiritual character of purpose will never change, it will always be the same, as before the foundations of the earth were laid when that plan and purpose was formulated. When Christ deals with, leads and guides, all the physical people during the 1,000 year reign(millennium) of the Kingdom of God on earth, with WHATEVER changes the earth and NC will have (the prophets say physical animal sacrifices will again be offered in a temple in Jerusalem by a priesthood) during that age, He will still be the SAME in Holy Righteous conduct. On into the WHITE THRONE JUDGMENT age, the NEW heavens and earth age, and out into eternity. Whatever God decides to do, whatever His plans, whatever CHANGES, whatever will not be the same, along the way, one thing will always remain the SAME - the Holy Righteous conduct of Jesus Christ (and God the Father) will FOREVER remain unchanged. Under all situations, under any covenant agreement, under all circumstances, with all people, God will be always JUST, LOVE, MERCY, HOLY, PURE, RIGHTEOUS and whatever other word can describe PERFECT SINLESS perfection of CONDUCT. The Holy character and divine plan and purpose of God and Christ is the same today, yesterday, and forever. Ah, yes, He may change some doctrinal things from time to time as He wills (after all He is God, not us humans, and can do what He wishes, when He wishes, in the manner He wishes and with whom He wishes - we are the clay He is the potter) but His holy sinless conduct has and will always remain THE SAME! Now that is the truth of the matter concerning Hebrews 13:8 as it is also with Malachi 3:6. Truly as Jesus said "the scriptures can not be broken." There is no contradiction in the word of the Lord, and so the truth about NC church government does not contradict the truth about OC church government, and the sum total of both does not contradict Hebrews 13:8. LOGIC, AND WHO TODAY COULD BE HEAD OF THE PHYSICAL CHURCH? Stop and think - let's use some logic. If God has decreed that His NC church for this age was to be humanly pyramid in structure, then with all the various BRANCHES of the Church of God that have "come out" of the one organization called the "Worldwide Church of God," WHICH human man is chief of the others, the one with all authority that the other ministers must say "yes sir" to? Is it Ted Armstrong or Ron Dart who is "directly under Christ"? Is it David Hume from the UCG who is next in authority under Christ? How about Rod Meredith from the GCG, maybe it is he who is top dog? Then possibly it is none of the above, but ministers like Fred Coulter of the CBCG, or John Ritenbaugh of the COG, or John Pinkston of the CGSD? Maybe it is Gerald Flurry of PCG. Her's another problem, if it is one of these men, now that the WCG has split into many organizations, how can this TOP man exercise authority over the others in any practical way? Further, if you believe Herbert Armstrong was God's TOP man in God's NT pyramid structure of human ministers, believing God has always had a human pyramid hierarchical structure in His NT church (as the RC church teaches), THEN TELL ME, if you can, WHO WAS TOP GUN in authority and power BEFORE HWA took over, and further more, tell me WHEN and WHY did HWA take over from the one before him? And further still, WHO was the chief minister before that, and before that, and so on down the historic line? The Roman Catholic church can tell you as they see it, so what about the Church of God and those that uphold the same type of idea as the RC's. Let's face it, the whole idea of human hierarchical authority in the context of the NC Church of God is LAUGHABLE when you recognize the true history of the true Church has been SPLITS upon SPLITS. The truth is HWA became leader of ONE part of the true Church of God, there were other parts teaching the same basic doctrines in other parts of the world, and yes keeping the festivals of Lev.23. Such a branch was found by WCG ministers in South America back in the 1960's. That has been the norm for God's people since the days of the last apostle of the first century A.D. - John. There has never really been UNITY among God's people since the end of the first century. And even during the apostle Paul's time a pretty strong case can be built from NT verses that God's people had trouble with unity even during the life time of Christ's original apostles (i.e. 1 Cor.l-3). The plain truth is, if the last 2,000 years says anything about the true Church of God and unity, it will NOT BE A REALIZATION until Jesus Christ returns to establish God's Kingdom on earth. Those who cling to the