Ruling or Leading?
Back in March, I began studying “Leadership, Obedience, and Authority” in the context of the church. I’ve posted a few blogs as I’ve continued this study. This is another post in this extended series.
In the last post of this series, called “Exercising Authority…“, I examined several Greek terms that mean “exercise authority”, or “rule over”, or “be the master of” – in other words, terms that mean “to tell someone else what to do”. These terms are not used in a positive sense in the New Testament. This was my conclusion in that post:
So far, in these passages, there is no indication that one person should exercise authority over another person in a spiritual sense. In fact, it seems like just the opposite is indicated. But, if the apostles were not to exercise authority, and Paul did not exercise authority, and Peter told elders not to exercise authority, then I’m not sure where the command for leaders to exercise authority over other people is coming from. However, I’m still searching Scripture. It is possible that I’ve missed something, or that there are other passages of Scripture where leaders are instructed to exercise authority.
In this post, I want to examine two more Greek verbs that are occasionally translated “rule” in various translations. The verbs are:
Ï€Ïοίστημι (proistÄ“mi) – (translated “rule/lead” in 1 Tim 5:17; Rom 12:8) According to the standard Greek lexicon (BDAG) this verb can mean 1) to exercise a position of leadership, rule, direct, be at the head of, or 2) to have an interest in, show concern for, care for, give aid.
ηγέομαι (hÄ“geomai) – (translated “ruler/leader” in Luke 22:26; Heb 13:7, 17, 24) Again, according to BDAG, this verb can mean 1) to be in a supervisory capacity, lead, guide, or 2) to engage in an intellectual process, think, consider, regard.
Most importantly, in some cases, ηγέομαι (hÄ“geomai) is used in a sense to mean the opposite of a servant: “But not so with you. Rather, let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves” (Luke 22:26 ESV). From the context of Luke 22:26, it is clear that Jesus is telling his followers to be “leaders” who act as “servants”. Thus, the extreme range of ηγέομαι (hÄ“geomai) that means the opposite of “servant” cannot be in view here. Would Paul or the author of Hebrews or another believer promote a type of leadership that was condemned by Jesus?
Thus, in English, the word “rule” carries the connotation of making a decision for someone else, exercising authority over someone else, displaying dominance through the exercise of power. Meanwhile, the word “lead” can have similar connotations, but it can also carry a different meaning: “travel in front of”, “go in advance of others”, “guide”.
So, while both “rule” and “lead” are possible glosses for the two Greek verbs, and since the idea of “ruling” or “exercising authority” is always cast in a negative in the context of the relationship between one believer and another believer, it would seem that “lead” in the since of “walking ahead of” or “guiding” would be a better English translation. This would also explain Peter’s insistence that elders “shepherd” by being “examples to the flock” (1 Peter 5:2-3).
There are a few other passages that can help us understand how the New Testament authors used this verbs in the context of the church. For example, in 1 Timothy 3:5, the Greek verb Ï€Ïοίστημι (proistÄ“mi) is paralleled with another verb, επιμελέομαι (epimeleomai):
“For if someone does not know how to manage (Ï€Ïοίστημι) his own household, how will he care for (επιμελέομαι) God’s church?” (ESV) In this verse, Paul uses the verb Ï€Ïοίστημι (proistÄ“mi) to describe someone’s relationship to their family, while he uses the verb επιμελέομαι (epimeleomai) to describe that person’s relationship to the church. While Ï€Ïοίστημι (proistÄ“mi) can carry a range of meanings from “rule” to “lead” (as has already been described), the verb επιμελέομαι (epimeleomai) does not have the same range of meanings. In this case, it seems that Ï€Ïοίστημι (proistÄ“mi) is used with the secondary meaning of “care for” not “rule”.
