Following Jesus vs. Following Christian Religious Leaders

Summary: Following Jesus means hearing His voice and following Him wherever He goes. In contrast, following Christian religious leaders means following all their teachings, their religious rules, and even regarding whatever they say as true.

Call to action: We must commit ourselves to continually learning to hear His voice and to follow Him wherever He leads.

Our theme on this occasion is following Jesus versus following Christian religious leaders. Why is this theme important? Because many Christians assume that following Jesus is the same as following Christian religious leaders. We therefore need to discuss briefly what it truly means to follow Jesus, and what it means to follow Christian religious leaders.

Let us begin by discussing what it means to follow Jesus. John 10:27 states, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.” The first meaning of following Jesus is hearing the voice of Jesus. In this verse, Jesus does not say that ‘if’ My sheep are taught by Christian religious leaders, then they will hear My voice. Not at all. Jesus firmly declares that His sheep will certainly hear His voice. The issue, therefore, is whether we truly are the sheep of Jesus or not. If one is Jesus’ sheep, one will surely hear His voice. If not, then even if thousands of Christian religious leaders teach that person how to hear God’s voice, he or she will still not be able to hear the voice of Jesus. Consequently, only Christians who hear the voice of Jesus can truly be called followers of Jesus.

For this reason, the apostle John affirms, “But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you …” (1 John 2:27). When the apostle John says that you do not need anyone to teach you, he does not mean that we should not learn from others. After all, the apostle John himself wrote his letters to the churches so that they might learn from him. What, then, does it mean that we do not need anyone to teach us?

Consider 1 John 2:20: “But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know.” The anointing from the Holy One referred to by the apostle John is the Holy Spirit who dwells within the inner being of believers. It is this anointing that enables the sheep of Jesus to recognize His voice without being taught by others. It is this anointing that enables the sheep of Jesus to discern between the voice of the Chief Shepherd and the voice of fierce wolves who disguise themselves as shepherds within Christendom. Once again, it must be emphasized that we do need to learn from one another as members of the church. However, with regard to ‘following Jesus’, no one needs to teach us. All the sheep of Jesus possess an inner anointing that enables them to hear His voice and follow Him.

Consider Revelation 14:4: “… These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These were redeemed from among men, being firstfruits to Elohim and to the Lamb” (ILT). James 1:18 likewise affirms, “… having determined that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creation” (ILT). The term ‘firstfruits’ is translated from the Greek word ‘aparche’, which refers to agricultural produce that ripens first and is therefore ready to be harvested. Farmers in Palestine understood that if there was a harvest of firstfruits, there would certainly be subsequent harvests. Thus, Christians who are ‘determined by the Father to mature first’ are those who follow Jesus wherever He goes. This is purely a matter of grace. It is solely the will of the Father in heaven. There is nothing for those appointed as the “firstfruits” of the church to boast about.

Therefore, to follow Jesus means to hear His voice and to follow Him wherever He goes. All who are able to hear the voice of Jesus and follow Him do so because they have been appointed by the Father to be the “firstfruits” of the church.

As we have emphasized, following Jesus means hearing His voice and following Him wherever He goes. The early church heard the voice of Jesus and followed Him wherever He went. In the Book of Acts, there are approximately seventy expressions such as ‘the Holy Spirit said’, ‘the Spirit forbade’, ‘filled with the Spirit’, and similar phrases. This demonstrates that all members of the early church heard the voice of the Spirit and followed Him.

The early church lived spontaneously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Peter and John held what we might call a ‘revival meeting’ without a committee, without fundraising, and without any prior planning—yet thousands repented. When the believers heard that they were threatened by the Jewish religious council, they spontaneously prayed, and the place where they were gathered was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 4). They also gave spontaneously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and distributed to each member according to need (Acts 2:45). There was no teaching on tithes, firstfruits (money), faith pledges, or any other doctrines designed to extract money from the congregation, as is commonly practiced in Christendom today. All members gave according to the leading of the Holy Spirit. When Ananias and Sapphira attempted to lie to the Holy Spirit, they were disciplined by the Holy Spirit and died.