teaching that God is still using the same form of church government in the NT age as He used with Israel in the OT age, must somehow try to find verses in the NT that would seem to support their hypothesis. The RC church has for centuries claimed that the apostle PETER was "chief" and authoritarian head of all other elders and apostles mentioned in the NT. The body of this study has examined the scriptures they use to expound the "supremacy of Peter" teaching and has found such ideas to be totally without any truth in fact. Now I must answer arguments that have been put forth by some in one branch of the Church of God, that PAUL had dictatorial authority over a church and/or churches as well as certain ministers. 1 CORINTHIANS 5:1-3 is often quoted to give credence to a "Supremacy of Paul" idea. One writer states: "Although he certainly must have had much information and probably also counsel from other leaders of the Church, the apostle Paul had authority to make the decision to disfellowship this sinner. Obviously, he was not seeking permission from any committee or 'church board' to carry out this action" (What Is the Biblical Form of Church Government? GCN-Global Church News, Vol.3, No.5, p.5). Please turn to 1 Cor.5 and read verses 1-12. Can you find anywhere in these verses where Paul said anything like: "As I have authority over you all and your elders, I command you to disfellowship this sinner." Or, "I am in authority and you MUST DO as I say, so cast this sinner out from among your fellowship." Or, "I have sole authority to judge and declare what the rest of you shall do with this sinner." No such dictatorial authority can be found in this passage! If it was a common fact that Paul had some sort of '"supreme - you must do as I say because I have authority over you and your ministers" rank, and the Corinthians KNEW IT, then surely somewhere in the two letters he wrote to them, he would have had point to tell them. Just look at all the things he had to CORRECT and INSTRUCT them on! As I read those letters it comes across to me VERY CLEARLY, that the Corinthian church, its members and elders, were NOT standing in AWE of the apostle Paul as some "chief" authority that they had to bow down before and lick the dust off his feet. Paul had to correct them on following MEN and not the ONE and only HEAD of the church - Christ (chap.l-3). Paul had planted - raised up the church at Corinth, but it was Apollos who WATERED, yet it was God who gave the increase(chap.2:5,6). Some were following neither of these two men but were looking to PETER as authority(chap.l:l2). Paul tells them that all of God's ministers are FELLOW WORKERS - one is NOT ABOVE the others - God is in charge, not men. They were to consider THEM (Peter, Apollos, Paul) as SERVANTS of Christ, none were to be puffed up against another (chap.3 to 4:7). Paul tells them they were acting as if they had no need of ANY minister to guide them (chap.4:8-13). Here was Paul's opportunity to set them in line and tell them it was HE - Paul, that had personal dictatorial authority over them, but he did no such thing. He goes on to use words not of dictatorial power but one who was spiritually more MATURE than they, to WARN and INSTRUCT them as to HOW they SHOULD be living and acting in the Spirit. "I do not write these things to shame you, but as my BELOVED CHILDREN I warn you. For though you might have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. Therefore I URGE you, IMITATE me. For this reason I have sent Timothy who will REMIND you of MY WAYS in Christ, as I TEACH everywhere and in every church" (v.14-17). Do you see how Paul conducted himself towards people? Not as some "big cheese" authoritative "I am the boss around here" head apostle with final power over all others. Not as someone saying "I will make the decision and you all will obey" but he presented himself as a servant of Christ, a fellow worker with other elders of Christ, a spiritual mature father of others he had brought to Christ through the gospel, someone who had to warn yes, but who also URGED, PLEADED with and ENCOURAGED others to IMITATE himself as he walked and imitated Christ (chap.11:1). Yes, and in all of that there could be times when POWERFUL correction may have to be used(see Paul's instruction in 2 Tim.4:1-4) as he explained to them in verses 18-21. Now chapter 5. It had been reported to Paul that OPEN incest was being practiced and the church was ignoring the situation - allowing it. Paul had to CORRECT them, show them their ERROR, so he did. He had to INSTRUCT them the WAY of Christ in regards