Thus, when the New Testament is looked at as a whole, and when relationships between believers are examined, it seems that believers are never instructed to “rule” one another, but that one believer may be called on to “lead” another believer or a group of believers. The concept of a Christian “ruler” who makes decisions for other believers, or who directs the lives of other believers, or who tells other believers what to do is not found in the pages of the New Testament. Instead, the New Testament authors call mature believers to lead by being examples to and serving other believers. Followers of Jesus Christ have only one ruler. He is the living, breathing, ready, able, wise, knowing, powerful, present, and authoritative chief shepherd. And, no one can serve two masters.
Creating Church Organization…
Several months ago, in a post called “The Church or the Organization?“, I wrote about an example from a book in which I believe the organization was given precedence over the church (“church” = “people”). This post was in the context of the role of the pastor. I suggested that, according to Scripture, the pastor should care for people, not tend an organization. In my final paragraph, I said:
Our desire should be to grow the people (edify the body), not to grow the organization – and this includes those “stubborn” people that God has placed in our path. In fact, our purpose should be the growth of the whole body, not just 2/3 of the body. When people begin to be sacrificed in order to further the “organizational mission”, then the organization has the wrong mission. And, when pastors/elders/bishops begin focusing on the organization instead of the people, then they are not acting as the pastors/elders/bishops that Scripture describes.
Since I wrote that, I feel even more strongly that every believer should focus on people and not organizations and structures, especially those believers within the body of Christ who serve as examples for others (i.e. pastors/elders/bishops and other leaders). Unfortunately, it is not only “established churches” that fall prey to focusing on the organization instead of focusing on people.
I recently ran across a “church planting” web site that include some interesting information concerning a “model” church plant. Three families were planning to move from one major metropolitan area to another major metropolitan area in order to start a church. The men of the family already had their titles. The group already had a vision statement and a business plan. They had completed their demographics studies and a colorful brochure. In fact, they only needed one thing: money.
You see, that small group was ready to move to another city to start a church, as long as they could come up with enough money to fund their efforts. And how much money were they looking for? (I promise, I am not making this up…) They wanted over $700,000 for two years, with almost $500,000 of that going toward salaries.
These believers were not evangelizing in the new city… yet. They were not discipling anyone in the target city… yet. They had not baptized one person in this new location… yet. But, they had big plans with a big budget.
I know what you’re thinking… this is an extreme case. And, you’re right. It is wrong of them to build an organization before there is even a church to organize. Most would probably agree with me on this (although, I’m sure some would disagree, since this was offered as an example of how to start churches). But, are we any better when we push our smaller budgets and programs and buildings and titles, without evangelizing and making disciples? Are we any better when we do all we can to attract people to our service (and our offering) instead of sending more people out into the world where people are hurting and lost and needy?
I think I am going to continue to focus on people, and I think I am going to continue to point others toward building up people. God loves people. And, we demonstrate our love for God the same way he demonstrated his love for us: by giving ourselves to people, not by growing (or starting) our organizations.
Jesus is the Great Shepherd (Senior Pastor)
I was tagged by Bryan at “Charis Shalom” to post five things I dig about Jesus. I enjoyed thinking through my five things so much that I decided to blog about each one. The second thing that I “dig” about Jesus is that he is the Great Shepherd – or, as I like to translate it, the Senior Pastor.
Jesus called himself the “good shepherd” (John 10:11, 14). The author of Hebrews called Jesus the “great shepherd of the sheep” (Heb 13:20). Peter called Jesus the “shepherd and overseer (pastor and bishop) of your souls” (1 Pet 2:25) and “the chief shepherd (senior pastor)”. (1 Pet 5:4) What does it mean for Jesus to be our shepherd?
In John 10:11-13, the good shepherd is the one who lays down his life for his flock. While this points to Jesus’ death, it points to much, much more. Notice that in the picture of the “hireling”, the hireling runs away when the wolf attacks the sheep. But, the good shepherd does not run away. Instead, he gives his life in order to protect the sheep. This is the picture of Jesus’ death that we need to keep in mind. Jesus, the good shepherd, died protecting his sheep – that’s us. There was real danger in our lives, but the good shepherd died protecting us and destroying the threat.
