In the past years, I used to come down hard on the shepherds of God’s flock who have become careless, undisciplined, and negligent. I would compare many to Isaiah’s description of blind watchmen, who know nothing or like “dumb dogs unable to bark, dreamers lying down, who love to slumber” (cf. Isaiah 56:9). But, then I realized that they and the paid preachers are fighting a losing battle for at least two major reasons. First, they are not living among saints like shepherds do their sheep. They are just keeping watch when they come into the feedlot a few times a week. Second, they are not qualified to lead if they did remain vigil over souls because they are not living in the same context of first-century spiritual gifts and the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. Third, given those circumstances, no member would submit to such an invasion of privacy by incompetent men. In fact, the cultural milieu of our day would resist such care by competent men. It is for this reason that the command to “submit” is significant. Some might naturally be inclined to think that the shepherds needed to mind their own business, not realizing that such vigilant care was their business. The big difference between the watchful care of New Testament shepherds and the practice of modern-day elders is that the Holy Spirit does not give today’s elder that task and equip them to do it. Herein lies the disconnect between the “now and then.” Today’s church elders recognize that they would not be allowed to watch men and women in their homes or other settings. Yet, if they must be spiritual care-takers, they will arrange a place and a limited period of time where the saints will allow it.
Thus, we redefine groups of Christians living in the first century Mediterranean world as local church organizations. Clarke explains, “The dominant contemporary model for a local church is one whose principal meeting is as a unified congregation in a single location, and accordingly has a core leadership structure that is centralized and focused in regard to the function and meeting of a single congregation.”[1] Having no solutions or viable options, they conclude that these groups cannot be overseen as individual souls because the limitations are too obvious. So, it must mean that elders oversee local church organization. In addition, others reason that since the Bible speaks of elders ruling, it is not possible to rule in matters of faith because that has already been accomplished through the written word. If he can’t rule individual souls in matters of faith, he must rule the local organization in matters of judgment. As a result, he assumes the role of decision maker for that organization’s work. Once this process is under way, it’s like the proverbial snow ball that becomes increasingly larger as it rolls down the spiral of error. One problem leads to another and continues on to another until they end with a huge monstrosity of human innovation.
This same mistake is made regarding other topics like the distinctions between the “church age” and the kingdom, the work and purpose of the Holy Spirit, and the second coming of Christ. Thinking that we must follow the Bible, we force the same plan on us that was applicable for first century Christians, only.