Philip preached the gospel spontaneously in Samaria, resulting in great joy throughout the city. Then Philip was directed by the Holy Spirit to evangelize the Ethiopian eunuch, and when the eunuch believed, Philip spontaneously baptized him. The early church gathered daily to break bread (to commemorate the death of Jesus) and to eat together with gladness. Later, Paul was led by the Spirit to meet on the first day of the week to break bread, and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the meeting continued until daybreak. There were no religious regulations whatsoever. There was no rule requiring Sunday services as later instituted by Christian religious leaders.

For anyone who reads the Book of Acts with a clear mind, it is evident that ‘there were no religious regulations whatsoever in the early church’. All members were led by the Holy Spirit, including the apostles. Paul even referred to himself as a ‘prisoner of the Spirit’ (Acts 20:22). Paul never established planning systems, organizational structures, control mechanisms, or leadership models as found in today’s Christendom. He moved from city to city according to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, not knowing what would happen to him except what the Holy Spirit revealed to him (Acts 20:23).

Did Paul ever fail to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit? Certainly he did. However, he never responded as Christian religious leaders commonly do today. Consider Paul’s failure to heed the Spirit’s warning in Acts 21:4: “… through the Spirit they urged Paul not to go up to Jerusalem.” Yet Paul still went to Jerusalem. Although Paul occasionally failed to discern the Spirit’s prompting, he remained a ‘free man’ who could continue to be led by the Holy Spirit wherever the Spirit

willed. Paul never entered into contractual arrangements with a particular congregation, received a fixed salary, or followed predetermined programs, as is common among ministers in Christendom today.

All of this demonstrates that all members of the early church lived under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. This does not mean they were without failures, problems, or persecution. Nevertheless, ‘this was the church as an organism directly governed by the Holy Spirit’. This was the church built directly by the Lord Jesus. Every member was called a disciple because they were learning about the kingdom of heaven, which was indeed the central message proclaimed by the apostles.

As we have seen in the Book of Acts, all members of the early church lived spontaneously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, without any religious regulations compelling the church to act in certain ways. There was only one rule: to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit and obey Him. We will now examine the role of leaders in the early church, both apostles and elders/overseers, in the building of the church.

Before discussing the role of leaders in the early church, we must remember that the early church was an organism (a Body). As with any organism, it is governed by its own life. Every part of an organism—feet, hands, and all others—is governed by the life of that organism. In other words, the authority operative within an organism is the authority of life.

Jesus declared, “I am the life” (zoe), and He builds His church by the authority of His life (zoe). Jesus governs all members of His church directly through His life. The leaders of the early church possessed no authority whatsoever over the members of the church. We must first understand the authority of life before discussing the role of leaders in the early church. Once again, it must be emphasized that the early church was an organism (the Body of Christ), and we will later see how radically different this is from modern Christendom—different as heaven and earth.

Let us examine Colossians 2:19 and Ephesians 4:16. We will not expound these verses in full, but will focus on the concept of ‘growth’ found in both. Colossians 2:19 speaks of ‘God’s growth’ (LAI). In fact, the verse uses two Greek terms, ‘auksano’ and ‘auksesis’, which the LAI translates as ‘God’s growth’. This translation is somewhat inaccurate; it should be rendered as “may increase with the increase of God” (Young’s Literal Translation). This means that the growth of the Body is the growth of Elohim. In other words, the growth of the church as an organism is the growth of the life of Elohim. This verse also mentions the function of ligaments and joints that support and unite the Body. Meanwhile, Ephesians 4:16 emphasizes that the growth of the body occurs as the body is joined and held together through the functioning of each part. When we compare these two verses, we can conclude that the growth of the church as an organism is the growth of the life of Elohim, in which leaders (“ligaments and joints”) function to support and unite the Body.

What we are describing here is body leadership. Leaders (“the ligaments and joints”) must operate exclusively under the authority of life. They must move according to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Within the context of the Body, it is impossible for ligaments and joints to act independently and damage the Body.