In Hebrews 13:20, the great shepherd is the one who died but was raised from the dead in completion of his work on earth. This is then tied back to our perfection. (Heb 13:21) Because God was able to raise our great shepherd from the dead thus perfecting his work on earth, God is also able to perfect us in good works. The resurrection is not simply an historic event (though it is an historic event). The resurrection is a present reality in the lives of believers. The resurrected great shepherd leads us toward perfection through his Spirit.
In 1 Peter 2:25, the shepherd and overseer of our souls is the one who gathered us to himself. He sought out each lost sheep until he was able to carry that sheep back into his fold. He continues to care for those sheep teaching them how they might “die to sin and live to righteousness”. (1 Pet 2:24) This is a shepherd and overseer who is active and powerful and able and personal and working and caring and energetic and listening and forceful and loving. We all strayed from God, but our shepherd and overseer has returned us to our fold and keeps us there in his care.
In 1 Peter 5:4, the chief shepherd (senior pastor) is the one who is physically returning to his sheep. Currently, he shepherds us through his Spirit; then he will shepherd us in our physical resurrection reality. He is also the model for other believers, teaching us how to live a life surrendered to the will of God as an example to others. His return is our hope in times of discouragement and our joy in times of trial.
This is our Great Shepherd! He is the one shepherd over his one flock (John 10:16; cf. Ecc 12:11; Ezek 34:23; 37:24; ) – the head of the church. He is real, living, present, and able to lead his sheep.
Jesus is the Great High Priest
I was tagged by Bryan at “Charis Shalom” to post five things I dig about Jesus. Besides the fact that I have never used the word “dig” in this context, I enjoyed thinking through this meme (it was groovy). In fact, I’ve decided to blog about each of my five things. The first thing that I dig is that Jesus is the Great High Priest.
I’ve grown to love the book of Hebrews. I love the way the author of Hebrews shows that the way of Jesus is far superior to the way of the law and ritual. In fact, Hebrews argues that Jesus is not only superior, but that the “former things” were mere shadows of the real things, which were initiated by Jesus himself.
One of the comparisons made by the author of Hebrews is between Jesus as High Priest and the priestly system that began with Aaron. The priest was responsible for offering bulls or goats as sacrifices, which were actually ineffective at removing sins. (Heb 9:13; 10:4) The priest was appointed to act as a mediator between God and man, but he had to offer sacrifices for himself and for his sins first, then he could enter the holy place in the tabernacle or temple. (Heb 5:1-3; 9:1-4) These ritualistic sacrifices had to be carried out continuously. (Heb 7:27) But, if these rituals were ineffective, then why did God command that they be carried out? Because they were a shadow (an imitation) of what was to come through Jesus Christ! (Heb 8:5; 10:1)
Jesus Christ, our Great High Priest, has now come. He has offered the perfect sacrifice (himself) once for all. (Heb 9:11-14) He does not need to offer this sacrifice continuously, because his death is sufficient. (Heb 7:27; 9:27-28) Now, Christ has entered into the very holy place – that is, into the presence of God himself. (Heb 9:24)
But, beyond what Christ did for us, Jesus as our Great High Priest continues to work on our behalf. Our Great High Priest does not die as other priests, but he lives forever! First, he mediates between us and God. (Heb 9:15; 12:22-24) Jesus intercedes on our behalf. (Heb 7:25) Finally, Jesus prepares the way for us to enter into the presence of God with him. (Heb 10:19-22)
Also, Jesus is not a high priest who is cold and distant. He is a high priest who came to us, who identifies with us, who suffered and was tempted as we are, and who is compassionate and sympathetic toward us! (Heb 4:15) This is the Great High Priest who ushers us into God’s presence, presenting our petitions when words fail us, mediating when we fail, lifting us when we fall, carrying us when we are too weak. This is the Great High Priest who will reign forever!