to HOW a church should act towards a person doing such blatant sins and not repenting of it, while still being a member of the church and everyone knowing what was being practiced by this individual. Paul told them he personally had to judge the case, just as if he was there within the congregation, as each of them must do. And his judgment was that such things CAN NOT be allowed to be practiced within the church, as if no sin was being done, or as if grace was to be extending towards the sinner by allowing him to remain with them while practicing such a sin. Notice clearly what Paul said: "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when YOU ARE GATHERED TOGETHER, along with my spirit, with the power of out Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan" (v.4,5). Read it again, get it CLEAR! The decision to disfellowship the sinner out of the church into the unconverted world of Satan was to be a COLLECTIVE church matter! "....when YOU ARE GATHERED TOGETHER ALONG WITH my spirit..." Paul wanted them ALL to come to the SAME judgment as he, a mature spiritual father to them had come to. The judgment decision was to be passed by THEM collectively, when they gathered together, and Paul would be among them in spirit. If Paul ONLY had authority to make the decision to disfellowship this sinner, no such language would have been needed from Paul to them, no GATHERING TOGETHER would have been needed on their part. Paul would have merely told them he knew what was going on, he had made a decision, he had authority over them all including their elders, and they were to tell the sinner that Paul had disfellowshipped him and that was all there was to it. Paul would have said to them that they were to send him this sinners address and he would write to him telling him that he was disfellowshipped on the authority of Paul himself. Or he could have told them that one of their elders was to tell this man that Paul had made a decision to disfellowship him, and that it would be announced from the pulpit to the whole congregation on the Sabbath. He could have told them to tell the sinner "Just tell him I've judged and he is disfellowshipped." No such words are here recorded, no such words from Paul as: "By the sole authority invested in me over you all, I now disfellowship this sinner. You are commanded to do as I say." No such words can be found from the mouth of Paul because HE FOLLOWED CHRIST! And Christ had given the 1, 2, 3, of disfellowshipping. The local church had FINAL judgement and authority NOT ANY ONE SINGLE MAN (Mat.18). That is why Paul said to the church at Corinth "when YOU are GATHERED together along with my spirit." Paul went on to say, "with the POWER of our LORD JESUS CHRIST" not with his (Paul's) power or authority, as some "highest" court judge, but with CHRIST'S authority. And Christ had already given His authority on such sinful matters in the church and how to handle them (Mat.l8). Paul had previously INSTRUCTED them about the way of Christ in regards un-repented open sins within the church and how THEY were to JUDGE such matters inside the church (v.9-13). But in this matter of a member practicing incest they were NOT judging when they SHOULD HAVE BEEN! And Paul had to correct and instruct and URGE them to do the right thing in this situation. There is a VAST difference between CORRECTING, INSTRUCTING, URGING, and PLEADING with someone to act upon the way of Christ, and dictatorially stating you and you alone apart from other humans or body of humans, have full authority to disfellowship someone. Of course this kind of individual power is very prevalent in "cultish" organizations. Paul did not come close to acting with any such demagogue authority. Notice how he corrects and instructs them about judging, and courts of law in chapter 6. Brother was taking brother to the courts of this world for justice and trouble solving between themselves. Did Paul think that the church at Corinth did NOT have the ABILITY and the spiritually mature elders among them to JUDGE? No way! This was a church full of "spiritual gifts" and prophets (chap.12 through 14). They had the "wise" among them, they had those who could judge, but they were not using those gifts, and those men, as they should have, so he had to "tongue in cheek" use SHAME to get them to see their errors (chap.6:2-6). He wanted THEM to judge the matters pertaining to the church. He wanted them to judge the matters between brothers, not the courts of the unconverted world. He wanted them to judge matters of serious sins being practiced openly within the