Thus, leaders within the organism are entirely under the authority of life and possess no authority over the Body or its members. Their sole function is to equip and serve the Body. If a leader fails to submit to the authority of life, that leader himself is cut off from life, while the Body remains unaffected. Why? Because the growth of the Body is determined only by the growth of life.

In summary, the role of leaders in the early church as an organism was as follows: first, they possessed no authority, since authority resided entirely in life; second, they functioned solely to equip and serve the Body as true servants (Ephesians 4:11–12); third, they could not control the Body, nor could they derive material gain (money) from it. If we ourselves were leaders within the context of the organism, we would behave accordingly. Conversely, leaders who act as though they possess controlling authority or seek personal gain demonstrate that they are not operating within the context of the organism.

As emphasized, the early church was an organism in which all members—leaders (“ligaments and joints”) and ordinary members alike—were under the authority of life. This means that all members of the early church were led directly by the Holy Spirit. Consequently, no member followed human leaders, for all were led and governed directly by the Holy Spirit. Paul rebuked the believers in Corinth who proudly declared, “I am of Paul,” “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Apollos,” because such claims revealed their worldliness and lack of spirituality (1 Corinthians 1:10–17; 3:4). When Paul said, “Follow me,” he meant, “Follow my example” (1 Corinthians 11:1).

Indeed, the leaders of the early church did not seek followers or attempt to draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves. However, when fierce wolves attacked the Body of Christ, some leaders began to draw disciples after themselves, as recorded in Acts 20:29–30: “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Even from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.”

Several points should be noted from these verses. First, the savage wolves—representing the devil—attacked church leaders, not ordinary disciples. Paul was addressing the elders of the church in Ephesus, though the meeting took place in Miletus. Second, the attack of these wolves resulted in the teaching of false doctrines. A false doctrine presupposes the existence of a genuine one. Counterfeits are never entirely dissimilar to the original; rather, they closely resemble it. These false teachings were sufficiently similar to the truth that less discerning believers could not distinguish them. Third, the purpose of these false teachings was to draw disciples away from the true path so that they would follow these leaders instead. The ‘true path’ refers to a life of directly following the guidance of the Holy Spirit—hearing His whisper and obeying Him.

Paul issued this warning to the Ephesian elders toward the end of his ministry as he traveled to Jerusalem. Indeed, when Paul later wrote his final letter, he had been abandoned by nearly all the churches in Asia Minor, including Ephesus, as well as by their leaders, Phygelus and Hermogenes (2 Timothy 1:15). The attack of savage wolves against church leaders had already begun by the end of Paul’s ministry.

In reality, however, the fall of the church became evident during the ministry of the apostle John in Asia Minor around AD 90–95, after both Paul and Peter had been martyred in AD 67 under Emperor Nero. John wrote his general epistle to the churches in Asia Minor, indicating that he and his companions no longer had fellowship (‘koinonia’) with those churches (1 John 1:3). A man named Diotrephes had emerged, seeking preeminence and leading others to reject John and his co-workers (3 John 9–10). Furthermore, in Revelation chapters 2–3, John identifies three false teachings that led to the church’s downfall: the doctrines of Jezebel, Balaam, and the Nicolaitans.

Let us examine these three false teachings mentioned in Revelation 2–3. At present, we will focus on the false teaching of Jezebel as recorded in Revelation 2:20: “Nevertheless, I have this against you: you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and by her teaching she misleads My servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols.”

We know that the Book of Revelation is the revelation of Jesus Christ and, indeed, of His church, delivered to the apostle John in symbolic language. Revelation 1:1 affirms, “…He made it known to His servant John.” The Greek term translated as ‘made it known’ is ‘sēmainō’, derived from the root ‘sēma’, which means ‘a sign or symbol’. Symbolic language means that there is a meaning or significance behind the symbols used.

Let us therefore consider the verse above that mentions “the woman Jezebel.” This is symbolic language. A woman or female is a symbol of the church, because Adam prefigures Christ, while Eve represents the church, who is the bride of Christ. But why is this church called “Jezebel”? To understand the symbol of “Jezebel,” we must understand the historical account of Jezebel. Historically, Jezebel was the wife of King Ahab. We will take only one aspect of Jezebel’s behavior in order to understand the meaning of this symbol.

