Authority is not a very popular
word or concept in today’s society. The
authority of law enforcement is openly mocked and challenged. Authority of civic leaders is derided—and to
be fair they bring it upon themselves.
The idea of authority within marriage relationships causes mouths to
drop open, aghast at such a suggestion.
Authority within the local church—an area in which I am keenly
interested—is confused and confounded.
I was having lunch with some
ministry colleagues recently and we were conversing on the issue of authority
in the church. One of the participants
made a comment that got me thinking. He
said, for one to exercise authority they must be under authority.
As I pondered that statement I was
drawn to think on Genesis 3. In the
beginning God created the world and everything in it. As His crowning act, God created human
beings—a man and a woman. Prior to the
creation of the woman, God conferred authority upon the man (“work and keep” of
Genesis 2:15 is the origin of the “subdue and have dominion over” in 1:28). After the creation of the woman, while she
shares in the rulership over the created order, she herself is under the authority
of the man (refer to 1 Corinthians 11:8-10; 1 Timothy 2:12-14).
When the man ate of the fruit, he
ceded his authority and thus the conflict between men and women began. Man, by virtue of his order in creation, was
still intended to exercise authority, but in his act of rebellion he sought to
cast off the authority of God over him and thus his right to rule was
diminished. He lost control of his
authority over the creation (Genesis 3:17-19) and his ordained authority over
woman was now warped and would become a point of strife and contention (Genesis
3:16b- the phrase is perhaps better understood as, ‘you will desire to supplant
your husband, and he shall dominate you.’)
Another example from Genesis
comes from the account of Nimrod. Nimrod
was a grandson of Noah by Ham and the founder of the city of Babel—yes that
same Babel in which the tower was built.
The name ‘Nimrod’ is thought to mean ‘rebellion’ and the story of the
tower is a story of rebellion. After the
flood, God commanded Noah and his descendents to fill the earth (Genesis 9:1),
but humanity decided to congregate in cities.
This was at the movement of those who came to be leaders, Nimrod in
particular. He is described in Genesis
10 as “a mighty one” and “a mighty hunter”.
However, this does not paint Nimrod in accurate detail. The Hebrew word ‘gibor’ in 10:8 certainly
means mighty, but take the account in detail and the other nuances of the word
emerge: ‘one who behaves arrogantly’, ‘a tyrant’. Genesis 10:9 does not therefore picture a
skilled huntsman, but one who dominates over his fellow men. This is confirmed for me in 10:10 in which he
founds a kingdom—the first time the concept of ‘kingdom’ enters the
Scripture. The world was God’s realm,
but now a rebel sets up his own competing domain. I am convinced that the tower episode in
Genesis 11:1-9 fits chronologically between 10:10 and 10:11. In 10:10 we read of “the beginning of his
kingdom” in Shinar—the very place the tower was built (see 11:2). In 10:11 “he went forth”. What would drive mighty Nimrod out of
Shinar? God stepped in. The rebel king decided, against the express
command of God, not to go out into the world, but to consolidate. Under Nimrod’s rebellious leadership the
people said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in
the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over
the face of the whole earth.” (Genesis 11:4 ESV) Notice the clear rebellion- “lest we be
dispersed…” So God relieved Nimrod of
his authority. Because Nimrod no longer recognized authority over him, he was
disqualified from exercising authority—at least to the degree that he had been
up to that point. With his people
confused and beginning to scatter, he also was forced to leave.
[As a side note, I find it
absolutely fascinating that this rebel was responsible for founding the two empires
which would later seek to dominate and destroy God’s people—the city of Babel (founded
in Genesis 10:10) would be the center of the Babylonian Empire and Nineveh (founded
in Genesis 10:11) would be the capital of the Assyrian Empire.]
To exercise authority, one must
be under authority. What it comes down
to is this: only under the authority of Christ can the situation be put
right.
In the home, only as a husband is
submitting himself to the authority of Jesus can he claim the right to exercise
that correct authority given to him by God.
This is the correct understanding of Ephesians 5.
In the Church, as leaders place themselves
under Christ’s authority and under the authority of fellow leaders in
cooperative ministry, they may confidently lay hold of the Biblical right to
shepherd the flock in the Way of Christ and the Apostles (more on this in a
later post on ‘modern apostleship’).
If governments would submit
themselves to the God who is truly King over all the earth (Psalm 22:28; Romans
13:1) they would be endued with His grace and would rule justly, being
recognized as good (Proverbs 29:2).
Our authority issues stem from
living under the curse. While Christians
endure in this sin sick world, we are not bound to it. Christ has set us free to live under His
perfect authority and to once again walk in the role that God purposed for
humanity, and specifically for a humanity redeemed through Jesus; to regain the
right to reveal God’s authority as we live under His righteous rule.