What does it mean for Jesus to be my Great High Priest? When someone tells me, “You can’t do that,” I just smile inside and remember the Great High Priest. When someone whispers, “God will not like you if you do that,” I nod and recognize that Jesus is mediating for me. When someone points out my sin and reminds me that I’m a loser, I remember that Jesus cleansed me of my sin and won on my behalf. When God seems distant because I have wandered far away from him, I remember that Jesus prepared a new and living way into the very presence of God, and He has given me permission to enter.
And, when I remember that I can’t do enough, and I can’t think enough, and I can’t say enough, and I can’t love enough, and I can’t serve enough… the Great High Priest reminds me that he did it all – once for all – and there’s nothing left for me to do, except to enter his rest – to abide with him.
This is the Great High Priest – the better priest who offered the better sacrifice in the better sanctuary to establish a better covenant over a better house. The shadows are no longer necessary because the light of the Son – our Great High Priest – has come and has conquered and is here.
Exercising authority…
Three months ago, in a post called “Leadership, Obedience, and Authority…” I discussed several questions that I had concerning leadership among believers in the church. I said then that I planned to continue studying various passages of Scripture that deal with leadership and authority. I’ve blogged about some of this study in “What does a non-bishop oversee?” and “1 Corinthians 14 and Leadership“. In this post, I want to continue discussing issues related to leadership.
There are several Greek verbs used to refer to the act of exercising authority:
εξουσιάζω (exousiazo) – “have power over”
κατεξουσιάζω (katexousiazo) – “exercise authority over”
κυÏιεύω (kurieuo) – “be lord or master over”
κατακυÏιεύω (katakurieuo) – “become master; gain dominion over”
These verbs each have one of two noun roots: κύÏιος (kurios – “lord or master”) and εξουσία (exousia – “authority or right”).
It is interesting to see how these verbs are used in context in Scripture. For example, consider these passages from the gospels:
[After the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Jesus asking if her sons could sit on his right hand and left hand in his kingdom] But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over [κατακυÏιεύω (katakurieuo)] them, and their great ones exercise authority over [κατεξουσιάζω (katexousiazo)] them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. (Matthew 20:25-28 ESV; c.f. Mark 10:42-45)
[Immediately following the cup of the last supper:] A dispute also arose among them, as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. And he [Jesus] said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over [κυÏιεύω (kurieuo)] them, and those in authority over [εξουσιάζω (exousiazo)] them are called benefactors. But not so with you. Rather, let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. (Luke 22:24-26 ESV)
In each of these passages, Jesus tells his followers that “exercising authority” will not be part of their relationship with one another. Instead, Jesus replaces “exercising authority” with serving. Peter follows up on this teaching by telling elders that they should not attempt to care for (“shepherd”) God’s people by “domineering over” [κατακυÏιεύω (katakurieuo)] the people, instead they should live as an example for the people. (1 Peter 5:3) Similarly, in spite of his teaching and admonishment and exhortation, Paul says that he did not exercise authority over the faith of the believers in Corinth. (2 Cor. 1:24)
So, who or what does “rule over” or “domineer”? A man possessed by a demon exercised authority over (“subdued”) some Jewish exorcists. (Acts 19:16) Death does not exercise authority over Christ. (Rom. 6:9) Sin does not exercise authority over Christ’s people. (Rom. 6:14) The law exercises authority over living people. (Rom. 7:1) Christ exercises authority over the living and the dead. (Rom. 14:9) Paul will not be brought under the authority of any “thing”. (1 Cor. 6:12) The husband exercises authority over the wife’s body, and the wife exercises authority over the husband’s body. (1 Cor. 7:4) Jesus is Lord of all that exercise authority. (1 Tim. 6:15)
So far, in these passages, there is no indication that one person should exercise authority over another person in a spiritual sense. In fact, it seems like just the opposite is indicated. But, if the apostles were not to exercise authority, and Paul did not exercise authority, and Peter told elders not to exercise authority, then I’m not sure where the command for leaders to exercise authority over other people is coming from. However, I’m still searching Scripture. It is possible that I’ve missed something, or that there are other passages of Scripture where leaders are instructed to exercise authority.
