I have recently been studying Chronicles in the Bible for the past couple of months. Through my study, I have read about kings who were good, followed G-D, and were obedient in how they lived and how they led. I have read about other kings who were bad, chose to not follow or honor G-D, and were not obedient to G-D in how they lived and how they led. And then I have read about other kings who were good, obedient, and honoring in the beginning of their reign as king, but then fell away from G-D and became bad kings.
Then recently my wife and I were reading some of Chronicles together and I questioned why there seemed to be so many more kings who were corrupt and evil then there were kings who were good and followed G-D. She answered me with what seemed to make sense. She said, “ultimate power corrupts. When someone has that much power, they are not living in community, they let there power get to them and then become corrupt and no longer focused on G-D or how he desires for us to live” Very interesting. That really makes sense. (I mean think of our politicians, police men, leaders in the school system or non-profit organizations, etc) Is that why, G-D didn’t necessarily want to allow the Jewish people to have kings or judges to rule his people? Wasn’t it the Jewish people who continued to insist that they wanted a ruler such as kings and judges and so G-D eventually allowed this to happen? Wasn’t it G-Ds people who desired these rulers and not G-D? Even thinking forward, G-D didn’t necessarily set specific rulers to rule His church (ex. Pastors), but that is something that many of His people still say they need. Does that make them wrong? But then again, there are many church pastors, etc, that fight and struggle with power, or being led in wrong directions, or not focusing on G-D but on other things such as “cultural relevancy, money, becoming bigger, doing, sin, sexual scandals, money scandals etc.
Does ultimate power corrupt? Does G-D really desire for us to have the kind of leadership we now have in most churches? Does G-D desire to be are ultimate focus as we move and live as “His Church”?
I am going to begin studying Leviticus, Numbers etc. in the Bible to see how G-D answers most of these questions, to try and understand G-Ds heart and desire, and to see if my current understanding is right, wrong, or can just learn a bunch of very cool things from my ultimate King!!!!
Maybe most of this doesn’t make sense, or could be communicated better in words, but I think are some very interesting and challenging questions to ask. I pray that G-D blesses these questions and reveals REAL answers that make sense in my head and in my heart.
6 comments:
Here are a couple things I may be able to help with:
Judges.
These guys were put in place by God, but not really in the same way the kings were. They were appointed to help out Israel in times when they cried out to God. Samuel was a judge in his time, but we often only look at his prophetic side. Most of these guys (minus a few character flaws like Samson)were good people (oh, and girls for that matter). The Judges were military leaders appointed by God, not like kings.
The kings were wanted by the people, not so they could be lead by a godly man, but so they could be like their neighbors. When you read Leviticus (GREAT BOOK!) you will see the ways God tells them not to be like their neighbors. That is why kings are frowned upon. Because God wants to be their authority and appoint the right people and so on. They do not want that. In Samuel it says "do not be disappointed (God speaking to Sammy) because it is not you they have rejected (speaking of Sam's leadership over the people as a judge) but me they have rejected."
As for Chronicles and Kings, make sure you are differentiating over Judah and Israel. Also, watch for the tribes the rulers came from.
If they came from Manassah (sp?) they were usually bad. This is partly because the Israelites felt they betrayed them by not wanting to enter the promised land. It is reflected in the literature.
Second, Israel is always the wicked one. They tend to turn their backs on God more than Judah. If the king is from Judah, there is a better chance that he either started out in fine standing with God, or gained good standing (like Hezekiah). You can see this reflected in the prophets (like Ezekiel) when they call Israel a wayward whore and talk about God always being with Judah.
Read the second half of 2 kings and you will see the point in which God told the kings of Judah it was too late, they would be exiled. I cannot remember the king, but God was so fond of him, he prolonged the exile until after his death.
Does ultimate power corrupt? Only if you are from the house of Israel. At least if you are writing from the standpoint of someone from Judah. Or God wants to show you what good people do in power...
