Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
...it seems that the criteria for leadership, pre-resurrection, was something like that of James and John, i.e. ambition. And the rest are on record as quarreling among themselves twice (Luke 9:46, & 22:24) about who was greatest. Jesus corrected them, patiently (thank You Lord for Your patience!) and repeatedly. The question is: did they get it? Or perhaps the better question is: did they get it all, 100%, on the day Jesus resurrected? In Acts chapter 1 they were drawing straws to replace one of the twelve. We all know they were on board "The Jesus Express" there. But were they fully on board or still merely partly on board?
Jesus told them that He still had a lot to teach them, and that the Spirit of reality would guide them into all the reality (John 16:13). I take that to mean "not instantaneous enlightenment on all things, but instead gradual enlightenment, over the course of time and experience."
|
I was struck by the fact that Jesus caught them arguing, not once, but twice, in the gospel record in Luke. The first is when, in chapter 9, He says He is going to be delivered to the Gentiles. They couldn't understand what He was saying, and promptly fell into "reasoning" (RcV) about whom was the greatest. Jesus found them so doing (Mark 9:34 has them falling silent when He enters the room -- oops!), gave them the "whoever is least among you, is greatest" speech, showing them a little child.
Immediately after, John brings up how he forbade others to preach in Jesus' name.
Later, in chapter 22, a "contention" occurred among them about who was greater, right after he broke the bread and gave the wine at the last supper together. Again, He compared the "Gentiles" model with the heavenly model.
I am wondering how much the "Jewish" model was really the Gentile model, in disguise. "And He said to them, The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who have authority over them are called benefactors." Luke 22:25
How much were the Jewish practices like everything else on this fallen globe, i.e. "I'm gonna git mine, and the devil take the hindmost", Moses notwithstanding? Because the observant Jews waved the scroll of Moses at Jesus, and He dismissed them with "You don't know Moses." How much were Jewish practices and customs, which rolled over, at least somewhat, into the new age, after Pentecost, not the "blueprint" God had in mind?
My point is this: the desire to be "top dog" is arguably ubiquitous among us "pack animals" - it is the way Gentiles do business, it permeated the Jewish system, and "who's greatest" would have been a repeated argument, whichever 12 disciples Jesus chose, and I am not convinced this impulse to control was expunged forthwith post-resurrection. Peter certainly was wary of it, and he gives it ample space in his second epistle.
In the seven letters to the Asian assemblies, we have Satan's throne, we have Jezebel(surely the classic case of usurpation of the kingship role), we have some claiming to be apostles who are not, we have the Nicolaitans. The entire Laodicean assembly is affected with this "We're the best" disease. Diotrophes crowds his way into the conversation in 3 John. This jockeying for position, to place others beneath the soles of your feet, is pervasive, even here.
I have been bugging my christian friends with these same questions. To one, who I put the question "What went wrong" regarding the Asian churches, explaining that to me this was a stand-in for the assemblies 'en masse', she merely replied, "They wanted to be first." I immediately thought of Jude verse 6, where the angels disregarded the place (yes, in a hierarchy) into which God had placed them, and they removed themselves to where they didn't belong, and were cast down headlong into the pit.
It seems the only safe thing is to take the last place. If God calls you up higher, fine. But that "calling up higher" is first done at the Judgment Seat, and then at the Wedding Feast.