Yesterday, a member letter went out to members of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association (CGWA). I don’t see it posted online yet, though. I won’t reproduce the entire letter here, as it is best if it is officially posted.
One of the areas that caught my attention was the area of governance. Perhaps it is because it is a subject I have addressed here in the past, it is something I felt strongly enough about to send in my own input (but, not strongly enough to make a doctrine out of it), or perhaps a little of both.
The mission statement for the committee looking into this has changed slightly. Online, you can still see the old version:
The mission statement of the long-term governance committee is: "Our mission is to recommend a structure founded upon biblical principles by which this new organization will be administered and to propose to the elders this structure for their consideration."
~ http://cogwa.org/conference.html
The member letter makes the following statement:
As members of the Long-Term Governance Committee, we would like to give you periodic updates about our progress and what we are doing. A couple of weeks ago, we saw the need to amend our mission statement to allow us to present more than one proposal if the need arises. It now reads: “Our mission is to recommend one or more structures founded upon biblical principles by which this new organization will be administered and to propose our findings to the elders for their consideration.”
We have been working hard this past week to process the input received over the past several weeks from both members and elders. In addition to the breakout sessions in Louisville, we received more than 100 e-mails from the ministry and members. To this, we intend to add our own research and experience to create a list of criteria to help us in producing one or two proposals for the ministry of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association, to select from as our permanent form of governance.
As always, we seek your prayers for God’s guidance in this important task.
Submitted by Bruce Gore
I realize that some are going to jump up and down about how “un-Biblical” this all is, but the fact remains that the Bible doesn’t prescribe a form of human government. Rather, what it does do is point to God as the ultimate authority in all things, and His desire is for each of us to be able to govern ourselves (with His help) underneath Him. I recommend a study of the Book of Judges for anyone who doubts this.
What governance structure did the apostles set up for the body of their Messiah? I am searching desperately for their kind of structure and I cannot find it anywhere. I have read where the Messiah sent the disciples out to preach and warned them that wherever they went and were not received that they should shake the dust of their feet and move on to another place to preach the gospel. I have not seen where he told any of them to set up governance structure. Could you please respond if you so desire?
To answer the above question by Anonymous you would need to move beyond the Gospels into the book of Acts. Later Paul referred to Peter, John and James as pillars (Christ being the chief cornerstone of the structure). There was obviously some sort of Council (Acts 15). Paul mentions in his writings evangelists, bishops, elders, apostles, pastors and ministers (deacons were added early in the book of Acts) so these weren't things that the contemporary church just dreamed up.
Even these were loosely based on the Levitical Priesthood. No matter what the ultimate form of governance that takes place it will always have to be with consent of large majorities or you'll simply have another split.
~Peter
The lack of any governance model for us to follow in organizing the Church should tell us a couple of things. First, there was no real hierarchy in the first century Church. Also that God wants a weak, loosely organized group whose individual members and ministers hold themselves directly responsible to God rather than a group of men who just might, possibly, maybe, sort of screw everything up.
Well, I do not know if this comment will mean anything to those who have commented thus far, but I am going to give it anyway. I have just posted to my website (www.mtcogsm.com) both an audio and a written bible study, dealing with this very issue of authority in the COG, as it relates to some of the COG groups. I believe the Scriptures are very clear about the type of governance Christ established for the true COG!
So I challenge those who think there is not any–to read or listen to either one of those new post's! As you do–think about how close to what Moses did, is also what Christ did. but also focus on the top down authority clearly revealed.
John and I have had a bit of this discussion before and we seem to be on different pages–but I consider him a brother in Christ anyway.
We all seem to have our own ideas about certain Scriptures but I think the most important idea is what the Scriptures themselves reveal. I hope you can come to agree.
The editor
Jesus did set up a model of government in the Old Testament church and He is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb. 13:8, Mal 3:6). He didn't have to repeat every single Word of God in the New Testament for it to be recognized by the New Testament church (Matt 4:4, Luke 4:4).
There are four principles of Bible study upon which proper church government can be established:
1. The first instance a subject is addressed in the Bible, something fundamental is usually revealed. Hence, Exodus 18:19-26.
2. Get all the verses (from both the Old and New Testaments) on a subject before drawing conclusions.
3. Use the plain clear scriptures to explain the difficult ones.
4. God allows a whole lot more than what He approves, this includes what is happening now in His church and the records of Scripture.
There is no command or reference to keeping the Feast of Trumpets in the New Testament, yet, by inference, we can establish is should be kept. The same can be done for proper church government structure.
Please let me know if there are holes in these premises. I strive to be at one with my Father and Savior according to their word.