Being examples…
Robby Mac has an interesting post called “Among“. In this article he discusses the difference between leading from above and leading from among. He says:
I’ve noticed something peculiar over the years, however, which this passage also addresses. Jesus is calling people to be leaders who “lead among” rather than “lord it over”. And the peculiar thing I’ve noticed is that (perhaps not surprisingly) this runs counter to the contemporary wisdom that puts gifted people into administrative positions that suck the life and vitality out of them.
I also agree that leaders (pastors, elders) are supposed to lead by example, by serving among people and with people. This is not the same as directing the activities of people nor is this the same as administrating and making decisions.
I understand some of the concerns that come up if leaders are not directing, administering, or making decisions. But, perhaps, God expects each of us to take on these responsibilities instead of delegating them to others who are told to lead by example. Plus, where does Scripture indicate that leaders are to make decisions for other believers?
1 Corinthians 14 and the Leadership
Because of several questions and comments on my post called “What do we do with 1 Corinthians 14?“, I have prepared a summary of 1 Corinthians 14, but it is long. So, I am planning to divide it into sections and publish it over two or three days next week. In this post, I would like to return to the question of leadership that I have been examining over the last few months (see “Leadership, Obedience, and Authority…“). Specifically, I would like to examine of role of leaders during the meeting of the church.
Without doubt, 1 Corinthians 14 gives the most extensive view of a meeting of the church by any New Testament author. However, leaders are nowhere in view in the book of 1 Corinthians, much less in chapter 14.
In Gordon Fee’s commentary on 1 Corinthians, he has this to say about leadership in regards to chapter 14:
What is striking in this entire discussion is the absence of any mention of leadership or of anyone who would be responsible for seeing that these guidelines were generally adhered to. The community appears to be left to itself and the Holy Spirit. What is mandatory is that everything aim at edification.
Is Fee correct? Does Paul expect believers to rely only on the Holy Spirit to conduct affairs when the church comes together?
Let me ask a series of questions. I hope you’ll think through these questions and share your answers in the comment section.
1) Why do we believe that one person (or a small group of people) is responsible for scheduling the meeting of the church? Where do we find this responsibility given in Scripture?
2) Why do we believe that only educated and prepared people should speak during the meeting of the church? Where do we get the idea that a 20-45 minute explanation of Scripture is the best way to teach people? Where do we find this idea in Scripture?
3) Why do we believe the “preacher” or “pastor” is always responsible for bringing a teaching, but other people in the church are not? Where do we find this in Scripture?
Perhaps you believe the some or all of these questions can be answered by Scripture. I hope that you will share that with us.
I end this post with one more question: What would happen if the meeting of the church was left completely to the working of the Holy Spirit in the lives of all of the believers both before and during the meeting?
Series on 1 Corinthians 14:
Prologue 1 – What do we do with 1 Corinthians 14?
Prologue 2 – 1 Corinthians 14 and the Leadership
Context & Verses 1-5 – Summary of 1 Corinthians 14 – Part 1
Verses 6-25 – Summary of 1 Corinthians 14 – Part 2
Verses 26-40 – Summary of 1 Corinthians 14 – Part 3
Concluding Remarks – Summary of 1 Corinthians 14 – Part 4
What does a non-bishop oversee?
A few weeks ago, I posted a blog called “What does a bishop oversee?” In this post, I suggested that the επίσκοπος (episkopos) / επισκοπÎω (episkopeo) word group, when used in Scripture for Christian leaders, should be translated “looking after people” or “being concerned about people” as opposed to “overseeing an organization”. I followed this blog with an example (a negative example, from my point of view) in a post called “The Church or the Organization?” I was surprised at the response to this blog post (three times the page views and comments of the next most viewed/commented post). I did not originally intend to discuss the church / organization dichotomy. Instead, I was heading in another direction, which began in a post called “Leadership, Obedience, and Authority…” I will continue in the original direction in this post, which is looking at Christian leaders and their function and operation among the church.