In the case of Naboth’s vineyard, Jezebel wrote letters in the name of King Ahab, sealed them with the king’s seal, and sent them to the elders of Naboth’s city to have him killed. Indeed, this behavior was intended to support the desire of her husband, King Ahab, who wanted to obtain Naboth’s vineyard. Nevertheless, Jezebel had usurped the authority of King Ahab through her actions. Therefore, why is the symbol of Jezebel applied to the church? The answer is clear: because the “woman Jezebel” is a type of church that usurps the authority of Christ.

Who usurps the authority of Christ? Certainly the church leaders. By drawing the Lord’s disciples to themselves and by regulating the church—its finances and all matters related to it—these leaders have in fact usurped Christ’s authority over His church. We have discussed that Jesus directly governs His church through His Life, or through His Spirit. All members of the church must submit to the authority of Life, that is, the authority of the Holy Spirit. However, because the leaders draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves, church members are no longer governed directly by the Lord Jesus. CHURCH LEADERS HAVE USURPED THE AUTHORITY OF THE LORD JESUS OVER HIS CHURCH. That is why this type of church is called the WOMAN JEZEBEL, namely, a church whose leaders usurp the authority of the Lord Jesus.

Let us observe what Jesus taught regarding church authority (Matthew 23:1–12). The context of this passage concerns the “seat of Moses,” which clearly speaks of authority. In this passage, Jesus was speaking to the crowds and to His disciples (Matthew 23:1). To the crowds, Jesus firmly taught that they should not rebel against the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law, because they occupied the “seat of Moses.” The crowds were to follow their teaching, but not their conduct.

However, in verse 8, Jesus spoke to His disciples. Jesus forbade any of His disciples to be called rabbi, leader, or father, because YOU ARE ALL BROTHERS. What does “you are all brothers” mean? In the context of the “seat of Moses,” what Jesus meant is that none of the Lord’s disciples should possess authority over another. In other words, within the church there must be no HIERARCHY (a structure of human authority).

The church is an organism and must not be organized. Many people say that organization is merely a tool. Yes, that is true—organization is merely a tool, but it is a tool in the hands of leaders who usurp the authority of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not need the tool of organization, because the Holy Spirit directly governs all members of the church through the Life of Christ.

What, then, does this Jezebel-type church look like? In fact, the denominations that exist within Christianity are Jezebel-type churches. Denominational leaders have usurped the authority of the Holy Spirit over church members. These self-exalting leaders will be humbled in due time (verse 12).

Let us continue our discussion of Jezebel’s false teaching. We must remember that Jezebel’s false teaching is taught by church leaders as part of their effort to draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves (Acts 20:30). These leaders teach that they possess authority from God to govern church members whom they have drawn to become their followers. In Christianity, we often hear expressions such as, “Do not rebel against the senior pastor,” or “Anyone who wants to serve God must be under submission to the authority of the local shepherd,” and other similar statements.

One Jezebel teaching that was popular in Indonesia around the 1990s was the teaching of ‘spiritual covering’. This teaching states that anyone who wants to serve God must be under the ‘spiritual covering’ of local elders or local leaders/pastors. Thus, those who serve God without being under such ‘spiritual covering’ are considered to be serving in rebellion against God. This, more or less, is the teaching of spiritual covering.

Let us examine whether this teaching of spiritual covering exists in the Bible. Let us begin with the Book of Genesis, when Adam and Eve fell into sin. After their fall, Adam and Eve attempted to cover their nakedness with fig leaves. But God was not pleased with the “covering” or garment they made for themselves. God made a covering or garment for them from animal skins, which symbolize the sacrifice of Christ. Thus, God is pleased only when the nakedness of Adam and Eve is covered by a “spiritual covering,” namely Christ.

Therefore, there is no “spiritual covering” or other garment provided by Elohim for humanity except Christ. Zephaniah 1:8 affirms, “On the day of the LORD’s sacrifice I will punish the officials, the king’s sons, and all who wear foreign garments.” Foreign garments speak of coverings that do not originate from God. The “Jezebels” in Christianity teach foreign coverings—namely, local elders or local pastors—whereas the Bible teaches that the only covering or garment we have is Christ. They teach that everyone must submit to authority above them within a hierarchy (a structure of human authority), where the highest authority resides in senior elders or pastors.