Hope this helps.
By the way, I still do not see in the Bible where church leaders are not part of God's design. The priests in the OT were appointed by God, not by Moses. Paul talks about the proper structure of the church as well in Corinthians and in Timothy. Can you show me or tell me where God tells us that a leadership structure is not needed? He seems to model it from the Godhead down. The triune God is head over the church, the church is head over man, man is head over the household.
It just seems to me that God values a leadership structure. He has a created order. He even talks about it in the later chapters of Job.
-Don-
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."...is the original quote as it was written by Lord Acton in the latter part of the 19th century.
Here's the REAL question:if this is truth, then wouldn't the Lord be corrupt?
Just something to chew on dude.
I am going to start from the third comment and work my way up. The reason G-D is not corrupt even though he has ultimate power, is because he is perfect and not sinful. We are still not perfect. But, that was a very good point that you made.
In regards to the second comment: I question the comment that G-D said that the church is above man. I am not sure I know where that is in scripture. Especially because my understanding of the church is the community of G-Ds people and not an institution. Also, when G-D paints the picture of the church, being His people, he paints a picture of the body of Christ. In this picture the head is what leads the body and no other part. The head tells the rest of the body what to do, and the rest of the body works together in order to accomplish what the head desires. In fact he says that if each part of the body does not work together then the whole body suffers. No where in that analogy does he say that one part of the body takes the lead or is more important than another part of the body. The head leads (Christ) and the rest of the body (the church…G-Ds people)works together to accomplish what the head desires.
In regards to the first comment: Judah may not have been as bad as Israel, but if you read the books of Chronicles or study many of the kings of Judah…you will see that there were still a lot of pretty bad kings in Judah. Also, many of the Judean kings may have started off good, but after many years of absolute power and rulership…many of them fell away from G-D or turned evil. Most of the time it seemed like they had done so out of pride or fear which came from being king.
Also, when you look at most of the leaders that G-D had used through judges, kings, prophets etc. Many of them had no desire to be leaders or had tried to run from the idea of being a leader…they were people that G-D chose to use for a short period of time. You are right, many of the judges were put into place because G-Ds people cried out for help and desired for G-d to move in that way. G-D gave them what they desired and asked for, but G-D shares his desire throughout all of the Old Testament for them to rely on him. Although this seems true, G-D ended up using leaders because that is what they desired not necessarily because that was the best way. Although G-D has and still uses leaders to accomplish his will(so I don't believe leadership to be bad) I just believe absolute leadership leads to corruption. Also, In the case of the judges, most of them were not absolute leaders.
Also, The priests were used in various aspects of worship, but you never saw just one or two priests play a major role in the temple worship…there were many priests who shared many responsibilities and were not necessarily seen as leaders. Even in the new testament, the elders weren’t set up to lead, but to make sure that G-Ds people were continuing to remain faithful. The apostles, Paul, etc. helped to keep the focus on G-D, but didn’t necessarily play an important part in the temple, tabernacle, worship etc. They just helped to teach and encourage G-Ds people in their faith. They didn’t set up programs, things for people to do, teachings, etc. they taught and discipled G-Ds people when it was necessary (basically played the role of an elder…they did not play the role of absolute leader). G-Ds people are the church and we all play different roles, but I still question the need for the type of leaders that we currently see in our institutional church.
I believe that it comes down to how you view and understand leadership or absolute power.
But, if we didn’t have the picture of church that we now have today and if we truly looked at how G-D set us up to live as his community (the people of G-D, the church, his kingdom etc.), What would it really look like to live life as the church? I don’t think it would look a thing like it does now.
I may have made a small error in saying "the church is the head of man" in a way that sounded like a reference to another popular verse, but it is awfully implied, and I will explain it below.
Now, as to the judges, many of them were absolute leaders, like Gideon. He lead an army that delivered the people of Israel. He later resorted to idol worship, but we do not know if that is because of leadership or not. We have Deborah who actually judged the people in the ways of legal matters who was never corrupt.
