Beresford Job's Biblical Church - 11

Ch. 12 is entitled, "To Submit or Not to Submit". Here, Job tackles the verses often cited to support the idea that laymen must submit to clergymen, in Protestant churches, typically the Head Pastor.

He first points out that if you start reading through the epistles in the New Testament, you get all the way through Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Ephesians "without so much as a single word being either written to, or concerning, church leaders." (143) Evidently, they were addressed to whole assemblies, or groups of assemblies in a town.

But 1 Thessalonians 5 says, "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." (144) Ain't that hierarchical leadership?

No. Job argues that the culprit here, and also in Romans 12:8 and 1 Tim 5:17 is the word proistemi. This is normally translated "stand before", "stand over", or "have charge over". Vine's Expository Dictionary lists these meanings: "'to stand before', hence to lead, to attend to (indicating care and diligence)." (144) Frustratingly, without citing the sources, Job cites F.F. Bruce and "some of the newer Bible translations" as endorsing the translation "care for you". (144)

Job is certainly right that if this is what was meant, then those texts take on a different color - they are exhorting people not to bow to hierarchical authority, but rather to respect their spiritual parents, as it were, who care for them.

But I don't think enough has been said here. What are these newer translations? NIV, NLT, HCSB, CEV, translate as above, or something like "your leaders". Note: leading terms are ambiguous - they can have to do with hierarchical leaders, or with those who provide initiative and guidance without have any special office or rights. A "leader" could be a king or pope (hierarchical) or the bravest guy in the platoon. (non-hierarchical) The coach, or the pro-Bowl middle linebacker.

The excellent Good News Bible has "[those] who guide". Score one for Job's preferred rendition. The Message (not a translation, but a paraphrase) has "honor those leaders who work so hard for you, who have been given the responsibility of urging and guiding you along in your obedience." (1 Thess 5:12) But is that right?

Perhaps Job was referring to the TNIV, which has

Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. (1 Thess 5:12)

Perhaps this explains why there was no reference - this 2002 revision of the popular NIV Bible has been perceived as wrongheadedly politically correct because of its rigorously gender-neutral translations. (e.g. "and sisters" above instead of "brothers" for adelphoi) They actually have a website constructed to explain various departures from the NIV. In any case, the TNIV translates "lead" for the same word in Romans 12:8.

The IVP Bible Background Commentary says that proistemi

...was especially applied in the Greco-Roman world to patrons, sponsors of clients and religious associations. If that sense is in view here, those would be the Christians who opened their homes for the churches to meet in them and sponsored them, providing what financial and political help they could... (595)

I suspect that is a dead-end, though. Why would those be singled out as ones who "labor among you"?

All in all, it seems to me that it is best to translate this verb as "lead" - leave the ambiguity in the translation which is in the original. It is up to the reader to discern that Christ-like, "foot-washing", servant-leadership is in view. I think Job is right about the meaning of these passages; I just don't think it makes the case to cite (without citing) an authority or two as to the proper translation. It's really interpretation that matters, in the context of the teaching of Jesus and it's fit with that of the apostles.

Next time: more Greek-word-fu.

Beresford Job's Biblical Church - 10

Chapter 11 is complicated, and if you're following this series, this is a good reason to buy the book, and carefully check it against the Bible to see if it is accurate. Here, I'll summarize the case.

As we saw last time, New Testament assemblies/churches meet in homes. This keeps the numbers down, and so the kinds or levels of leadership suited to large organizations are simply irrelevant. There will be no CEO. (125)

Job examines Acts 1 and Acts 6 - in both, the fledgling Christian community in Jerusalem had some tough decisions to make. In both, Peter takes the lead. But how? Not by himself making the call. Rather, he leads by framing the issue and giving an argument about the best way forward. In short, he didn't order, but rather persuaded the assembly. The consensus of the whole group was the key - Peter played an active, stimulating, and guiding role in the formation of it. (125-8)

In another episode, Acts 15, the leaders (apostles & elders) not only convene the meeting, but they, on behalf of and in front of the assembly, argue through a matter. The result? Consensus. Quoting Acts 15:22, "Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided..." (130, original emphasis) Job comments,

What a contrast this is to clergy-led doctrinal convocations behind closed doors at denominational headquarters; or even just an individual Minister of an individual church unilaterally deciding how things ought to be! (131)