@Jake: Exodus 18 is the pattern for the civil government. If we are going to turn to the OT, then Aaron and the Levites should be the pattern for a church, wouldn't you think?
Just as we don't stone people today for committing adultery, because that would be the role for the civil government, neither should we try to confuse the pattern for a civil government with the organization for religious duties.
The main question that is left is whether or not the Levitical pattern should still exist or not, seeing as both the priesthood and its mission has changed. And, if the answer is "No", then why isn't a clearer pattern in the NT presented (who outranks who, in other words)?
Actually, I meant *if the answer is "Yes"*
Well, John—if the answer is *(YES)*, then why isn't a clearer pattern in the NT presented (who outranks who, in other words)?—-
For some of us there is–as the material i suggested above seems to reveal—it is just a matter of accepting it as the truth instead of trying to reason around it by tying in other Scriptural points (that cannot contradict-BTW) to water down the effect and have a man made system that is in all honesty, NOT found in Scripture, instituted by Christ.
The editor for mtCOGsm
John,your comment–@Jake: Exodus 18 is the pattern for the civil government. If we are going to turn to the OT,—How can you figure that V.20-21 would not have any application as a type for the COG? Was Israel not told to be a Holy nation? Exod 19:6 'And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel."(NKJ) I too believe the OT governance under Moses was copied for the NT COG.
Moses had the twelve tribal elders and seventy others were given some of the spirit that was given to Moses, etc. Christ chose twelve and appointed them apostles and then later chose seventy and sent them out with authority.
After Pentecost, ordinations began by the laying on of hands–which is appointment by those already in an appointed office. there does not appear (to me) to have been any type of voting sytems used. I am inclined to agree with editor on this and what he reveals about Paul and the obvious authority structure put in place.
Anony Jon
Anony Jon wrote: "How can you figure that V.20-21 would not have any application as a type for the COG?"
I wouldn't say it wouldn't have "any application", seeing as they were to pick out "people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness". I would think that should apply to all rulers.
However, notice they were to become "judges" in v22, the verse after the ones you pointed to.
Sorry, but that is the civil government. Throughout the OT, we see a separation of powers. In fact, whenever King Saul and King Uzziah crossed the line, bad things happened to them.
"'And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'"
And yet, kings were kings and priests were priests. Moreover, most people were neither. What we see is that Israel was supposed to minister to the entire world by being that shining example of how God blesses His people. For us, it goes further because we who are now called will be rulers in the Kingdom.
If you want to base church government upon how the Levitical system was set up, that's one thing. However, to confuse the civil and religious hierarchies does your argument no good … again, unless you think we should start carrying out civil penalties like stoning people.
John, "'And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'"—–I respect what you think you know on this –but it is my belief that you are wrong. We are in training now in the COG to be a KINGDOM OF PRIESTS–Rev.5:10 (the way it should be translated) that is eactly what Exo.19:6 says that Israel were to be like–not just the levites—and this is not an "arguement" –as I thought i was only commenting. however, I am now suggesting that you really need to study this a lot more–You seem to be commenting from a UCG mentality–I am beginnning to see.
Anony Jon
"After Pentecost, ordinations began by the laying on of hands–which is appointment by those already in an appointed office."
Strictly speaking after Pentecost, "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added to them about three thousand souls. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." (Ac 2:41-42)
What are the scriptures that show ordinations began after Pentacost with the laying on of hands?
@Anony Jon: Well, I hope you are not suggesting I haven't studied it. I'll assume you realize the number of articles I've written about church governance. I'm going to push back and repeat my suggestion that a critical reading of the Book of Judges would be worth something.
Hi John,
I would have to say "nay" to Aaron and the Levites being more apt pattern for the New Testament church.
The New Testament ministry are not "priests" according to the order of Melchizedek. They servants of our High Priest, but not "priests" according to His order. Correct me if I am wrong about that. The Levitical Priesthood and High Priest were to "offer both gifts and sacrifices for sin" (Heb 5:1). The next few chapters in Hebrews goes on to show that Jesus now fulfills their duties, not the New Testament minisry.
The New Testament church is the "Israel of God" (Gal 6:16) – a spiritual people. The Old Testament church was the nation of Israel – a physical people. When the rulers of Israel followed the Exodus 18 pattern, they were blessed (Moses, David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat). The principles of Exodus 18 governmental structure are good, no doubt, for a "civil" government, but also is applicable for the New Testament minitsry and church.
Even if Aaron and the Levites were the "correct" model for the New Testament ministry, were they not a hierarchial structure as well? My understanding of the Levitical priesthood most likely needs to be improved, no doubt.