As for the church, I think the structure we have set up is important. I love how the Eastern Orthodox are set up (and I will write a post on it someday soon). They try to take everything from the Bible as it was in the first century. That is pretty much what orthodox means, to do things that are tried, proven, and held to a standard. This standard is what Paul put in place in the books of Corinthians, Timothy, and others in the new testament.
I find the book of Titus very interesting because Paul tells Titus, as a leader to rebuke people harshly.
1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 says:
"Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you.Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work. Live in peace with each other."
I find the first part interesting in that it actually says there are people who work "in the Lord" who are over other people.
Why did Paul always talk about church leadership? Since he did, why is it in the Bible? And such a predominate part of several letters (often called the pastoral epistles.)
If these are not from God, why are they in his word?
Can we ourselves live above the word of God (which is his authority to us, and we should be under) in a manner that is closer to Christ?
Will this be possible in this life, or do we have to wait until the return of Christ?
I find it hard at times to live under the authority of others, especially those who abuse it. But it seems to be a theme in the Bible, that there is an authority in heaven, and another on earth as appointed by heaven (such as Aaron who was appointed by Moses as the High Priest or Paul, or Peter, or John, or the prophets, and on and on).
I think God knows we are an imperfect people, and without structure and guidelines that are put in place by him and carried out through the people he appoints, we would not do things very well.
Leadership in the Church may look bad in some churches, but marvelous in others. I know some churches talk about elder leadership, others have pastoral, and both can point out in scripture why. And I think God wants both. I do not think God honors the pope or cardinals, but that is another long story...
I am fearful of anarchy in the church (we are all leaders, and elders are just respected, but WTF does that really mean anyway, if you are respected, and your opinion matters, would that not make you a leader?)
God has headship and should be the ultimate leader. He leads through his son, and we lead through the outline in his word. God seems to have a purpose for setting some people as head over others (like the husband as head over the wife)
Being a leader in a church in no way makes you more important than another person. But leadership in the church is something that should be trusted and respected. If one is elected as an elder, or we choose to sit under one particular pastor, mentor, or Sunday School teacher, we should be able to see God at work in their lives, and fall under their God-given authority.
After all, it's biblical.
I am not against leadership nor the gift of leadership, and I can't deny how G-D has raised up people throughout history to lead His people and others, but I do believe that he doesn't call many people to have a role of absolute leadership. I do believe that G-D still raises up people to lead, but again I think it is for specific reasons or tasks.
I don't believe the church to be a place for absolute leaders. My understanding of "the Church" makes it a community and not a structure. Although that does not mean that people don't lead, I don't think there is necessarily one or two main leaders for these "church communities". I also don't see a scriptural place for a paid pastor or maybe a pastor at all...and my understanding of pastor seems to be more of the role of a discipler than of a leader (living life with people)- meaning many people play this role of pastor. I don't necessarily believe that the teacher and pastor are the same thing. I don't believe that elders are necessarily absolute leaders. There role seems to also be that of a Shepard, a discipler, someone who watches over the "community", "church", body of Christ etc. They make sure that people keep their eyes on Jesus. really I think the idea of a leader as it is understood in the church is wrong or has become messed up...so my picture of leader may be different than other peoples view of one...so maybe this discussion just comes down to different definitions.
I think that the role of the paid pastor that we now see in the institutional church is set up is wrong and at many times becomes harmful. many times the pastor falls due to his absolute leadership role, pride, or "pastor" type role usually designated to "pastor" people. He is "the man" and the community looks to him as so instead of G-D or think he should do it all. Many times because of this role many pastors die due to sin, pride, or there inability to follow the things that G-D puts on their hearts because they became the "church bitch". (more about this in my future blog "being the bitch and why many pastors die") I kind of feel that usually the paid pastor obtains that role of absolute leader within their congregation and falls due to the reality of what this role has become.
Post a Comment