The Tested Leadership Model – Can a Wrong Action by Leadership Be Justified if the End Result Furthers the Kingdom of God?

6

The Tested Leadership Model – Can a Wrong Action by Leadership Be Justified if the End Result Furthers the Kingdom of God?

Interesting question! Have you ever been involved in a church where this perspective was promoted? Let’s do our diligence and look at Scriptures that address this and find the characteristic of this model that exemplifies such. Please go to the book of Matthew.



Suggested Reading: Matthew 10:1-20

17-20 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues; And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles. But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

Jesus called His twelve disciples and told them that He was sending them to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. They were to preach that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, and cast out devils. Some would receive them, and some wouldn’t.

They were told to beware because some men would have them arrested and brought before governors and kings for His sake, but this would be an opportunity for them to speak about Him. Furthermore, He comforted them by saying that when they were confronted, don’t be upset or anxious about the manner of their defense because God would tell them through the Holy Spirit what to say at the appropriate time.

Let’s take a look at some verses from the book of Romans that develops this aspect.



Suggested Reading: Romans 2:1-31

12-14 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

The Apostle Paul was addressing unbelieving Jews, who were condemning the pagan Gentiles for their sinful lifestyle. He said whoever you are that passes judgment on other people’s actions cannot save you from accusations regarding your evil ways. In other words, God will punish wickedness whether committed out in the open by the Gentiles or according to the fundamental nature of one’s conduct and not as to how one’s behavior may appear to others, as exemplified by the religious Jews.

He said that the Jews believe they’re justified (made righteous) by merely knowing what the Mosaic Law says. However, this is only true if they fulfilled the Law, i.e., obeyed all of it, which was impossible. Therefore, none of them can be made righteous in the eyes of God by their works, so another way of righteousness must be sought. Along with his dissertation, the apostle asked specific questions to clear up some misconceptions that many of the unbelieving Jews were holding on to.

3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

Some contended that even if they chose not to believe (obey) the Law, they’d be saved because God chose them to be His people and of the covenant, He made with their fathers.

Genesis 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

And that if this weren’t the case, then God would be considered as being unjust. Paul responded that this everlasting covenant was conditional, i.e., it was based on whether they complied with it. With that said, what arose was another question that some Jews might pose in their defense that God is unjust.

5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)

Suppose their unrighteousness (the sin of unbelief or disobedience in respect to the Law) illustrated that God is faithful in keeping His promises to them. In that case, i.e., His covenant with them is everlasting, then He’d be considered to be just and holy. But as was argued earlier, this wasn’t the case. Yahweh’s covenant with them was conditional. It was based on whether they would obey the institution of the Mosaic Law set before them. And then, Paul made this statement concerning the relationship involving the means justifying the end.

8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.

What the unconverted Jews heard was that they’re under sin, just as the Gentiles. There’s no one righteous in God’s sight. Their response to this new way of righteousness, i.e., by grace through faith are you saved, was that it encouraged wickedness. In other words, if someone sins more and more after their response to the gospel, having received pardon, God can glorify in His grace. In this sense, they’d argue that sin benefits God or Let us do evil, that good may come.

The counterargument to this was why would those who love sin want to change? And if this is so, they surely wouldn’t want to respond to the gospel. Hopefully, the result of continual debilitating sin in an unbeliever’s life would bring about a desire for a new beginning, a fresh start. This can only occur if they repent and believe in the only one, Jesus Christ, who can provide the means for this inward change, i.e., the indwelling Spirit.

The question ascribed to the apostles was that evil promotes good or, as some might infer, sin justifies the kingdom of God, i.e., the end justifies the means. Is this true ? No. Sin promotes sin. Sin imposes immediate and future judgment. Sin doesn’t encourage grace. Grace offers an alternative to a person’s sinful state.