church. He did not say anything about them just handling the minor problems, little sins, while he, as chief authority would personally judge the "hard" cases and serious sins, and have sole authority to disfellowship. Paul wanted them with their elders and the spiritual gifts they had to JUDGE, and to govern their congregation in the way of Christ. Paul was CORRECTING yes, Paul was INSTRUCTING yes, Paul was WARNING yes, Paul was URGING and PLEADING, yes. He was ENCOURAGING, yes, but it was they - as a collective body and unit - elders, deacons, and saints, who were to judge and act and walk the way of Christ Jesus in all things. The church at Corinth was willing to listen to Paul, they were willing to be corrected and taught. They did disfellowship the sinner for his practice of incest. When he writes his next letter to them he has heard that the sinner is truly repentant, but the church is holding back its forgiveness and comfort towards him. He then must INSTRUCT and URGE them to now do what Christ would do. See the beauty of this love expressed to the church and repentant sinner in 2 Cor.2:1-11. Please read it in the AMPLIFIED BIBLE TRANSLATION. The sinner was censured for his sin not by Paul per se, but "by the MAJORITY" (v.6). He tells them in verse 7 to FORGIVE, to COMFORT, to encourage the repentant man lest he despair. Notice verse 8 in the Amplified Bible. "I therefore BEG you to reinstate him in your affection and assure him by your love for him." The NKJV says, "Therefore I URGE you..." The same language as in his first letter. There is no "I command you by my authority" language. Nothing here about Paul telling them he will allow him back into fellowship so they must obey. Nothing about Paul writing to the man and telling him that on his authority only he could come back. No, the ultimate DOING was in their hands. Paul could GUIDE, TEACH, INSTRUCT, CORRECT. He could URGE and BEG them to follow the way of Christ, to follow him as he followed Christ. He could PLEAD with them to LISTEN to him, but it was finally, when all was said and done, UP TO THEM TO DO THE WAY OF CHRIST! You will note in this also - in this re-instating of the now repentant sinner - it was THEY who had to do it! Paul did not say that he would do it. Paul FORGAVE because the sinner was repentant. They forgave - Paul forgave. The church at Corinth was not writing to Paul to acquire his authority for getting this man reinstated. Paul had been told the sinner had repented and he was INSTRUCTING the church what the way of Christ would now be. He was URGING - BEGGING them to show love, mercy, forgiveness, comfort and encouragement to this man, and to allow him back into fellowship. The chances are very likely that this man went through all this - the 1, 2, 3, steps of Mat.18, the final judgment and decision by the majority to disfellowship, the period of repentance, the caring, encouragement, forgiveness, and reinstating to full fellowship again, WITHOUT EVER HEARING THE NAME OF PAUL!! I have spent time on this issue because the plain truth of the subject of excommunication from the church has been greatly MISUNDERSTOOD, PERVERTED, and ABUSED by a number of denominations of Christianity over the years, including sadly to say, some branches of the Church of God. It seems few really understand what the word of God correctly teaches on this subject. This is one time when the voting majority of the church must make the decision to disfellowship, and not any single elder or group of elders. I have written in great depth and detail the truth about this subject in an article called "Disfellowshipping - What the Bible Really Teaches." I have to my pleasant surprise also discovered over the years that some fundamental Protestant churches as well as the Seventh Day Adventist church not only understand but practice the truth of this doctrine in their structure of church governing. When done correctly as Jesus taught and all the NT enjoins, it is most loving, merciful, and rewarding for the whole church. It brings the sinner, the elders, the deacons, and the saints together in a humility that transcends human ideas. It brings the church together as a FAMILY in a way that only trials, tests, pain, sorrow, crying, humility, forgiveness, mercy, and love can do. Not all the truths of the Lord are easy to accept or enjoyable to enact (from the human emotional view) but the end result is the peaceable fruits of righteousness to them who are exercised thereby. As Jesus said, "You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." To be continued |
No comments:
Post a Comment