Igzy,
After reading your last two paragraphs in #78, I feel that I should try once more to communicate. I hope that this abbreviated presentation will promote understanding:
Your claims
Turns out the ways things are done in "Christianity" are the healthiest and most biblical.
. . . These churches are led by leaders who have the right and obligation to vet ministries for the sake of those they lead (Heb 13:17; Rev 2:2). Although members are charged to obey and submit to leaders, this charge is not absolute (Acts 5:29). A leader is no longer your leader if you move from his church to another, nor if his words violate your conscience.
My comments about your verse references
- Heb 13:17 (from post #64):
From the Greek, “be you being persuaded to the ones leading you and be you deferring” (scripture4all.org). The language in this verse carries a much different sense than “obey and submit.”
- Rev 2:2 (from post #64):
This verse applies to he whoever will and not just to someone who is leading.
- Acts 5:29 (from post #64):
This verse applies to the apostles not yielding to clerical authority in the Jewish religion.
- Eph 5:21 (from post #74):
This verse applies to one another and not just to someone who is leading.
- Rom 13:1 (from post #78):
This verse applies to civil authorities and not to someone who is leading in a church.
My conclusion
In these verses, I find no injunction compelling a member of a church to obey anyone leading in a church. With the exception of Heb 13:17, the verses are taken out of context and, thus, do not support the claim. As to Heb 13:17, your claim is much more forceful (obey and submit) than is justified by the meaning of the Greek words or the intent of the language used in that verse.
These are not my interpretations, unless you want to discuss nuances of meanings between what’s in your head and in mine regarding any particular English word or phrase. I am just bringing out the plain text of the Bible, not adding or subtracting anything.