In this post, I would like to continue to examine the επίσκοπος (episkopos) / επισκοπÎω (episkopeo) word group. Specifically, what does this word group mean for those who are not elders/bishops? Or, does it apply to non-elders/non-bishops at all?
Apparently, the author of Hebrews believes that this function does apply to all believers. For example, consider this passage:
Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord. See to it [from επισκοπÎω] that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled; that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. (Hebrews 12:14-16 ESV)
If you need to check the context, read from Hebrews 12:1. It is clear from this context that all believers are in view, and all believers should be “looking carefully” (as the NKJV translates the participle επισκοπÎω in 12:15).
Commenting on the word επισκοπÎω in 12:15, William Lane says in the Word Biblical Commentary:
The call to vigilance expressed in επισκοπουντες [that is, the participle of επισκοπÎω] refers not to some official expression of ministry but rather to the engagement of the community as a whole in the extension of mutual care (cf. 3:12-13; 4:1; 10:24-25). Christian vigilance is the proper response to a peril that poses an imminent threat to the entire community… In view of this very real danger, the members of the house church are urged to vigilant concern for one another. [451-52]
Thus, Lane understands the verb επισκοπÎω to mean “to show vigilant concern”. This is very similar to the definitions that I suggested in my previous post (“What does a bishop oversee?“): “to look after” or “be concerned about”. In this case, it is clear that the object of concern is not an organization, but the people (that is, the church) themselves. Believers are to show concern for other believers so that they do not fail to obtain the grace of God, so that no root of bitterness springs up, and so that they are not sexually immoral or unholy.
If all believers are “to show vigilant concern” for other people, could it not also be that bishops and elders are “to show vigilant concern” for other people (Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:1-2)? Once again, I suggest that this is quite different than “overseeing an organization”; yet, this is the way the verb επισκοπÎω is often presented when it comes to Christian leaders. Perhaps, elders are supposed “to show vigilant concern” for other people not because they are elders, but because they are believers. In fact, they should be more likely “to show vigilant concern” for others because they are supposed to be good examples of what it means to follow Christ and obey Him.
The important thing to realize in Hebrews 12:14-15 is that it is our responsibility to be concerned about one another. This is not only the responsibility of Christian leaders. However, we all realize that there are occasionally hindrances and obstacles that prevent us from showing proper concern for our brothers and sisters in Christ. Sometimes, those hindrances and obstacles are in our lives; sometimes, they are in the lives of others.
What are some of the hindrances or obstacles to showing vigilant concern for other believers? How can we overcome some of these hindrances and obstacles?
Ephesians 4:12 and Equipping Ministries
In a previous post, I suggested from the grammar and syntax of Ephesians 4:11 that there are only four “items”, which precludes a “five-fold ministry” (see “Ephesians 4:11 and the Five-Fold Ministry“). The “five-fold ministry” is often said to be distinct from other types of “ministry” because only the “five-fold ministry” are given the responsibility of “equipping” the church. In this post, I hope to look at the “equipping” that is listed in Ephesians 4:12. Once again, let’s begin with the Greek text:
Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον των αγιων εις εÏγον διακονιας εις οικοδομην του σωματος του ΧÏιστου
Here is the translation of Ephesians 4:11-12 in the ESV:
And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ… (Ephesians 4:11-12 ESV)
From this translation, it does appear that the apostles, prophets, evangelists, etc. function to equip the saints. There is a problem with this view though: the phrase Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον which is translated in the ESV as what looks like an infinitive (“to equip”), is actually a prepositional phrase: the preposition Ï€Ïος (“to”or “toward”) combined with the noun τον καταÏτισμον which has various glosses.