Allow me to quote J. Preston Eby from his book Echoes of Eden, as follows:

“WHAT PART OF SCRIPTURE AUTHORIZES THE APPLICATION OF THIS COVERING? None! In what verse is the husband called the ‘covering’ of his wife? In what verse are elders called the ‘covering’ of their congregation? In what verse is the church called the ‘covering’ of the believer? What chapter and verse state that apostles, elders, or pastors are the ‘covering’ of other ministries? Where is the rule that says a ministry cannot be accepted unless it originates from a certain group or elder who serves as its ‘covering’? My brother, search the entire Scriptures—read and study until your eyes ache and your vision blurs, until you fall asleep restlessly beside your Bible and reference books still open on your desk—and I tell you that all your labor will be fruitless and in vain! The doctrine of ‘covering’ is not in the Bible.” (End of quotation)

Thus, this Jezebel false teaching was devised by church leaders so that “naive sheep” would remain in their hands. This is human and religious bondage that has become rampant in Christianity.

We have briefly outlined Jezebel’s false teaching, namely a teaching that justifies the usurpation of church authority by leaders. In order to better recognize and reject Jezebel’s false teaching, so that we do not partake in it, we must understand the original teaching—the true teaching regarding church authority as an organism. To speak of church authority (as an organism) is actually to speak of organic leadership, and now we will distinguish it from “Jezebel-type” leadership.

The term leadership, according to the Great Dictionary of the Indonesian Language (fourth edition), refers to matters concerning leaders and ways of leading, while an organism is a systematic arrangement of various parts of a living body for a particular purpose. As a noun in biology, an organism is a living being. Thus, the meaning of organism here is the arrangement or interrelation among the “parts of a living body,” such as the relationship between feet, hands, and other body parts, so that the living being’s purpose is achieved.

To better understand the concept of organism, we must first clearly understand the term organization, which is used in “Jezebel-type” leadership. In the same dictionary, organization is defined as a unity or arrangement consisting of parts (that is, people) in an association for a specific purpose, or a cooperative group of people established to achieve a common goal. Thus, it is clear that an organization is a relationship among people within a structure (hierarchy), whereas an organism is a relationship between hands and feet within a living being.

The relationship among people within an organization requires leadership. There must be a type of authority that governs the relationship among individuals. Authority in the organizational context is called the “chain of command” or “line of authority.” In an organizational structure, we see a chain of command that connects one person to another, determining who leads whom and who is responsible to whom. The person at the top of the organizational structure possesses the highest authority.

Likewise, the relationship between hands and feet within an organism also requires leadership. There must be a type of authority that governs the relationship between hands and feet. Authority in the context of an organism is called the Authority of Life, or the authority of the organism’s life itself. The life of the organism governs the relationship between hands and feet. If there is no longer life within that organism, then there is no longer any authority governing the relationship between hands and feet, and there is no movement at all—in other words, death.

Thus, it is clear that leadership in the context of an organization IS A PERSON (namely, the person at the top of the hierarchy), whereas organic leadership IS LIFE. To speak of leadership in an organizational context is to speak of people and how they lead. To speak of leadership in an organic context is to speak of life and how life leads the hands and feet, or the parts of a living body.

Therefore, the authority of an organism is the life of the organism itself. And we understand that the church is an organism. To speak of church leadership is to speak of organic authority, that is, life. In an organizational context, authority is a person—the highest person in the structure. In the church, no person possesses authority. The authority of the church is life, and only Jesus said, “I am the Life.” There is not even such a thing as delegated authority in the church. In the church, THERE IS NO DELEGATED LIFE. Jesus never delegated His life; He gave His life so that EVERYONE WOULD OBEY LIFE.