Some of the toughest decisions a church must make have to do with disciplining members by kicking them out (hopefully temporarily). Jesus in Matthew 18 seems to imply that this is the work of the whole assembly, and this is confirmed by Paul's handling of sexual immorality in the Corinth assembly, 1 Cor 5. (131-4)

In sum, churches should have non-hierarchical leaders - their elders standing not as a special class, but just brothers along with the rest, with no positional perks or powers. They should lead by moral authority, having earned the right to influence people's free choices, so that they follow Jesus together. (140-1)

There is a place in the world for hierarchical leadership - Job cites government and family, in which the mayor or husband does by virtue of his position stand "above" those under him. But "there is no hierarchy in a biblical church because one already exists: Jesus - and everyone else!" (136) Jesus should function as head not only of the universal church, but on individual assemblies, and he doesn't need middle management. (136)

At the end of the chapter he makes a very interesting argument. God has ordained hierarchical leadership in the family - husband over wife and kids, and parents over children - see Ephesians 5 and Col 3. (136-8) (I would hasten to add that this is Christ-like, non-domineering leadership.) Suppose that the Rev. Lovejoy, picture above, is a legit hierarchical leader over a family - which means that they should submit to him. Job points out that this is not consistent with the hierarchies just mentioned. Suppose Lovejoy wants the wife to teach Sunday-school and the husband doesn't want her to. To whom should she submit, pastor or husband? Again, suppose Lovejoy wants the kids to give all their allowance to cause X, and mom and dad disagree. What should the kids do? Job says, "we are presented in a nonsensical and absurd impasse" (139) - so long as we take the idea of hierarchical clerical leadership seriously. But, we should not. Sorry, Lovejoy!

Next time: What about NT exhortations to obey our leaders?

Beresford Job's Biblical Church - 9

In chapter 10, Job says that if he's going to get on a plane, he insists that certain things be in place: wings, pilot, engine, and so on.

Similarly, there is an "irreducible minimum" of structural elements that should be in place in a biblical church - not a real church (Job grants that traditional, institutional churches are real churches) but rather one which is faithful to the apostolic tradition as delivered in the Bible. (119-20) What are these structural elements?

1. Governance by the consensus of all in the group, with (non-hierarchical) leadership provided by men the group recognizes and respects as spiritually mature (elders).
2. Meeting in a home or homes.
3. Meeting on Sunday, with "a time of corporate worship where the format was that all were free to participate as the Holy Spirit led. No one person convened the gathering from the front." (121)
4. And "the heart of their [Sunday] gathering was the Lord's Supper observed as an actual meal which all present shared". (121)

Why hold out these structural elements? Is it because Job is a legalist, eager to point the bony finger of condemnation at those who do things differently? No. Rather, it is because "the design of a thing" - whether on airplane or an assembly - "corresponds directly to its function". (122) A local assembly is supposed to function as "a little, local, extended family of God's people." (122) And the above structure, in Job's view, best facilitates that sort of corporate life.

In a humorous thought experiment, Job asks us to imagine a "family gathering" in which the family assembles in a rented hall, and then after some chit-chat, the dad or someone gets up and offers an extended speech. They then share a cup of cofee in the foyer and chat some more, and skatter back to their respective homes for a meal. Some family gathering! It is indeed a family, but it is disfunctional. (123-4)

With this chapter, Job begins part 2 of his book, wherein he covers the actual functioning of biblical churches in some detail. I think he actually qualifies points 1 & 3 above - stay tuned. The above is just the bones - he's going to put some meat on it, until you can discern an actual animal.

Beresford Job's Biblical Church - 8

In chapter 8, Job tackles some common objections. Most of these are summarized below.

Objection: God blesses these so-called unbiblical churches. (105)

Reply: "Yes of course he does! [I'm]... grateful to him that he does." (105) God is so gracious, he blesses even the half-obedient.