(As an aside, the prepositional phrase actually includes at least the following words των αγιων — “of the saints”. The prepositional phrase may include more of the sentence. However, a prepositional phrase always includes at least a preposition and a noun. So, for the sake of simplification, I am only going to discuss the basic prepositional phrase Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον.)
Before I discuss the meaning of the noun τον καταÏτισμον, it is important to note the use of the entire prepositional phrase, Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον. To begin with, what is a prepositional phrase? Daniel Wallace, in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, says, “Prepositions are, in some respects, extended adverbs. That is, they frequently modify verbs and tell how, when, where, etc. But, unlike adverbs they govern a noun and hence give more information than a mere adverb can.” [356] Thus, the prepositional phrase Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον functions in the sentence as an adverb, modifying or further explaining a verb in the sentence. Within the prepositional phrase itself, the preposition Ï€Ïος explains how the verb in the sentence is connected to the noun of the prepositional phrase, τον καταÏτισμον.
So, the preposition Ï€Ïος works to connect τον καταÏτισμον to the verb. But what is the verb? To find the verb, we must go back to the beginning of Eph. 4:11: και αυτος εδωκεν – “And he himself gave”. “Gave” is the verb of this sentence. Therefore, the prepositional phrase modifies this verb, not the objects of the verb. Furthermore, the preposition Ï€Ïος explains how the verb “gave” is connected to the noun τον καταÏτισμον.
In this case, the preposition Ï€Ïος is probably used to describe the purpose or result of Jesus’ “giving”. There are other usages of Ï€Ïος (spatial: toward, temporal: toward, opposition: against, or association: with). However, in this case purpose (for, for the purpose of) or result (so that, with the result that) is probably best. There does not seem to be a connection of space, time, opposition, or association in this sentence. Sometimes, it is difficult to distinguish between purpose and result; and sometimes it does not change the meaning significantly. At this time, I’m not going to attempt to differentiate between these two usages.
So far, we have seen that the prepositional phrase Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον describes the purpose or the result of Jesus’ giving. This is significant. Because we can now see that the prepositional phrase does not identify the function of the gifted people that Jesus gives. In order to see this more clearly, consider the following sentences in which I have replaced the adverbial prepositional phrase with an adverb (Also, I shortened the list to make the sentences easier to read in English):
He himself gave apostles wisely.
He himself gave prophets abundantly.
He himself gave evangelists quickly.
The prepositional phrase Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον in Eph. 4:12 modifies the verb “gave” in Eph. 4:11 in the same way that the adverbs “wisely”, “abundantly”, and “quickly” modify the verb “gave” in the sentences above. Neither “wisely”, nor “abundantly”, nor “quickly” describe the apostles, prophets, or evangelists. Instead, those adverbs tell us how Jesus gave.
Similarly, the adverbial prepositional phrase Ï€Ïος τον καταÏτισμον tells us for what purpose or for what reason Jesus gave: “for the equipping”, “for the purpose of preparation”, “with the result of training”. These glosses are highly confusing, because in English it appears that the author is saying that apostles equip, or prophets prepare, or evangelists train. As the apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors and teachers function, this will occur. But, this is not what Paul is telling us in Eph. 4:11-12. Instead, he is telling us that the saints are equipped, prepared, or trained because Jesus gave, not because apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors and teachers carry out their functions.
Why is this important? Because in this passage, Paul associated equipping with Jesus’ giving, not with the function of certain types of gifted individuals. There is no reason (in this passage) to limit Jesus’ ability to equip, prepare, or train the saints to the functioning of those listed in Eph. 4:11, just as there is no reason to limit the number of spiritual gifts to those listed in Romans 12:6-8, or to those listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, or to those listed in 1 Corinthians 12:28-30. Each believer is Jesus’ gift to the church. Therefore, Jesus can and does work through all believers (through the gifting that He provides) in order to equip the church.