Jake wrote: "When the rulers of Israel followed the Exodus 18 pattern, they were blessed (Moses, David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat)."
That ignores the fact that most of the time, it didn't work, though. Both Judah and Israel had kings right up until the time they went into exile. The form of government had absolutely nothing to do with it. When their rulers obeyed God, they were blessed. Most of the time, they rebelled and fell into idolatry. That's with the so-called "Exodus 18" type of government you are referring to!
"Even if Aaron and the Levites were the 'correct' model for the New Testament ministry, were they not a hierarchial structure as well? My understanding of the Levitical priesthood most likely needs to be improved, no doubt."
Frankly, I'm not saying it is the correct model, but at least it is the model for the religious community. Exodus 18 adds nothing to the discussion about how to organize the church because Exodus 18 sets up the civil system of judges. Therefore, if someone wants to argue in favor of the church having a hierarchical government, they need to look at what was established for the religious order of the past, not the civil.
John, where do you find any seperation of "Church & Civil government"? were they (Israel) not governed by the same Law of God? I hope you are not suggesting that the "Civil system of judges" are the only ones who administered the Law of God and everyone in Israel under the "Civil" authorities could brake the Law with impunity!
The apostle Paul made it clear that those in the COG are also to judge matters in the Church, and we are to judge angels in the future.
Do you think there is going to be a "Religous" Law and a seperate "Civil" in the kingdom and on earth for humans?
You seem to be suggesting that the preisthood was governed differently than the nation of Israel–so I am just asking you where you have read that in scripture?
Anony Jon
Anony Jon wrote: "John, where do you find any seperation of 'Church & Civil government'?"
Are you being serious? I have given you examples of these above! Dt 18 sets up a system of judges. Later, the kings are appointed as heads of the civil governments (plural after the kingdom split into 2).
Judges could not offer sacrifices. Kings could not either (again, I've already stated this). The kings and judges could make laws and enforce them.
The Levites could not engage in war. Even within this tribe, the average Levite had no power or authority at all. Only the priests were allowed to make sacrifices. Only the high priest could consult the urim and thummin.
"were they (Israel) not governed by the same Law of God?"
Yes, why is that important? Look around you. Are today's judges, policemen and congressmen under the same laws? Yet, judges don't normally arrest people, policemen don't normally introduce legislation into congress, nor do congressmen normally sentence someone to jail.
"I hope you are not suggesting that the 'Civil system of judges' are the only ones who administered the Law of God and everyone in Israel under the 'Civil' authorities could brake the Law with impunity!"
Where do I suggest anyone under the government system of Israel could break the law with impunity if everyone was doing their job?
"The apostle Paul made it clear that those in the COG are also to judge matters in the Church".
OK, so when is the last time the church sentenced an adulterer to death? Do you have your heap of stones warmed up? Why won't you answer this, even though I've brought it up every time? Because, if the church is "God's government on earth", then we better be stoning adulterers or we are guilty of sin ourselves.
John,
"OK, so when is the last time the church sentenced an adulterer to death?"
The closest case in similiarity within the Church to that question is found in 1 Cor 5:4-5, "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
However that doesn't fully address the question as to the form of government. It does show there is authority within the Church, it's undeniably there. It shows that Paul, just like Peter or for that matter the rest of the apostles had authority within the Church to make certain decisions, but not all decisions.
The Jerusalem council had to make such a decision because certain men claimed, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." (Ac 15:1)
Near 2000 years have passed and numerous people within the CoG are being confronted with a similiar challenge, "Unless one man rules it cannot be the Church of God."
John–Anony Jon wrote: "John, where do you find any seperation of 'Church & Civil government'?"
"Are you being serious? I have given you examples of these above! Dt 18 sets up a system of judges."
Well yes, I am being serious–but perhaps not with perfect understanding–the same as you.
So let me just ask you this–If Duet.18 seems to you to set up a system of Judges that only deal with civlil matters–then how do you explain Duet.16 where it deals with the festivals of God and judges being appointed using Just or "rightous judgement" if only the preists deal with matters pertaining to the government of God?
Then you come to Duet.19:17– where you will find the preist and the judges working together and using the same system of governing?
Duet.21:2 shows "elders and judges" working together to render a judgement.
Joshua, in 23:2 and as well as later, calls ALL ISRAEL, which if I am not mistaken would include the Levitical priests, and instructs them all. Is he not considered to be governing?
what about Ruth1:1 where it says the Judges ruled, was there no preisthood–or did the judges and the presithood work together, as seen back in Duet.
