Looking back at the first post in this thread, I find the following:
From John:
Quote:
Now, on to what I disagree with in your presentation as regards it being biblical. First, I do not see that Hebrews 13:17 supports leaders having the obligation to vet ministries as you claim:Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you (KJV).
As I hope that you will agree, the verse does not address vetting ministries at all. Therefore, this claim, so far as you have tried to show, is lacking in biblical support.
Second, I noticed that you did not give a biblical reference for the following statement: “members are charged to obey and submit to leaders.” I could assume that you would use Hebrews 13:17 to support it, since maybe it was what you meant to do when you used it to try to support vetting. Reading what the King James translators did with it sure seems to authorize some kind of heavy-handed ruling and obedience. Unfortunately, this verse has been used, I think, by leaders in some Christian churches to force submission, producing an environment in which abuse can take root and grow. The problem with leaning on this verse is that the translation is grossly inaccurate and does not actually support rendering obedience to church leaders. The literal Greek goes like this:be you being persuaded to the ones leading you and be you deferring
(scripture4all.org).
|
Now I agree that this reading says it somewhat softer than the old KJV. And the NIV says it this way:
Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.
But when I go back to the scripture4all.org Greek and the transliteration it provides, it does not seem quite as simple as was suggested. The first word is translated into “be-ye-being-persuaded !” The whole first phrase would look something like this:
“be-ye-being-persuaded ! to-the ones-leading of-you and be-ye-deferring !”
The addition of the exclamation marks was not by me, but by the translators. I would agree that “be being persuaded” is not as strong as “obey,” but when you make it an imperative, it is only slightly softer. It is as if saying “You must be being persuaded by those leading you.” That seems to suggest that your mind should be changing to align with them. It is not just a suggestion that you consider their words.
And the second odd phrase, “be ye deferring!” is hard to read as anything less than a soft command. It may only be “deferring,” but it is insisted upon.
But, like we so often read the “submits” in Ephesians, this is not written to the leader so they can demand obedience and submission. It is written to the follower to instruct them (for their benefit) to be persuaded and defer. If you are intentionally setting out to be persuaded, then it would be expected that something looking like obedience will arise. And if you set out to defer, then it will have the appearance of submission because it will be the suggestion given by the leader that is taken, not the direction given by the leader that is ignored.
It seems to me that there are two things in play here.
- First there is proper leadership. Someone posted concerning leadership that serves rather than orders around. That considers itself the least rather than the first.
- The second is the gratefulness of the flock for those who have given themselves to them to lead them. This comes with an attitude that these are God’s gifts to them. This is how they become equipped. It is not by figuring it out for themselves. They have trustworthy “men” who will give themselves for the flock.
And in this kind of relationship, who looks out for the wolves? It is the sheep!! (
NOT!!) No! It is the shepherds.
We like to take Ephesians, and those five listed “gifts” to the church and read the following verses as saying that those gifts will make us into the same thing, so we will never need someone else to shepherd us again. To teach us again. But that is not what it says. It merely says to do works of ministry. The suggestion that “works of ministry” are just the very things that the five gifts are/do and that we simply become them (and without saying, we no longer need them — except for Lee) is a bare assertion made without obvious cause or evidence. We do not become our own shepherds. Imagine that, a flock of shepherds. Or a church full of elders.
Do we need a verse to directly say that the leaders should vet ministers? At any level? If we insist on it, then I would suggest that we have them. 1 Timothy has a few. That was written to Timothy, not the church in (wherever). Yes, we can read the words to him. And they should give us instruction enough to realize that not everything that calls itself a minister or ministry is worthy of the claim. But it doesn’t direct us to each make our own determinations. Not saying you can’t. But those were instructions given to leaders. Not to the flock.
Besides, what is a flock, and what is the need for a shepherd if they can all fend off the wolf by themselves?