The Tested Leadership Model Characteristic

Sin isn’t justified as a means to promote the kingdom of God. It’s inevitable that we, as witnesses for Christ, will be rejected by others who, in some cases, may want to do us physical harm. When this happens, keep your eyes on God who’ll provide a Word in season through the Holy Spirit for us to speak that which testifies of Christ. Our central defense should be our utmost dependence on God. Therefore, the end of promoting the kingdom of God should never be justification for sinful means. (Matthew 10:1-20; Romans 2:1-31)



The Mandated Leadership Model Response - Rebuttal

Sinful behavior is justified as long as the intent of the actions is for the benefit of the kingdom of God. (Joshua 2:1-24)

Joshua 2:4 And the woman took the two men, and hid them, and said thus, There came men unto me, but I wist not whence they were:

Rahab saved the two Jewish spies who were sent to spy out the city of Jericho. They would have been apprehended and killed if she hadn’t lied to the king’s messengers when they asked her if she knew where they were. So yes, the end justifies the means.

Colossians 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Whatever is said or done in God’s name is acceptable.

Are you surprised at how differently a doctrinal topic can be taught based on the Scriptures that are used to support it? No wonder there’s such theological disagreements between the churches of Christ. My hope is that this study will help you better understand the leadership model you’re under and help you decide which one will bring you closer to God. Let’s continue to look at doctrinal topics from the tested leadership model and find out more of the essentials of it. But before we do, I’d like to tell you a personal story.

In my earlier years in the Lord, I was involved with a church with the characteristics of both the mandated and tested leadership models. There was no question that the leader was, at times, Spirit-filled and Spirit directed. The gospel was preached, the gifts of the Spirit were evident, and people’s lives were changed as they learned and appropriated the truths about who they were made anew in Christ. However, some teachings seemed to provoke factions, mistrust, favoritism, and ultimately the condoning of sins committed by those in leadership.

One of them was called Delegated Authority. This doctrine states that when a man of God is preaching or teaching under the anointing (the person of the Holy Spirit), then everything they’re saying is from God and, as such, is to be obeyed without question. This supported the conjecture that if someone in authority has committed an egregious sin, like King David, they’re considered above reproach, meaning they’re only answerable to God.

What began to happen to this leader and many others who adhered to this teaching was that the end, the acceptance of sinful behavior was justified by the means, i.e., supporting a biblical view instituted by God in the Old Testament that was believed to be still in effect. They claimed that this spiritual insight on church authority came from God, and any believer who attempted to address their misjudgments would be accused of judging God’s man and receive divine discipline.

I know of certain pastors who didn’t agree with the authoritative doctrine and discussed it with those that adhered to such. It’s possible that some of these Scriptures were presented in this dialogue, such as Matthew 18:15-17, 1 Corinthians 5, 2 Corinthians 2:1-11, 1 Timothy 5:19-20, 1 John 2:27, and Acts 17:10-12. It appears that those who promoted this doctrinal error changed their minds. However, behind the scenes, all they did was try to placate those who disagreed with them. This manipulative doctrine was still being advanced, yet in a more subtle fashion.

Those who opposed this doctrine came up with an alternate definition of the anointing. The substitute explanation stated that the words spoken are merely men’s words, but the Holy Spirit is especially present to help our [infirmity convey the best sense or meaning. Furthermore, it’s] impossible for God to be present in that which is untrue or unbiblically impossible that false and unscriptural teaching be anointed teaching at the same time.17

Realizing that this doctrine would remain in effect, a significant number of those in leadership who had been in the ministry in its early years chose to leave the ministry.

I probably heard teachings that should have raised alarms in my head, but sometimes it’s easier to dismiss or rationalize what we hear, especially if most people around us agree that the teachings are of God. It’s also easy for someone to respond in the light of these teachings something like this, who am I to think that what’s being said is unscriptural? I’m just a church member who isn’t in any leadership capacity. If I were to say something to someone in authority, they’d probably get offended and rebuke me. And surely, I didn’t want to be thought of as a rabble-rouser.

My response to what happened here was that it hurt me immensely. Don’t despair. Go to God for guidance no matter what the situation and see Him work all things together for your own good.

Are you ready to take a look at another trait of the tested leadership model? What’s in store for us? Let’s find out.



Endnotes

17“REPORT ON “THE BIBLE SPEAKS” (Gospel Ministries. 9/27/2004)

.



Amazon: https://amzn.to/2ITJ1wj

Website: http://bit.ly/1RQnYJ8