I am not argueing with you on this–I am simply asking you to explain how you see these verses if there was this great seperation between God's government over civil and religous matters.
There are many other passages that seem to indicate that there was no seperation when it comes to the government of God being applied, nor do I see any indication it would be that way in the kingdom to come.
As far as casting stones–unless God directs that, as He did in OT–Christ said "He who has NO SIN, cast the first stone" -He was the only sinless one there and He did not stone her–but judged her—which is what the COG is supposed to do in such matters. What good would judgements be if there was no authority to Govern those judgements—to see them carried out? (Matt.18:15–) What about John and Dietrophes? If they were both just elders, how did John have any authority to do anything?
Anony Jon
Hi John,
"That ignores the fact that most of the time, it didn't work, though. Both Judah and Israel had kings right up until the time they went into exile. The form of government had absolutely nothing to do with it. When their rulers obeyed God, they were blessed. Most of the time, they rebelled and fell into idolatry. That's with the so-called 'Exodus 18' type of government you are referring to!"
I partially agree and disagree with what you say here in regards to my statement that, "When the rulers of Israel followed the Exodus 18 pattern, they were blessed (Moses, David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat)."
You're right that it was not the governmental structure that leads to their obedience and blessings. However, these few leaders who employed this structure of government came to follow it by seeking God. Moses was lead to it an observation of his father-in-law that was endorsed by God (Ex 18:23) and, subsequently, the kings who did employ it by reading about it in Exodus.
The leaders of Israel throughout it's history who did not obey God and fell into idolatry eventually and progressively moved away from the proper principles of governemnt (which involves many elements including God's law and this structure).
There is little to no scriptural evidence that the Exodus 18 form of government was employed other than a few times in the Old Testament except where it is described such as in the cases cited above. This is where the fourth principle I mentioned in an earlier post applies.
So rather than your statement that most of the time, it didn't work; the actual case is that it was actually seldom used. So I disagree with you on that point.
However, you're right in that using the "Exodus 18" pattern does not ensure blessing nor obedience to God's law. Forgive me if I seemed to imply that. I totally agree with you on that – it's use does not ensure obedience and blessings.
You state:
"Exodus 18 adds nothing to the discussion about how to organize the church because Exodus 18 sets up the civil system of judges. Therefore, if someone wants to argue in favor of the church having a hierarchical government, they need to look at what was established for the religious order of the past, not the civil."
I cannot agree with this conclusion. The children of Israel was the Old Testament church, not merely the priests and Levites! These judges that were appointed are more like the New Testament ministry than any Levitical system. Both were/are appointed based on their character, knowledge and leadership abilities. God was with these men in the judgement (2 Chronicles 19:5-7). To dismiss the governmental pattern of Exodus 18 as "civil", and, therefore, not legitimate for the New Testament church and ministry is, at best, weak and just doesn't hold water. I believe this is what philosphy calls a "straw man" argument.
I have meant no disrespect in anything I have stated so please don't take it that way. Thanks for your responses and patience with me.
@Anony Jon: The short answer is that working together doesn't mean they don't have different functions. Policemen and firefighters often work together, but the police are still the police and the firefighters are still firefighters.
I don't understand your point about Joshua, since he was governing at the time. He would have been the highest judge at the time, even as many that came after were. However, even he would not have had the right to perform sacrifices or even tell the priests how to do so.
By the time of Christ, the civil government had been replaced by Roman rule. The death penalty was not to be given except by Roman authority, which is why Christ had to go before Pilate. If Jesus had authorized stoning the woman, He would have sinned by going against the civil authority of His day.
Furthermore, even if it were the days of the Judges, Christ could not have stoned the woman because that would have been against God's Law without witnesses. The "witnesses" in this case were just as guilty as the woman (where is the man?)! There may have been even more going on there, as Jesus was writing on the ground, which may have had overtones of the ceremony for the jealous husband. If that is true, then they would have realized that their accusations could likely reveal their own sins if pursued.
If the religious authorities in Jesus' day did not have the authority to put someone to death, and since Jesus did not condemn them for this, then we can easily look to Ro 13 to find the answer. The civil government is also ordained by God.
"What about John and Dietrophes?"
I really don't understand where you are coming from. Does religious authority mean nothing? Why do you seem to believe all the power is on the civil side?
@Jake: From what I read, it was actually used most of the time. You had the kingly line and the priestly line, at least in Judah.
"Both were/are appointed based on their character, knowledge and leadership abilities."
This, to me, is the main point. Form of government will never overcome a lack of integrity and ability. Even the best government will collapse if the wicked are in charge. However, men of character and ability can and often do overcome great obstacles and fix what is broken.