Ephesians 4:7-16 Series:
1. Ephesians 4:11 and the Five-Fold Ministry
2. Ephesians 4:12 and Equipping Ministry
3. Ephesians 4:7-16 and the Growing Church
4. Ephesians 4:7-16 and Consistency
Ephesians 4:11 and the Five-Fold Ministry…
I have read several books that discuss the “five-fold ministry”, taken from Ephesians 4:11. (Two important books that deal with “five-fold ministry” are Wolfgang Simson’s Houses that Change the World and Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch’s The Shaping of Things to Come.) According to the “five-fold ministry” concept, the list in this verse (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers – sometimes called APEPT) represent five types of Christian leadership. I’m trying to be very broad in my terminology, because different authors use different words to describe the “five-fold ministry”. Some call them offices; some call them functions; some call them gifts.
At this point, I do not plan to discuss the purpose of the people listed in Ephesians 4:11 – that will come in a later post. Instead, I would like to focus on the number of “items” listed in the verse. Unfortunately, to make this point, I will have to include the Greek text:
και αυτος εδωκεν τους μεν αποστολους τους δε Ï€Ïοφητας τους δε ευαγγελιστας τους δε ποιμενας και διδασκολους…
A literal translation would be:
And he (himself) gave on the one hand the apostles, on the other hand the prophets, on the other hand the evangelists, on the other hand the pastors and teachers…
There are three reasons to see this as a list of four items instead of five.
First, the μεν … δε (men … de – “on the one hand … on the other hand”) conjunction pair works to separate this list into four distinct elements. When using the μεν … δε conjunction, it was perfectly acceptable to the Greeks to have more than two “hands”, but they still used the conjunction pair to mark off the items in the list. Today, in English, we use commas and conjunctions to do the same thing. By examining the μεν … δε … δε … δε construction in Ephesians 4:11, it seems that the author was pointing to four items.
Second, the author also uses the definite article τους (tous) to separate the items. Notice that in this verse, there are four uses of the definite article τους. The last two nouns (ποιμενας και διδασκολους – “pastors and teachers”) share a definite article. This shows a correlation between these two nouns that the author does not indicate between the other three nouns (αποστολους… Ï€Ïοφητας… ευαγγελιστας – “apostles… prophets… evangelists”) since each has its own definite article.
Third, according to Daniel Wallace in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, the combination of the μεν … δε conjunction pair with the definite article implies a mild contrast. [212-213] For this reason, many English versions translate this conjunction pair with the definite article as “some” and “others” (i.e. “some as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers). However, this “mild contrast” does not exist between the last two nouns (ποιμενας και διδασκολους – “pastors and teachers”). Instead, they are connected by a different conjunction (και) which is connective or correlative. So, the author is contrasting four distinct groups, with the fourth group containing two connected nouns.
In other words, I would contend that the grammar and syntax of Ephesians 4:11 would create a bulleted list as shown below:
- apostles
- prophets
- evangelists
- pastors and teachers
I am not asserting that a “pastor” and a “teacher” are the same thing. That is a completely different discussion. At this point, I am simply examining the grammar, syntax, and construction of the Greek text. It is my belief that the Spirit worked through the authors to produce the text as He desired. Thus, we can know the intention of the author by reading the text itself. Once we know what the text says, then we can begin to discuss what the text means.
Also, I am not asserting that these giftings no longer exist nor am I asserting that God no longer works through individuals as apostles, prophets, etc. Again, that is a separate discussion.
So, what is my assertion? There are four items listed in Ephesians 4:11. I think it is problematic to base the concept of a “five-fold ministry” on a list that only contains four items.
Ephesians 4:7-16 Series:
1. Ephesians 4:11 and the Five-Fold Ministry
2. Ephesians 4:12 and Equipping Ministry
3. Ephesians 4:7-16 and the Growing Church
4. Ephesians 4:7-16 and Consistency