Objection: "But the Holy Spirit leads believers to do these practices and to form together into these types of churches." (107)

Reply: Not if I'm right about what the Bible says. God wouldn't act contrary to his expressed will. (107-8)

Objection: "We must renew the churches from the inside and remain in them and be the influence for change." (109)

Reply: This is logically impossible. A New Testament style assembly and a traditional, institutional church have several contrary properties (e.g. no hierarchical leadership vs. hierarchical leadership). It is nonsense to suppose that you could reform the latter into the former, as no group of people could be both. (109-11) Really, "This [objection] is usually just a cover for maintaining the status quo and leading a quiet life." (109)

Objection: "Going on about all this just upsets people. You're just causing trouble and being divisive and unloving!" (110)

Reply: Sorry, but how could it be somehow wrong to test Christian practices by the Scriptures? I'm not going to go with the normal ways if I think I'm thereby disobeying God. Just as the ancient Jews preferred the "oral law" to God's actual law, so present day Christians prefer common Christian habits to the pattern set out by Jesus' apostles. But that makes no sense. (110-1)

In short, and this is the point of the brief 9th chapter, the work of the Reformation isn't yet done. Autonomy from Rome, salvation through grace, believers baptism, the gifts of the Spirit - all these have been recovered by a succession of reforming, world-wide movements. But biblical church practice hasn't been recovered. After searching the scriptures, Job is convinced that Jesus is saying, "Give Me back My church!" (114)

...I want to live according to what I read in scripture... I need to know that I am in conformity to his revealed Word, for only then can I know that I am in conformity to him. Only then, and this is what matters to me more than anything else, can I know that I am safe from doing my will, and free to be doing his. (115)

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the heart of an actual disciple of Jesus, and a servant of God is Jesus' mold. Not my will, but yours.

Beresford Job's Biblical Church - 7

As we've seen, Job has argued that the church practices which derive ultimately from the early "fathers" are not only "un-biblical, they are actually anti-biblical." (95) Their foundational error was imposing top-down, government style leadership, "with the Bishop presiding as the big chief at the top of the pecking order." (95) Churches, which had heretofore been independent organisms, now became assimilated to "a multi-national organization". (95) This led to havoc with various doctrines, including teaching about baptism, and the very practice of weekly meetings was totally transformed. (96)

Job now anticipates a certain popular but lame defense against all this: but we're Protestant - we base our teachings and practices on the Bible.

He replies: although Catholics may be "more deeply immersed" in the anti-biblical practices he's been discussing, Protestants are in just a little less deeply. (96-8) Despite our scripture-only rhetoric, and our smug self-image as the biblically-based wing of Christianity, in light of the comparison of biblical church practices and ours, "it becomes unnervingly clear just how inconsistent we have acually been." (101) Job believes in the Reformation, but things its work of returning Christians to the Bible needs to be pushed forward, in the arena of church practice. (101)

If you find that you're not doing what the Master wants, it is pointless to console youself by reflecting that other of his servants are doing things he likes a teeny bit less than the things you're doing! And if you accept the premise that the New Testament best reveals God's will, then to obey God is to obey it. And it simply can't be obeyed through a normal, institutional-church-going lifestyle - the practices are logically incompatible. (99)

Job recaps a list of anti-biblical practices which most Christians take for granted as normal.

• priesthood, or any clergy/laity divide - or any hierarchical, position-based leadership structure
• set liturgy, to be follow in meetings
• meetings as services, led from the front
• infant baptism
• (lengthy) pre-baptismal instruction
• "denominationalism" - or devotion to particular leaders or meeting-styles
• bread and wine communion services
• formal church membership
• special religious buildings (100)

At this point, one may be concerned that Job is a mean, finger-pointing legalist, who enjoys condemning his brethren. To the contrary, I have never observed anything remotely resembling this in him. And to make clear that he's not pointy that bony finger of condemnation, he says,

I do not say that the wrong practices themselves are necessarily sinful, or that to observe them out of genuine ignorance is either, but once we do become aware of the truth then we are duty bound to act. (102)

Not acting, once the knowledge is in place, is, sad to say, hypocrisy; it is preferring human traditions to the will of God, whilst publicly claiming to be devoted to the will of God. And this is like the hypocrisy Jesus condemned in his fellow Jews, who overrode the clear commands of Moses for the sake of their own traditions. (102) To point this out is not mean or self-righteous; when one employee suddenly gets clear on what precisely the Boss wants, he naturally tells his fellow employees, and if they won't listen, he'll obey anyway.

Next time: Objections and Replies.