In contrast, Jezebel’s false teaching claims that leaders have authority over the congregation. Supporters of this false teaching will cite several verses about submission to support the idea that leaders possess authority over the church. But God’s chosen people understand that church authority as an organism is the authority of Life—that is, the authority of Jesus Himself as Life. With this explanation, it is hoped that we can better recognize Jezebel’s false teaching.

Let us now look at Christian history to identify the first person who taught this Jezebel false teaching. After the death of the apostle John, several leaders/bishops arose, namely Ignatius, bishop of the church in Antioch; Polycarp, bishop of the church in Smyrna; and Papias, bishop of Hierapolis.

However, history records that Ignatius (AD 110–115) was the first church leader to teach a distinction between elders and bishops. The book The History of Christianity, a Lion Handbook, page 83, records: “He argued strongly that there should be one bishop in charge of each congregation, in order to prevent splits in the church and to ensure that correct beliefs were preserved.” Yet the Bible records in Titus 1:5 and 7 that the two Greek terms ‘presbuteros’ (elders) and ‘episkopos’ (overseers/bishops) are used interchangeably. Notice Titus 1:5 and 7: “…appoint elders (presbuteros)… For an overseer (episkopos), as God’s steward, must be blameless…” This means that ‘presbuteros’ (elders) are the same as ‘episkopos’ (overseers/bishops). Presbuteros refers to maturity and age, while episkopos refers to function as overseers. And elders or overseers are always plural (more than one person). Thus, Ignatius’s teaching was seriously flawed, even though his intention was good—to prevent church divisions and preserve correct belief. By appointing a single bishop to lead each local church, Ignatius inadvertently supported Jezebel’s false teaching, namely the usurpation of church authority.

Let us consider several statements by Ignatius regarding bishops so that we may better understand this Jezebel false teaching. I will quote the English text from The Apostolic Fathers (1956) by J. B. Lightfoot:

First: “Plainly therefore we ought to regard the bishop as the Lord himself” (p. 65).

Second: “Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Father (being united with Him), either by Himself or by the Apostles, so neither do ye anything without the bishop and the presbyters” (p. 70).

Third: “…submitting yourselves to your bishop and presbytery, ye may be sanctified in all things” (p. 64).

Fourth: “Be obedient to the bishop…” (p. 72).

Fifth: “…he that doeth aught without the bishop and presbytery and deacons, this man is not clean in his conscience” (p. 74).

Sixth: “Do ye all follow your bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the Father, and the presbytery as the Apostles” (p. 84).

Seventh: “…he that doeth aught without the knowledge of the bishop rendereth service to the devil” (p. 84).

Ignatius was a highly respected leader and died as a martyr in Rome, but through these teachings the Body of Christ was torn apart and fell into a system of human government with all its hierarchies and organizations. Indeed, this is the attack of fierce wolves against church leaders (Acts 20:28–30).

Many people do not realize that fierce wolves do not attack thugs in markets or terminals—whose appearance alone would cause people to avoid them—but that fierce wolves…he will attack Christian religious leaders with a “religious cloak,” so that naïve congregants do not avoid him, but instead even become his loyal followers.

Let us continue with other false teachings that are taught and practiced by Christian religious leaders so that congregants become their followers. This false teaching is called the teaching of the ‘Nicolaitans’ (Revelation 2:6, 15). What is meant by ‘Nicolaitans’ here is not the name of a church leader, nor the name of one of the seven men chosen in Jerusalem (Acts 6:5).

In the time of the apostle John, there was no leader named Nicolaus. Therefore, Nicolaus in the book of Revelation is a symbol, in accordance with the fundamental nature of the book of Revelation itself. This symbol uses Latin terms, where NIKO means ‘to conquer’, and LAOS means ‘the common people’ (laity). Thus, NICOLAUS refers to the practice and teaching of leaders who subjugate the laity (the congregation). In the Christian world, the Nicolaitan system is no longer merely a ‘practice’ of leaders, but has already become a ‘teaching’ that is justified and no longer questioned.

At least two things are damaged by this false teaching of the Nicolaitans: first, the priesthood of all believers; and second, the matter of submission within the church. First Peter 2:9 affirms, “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood….” This means that all believers are priests and kings. However, because of the false teaching of the Nicolaitans, the church has been divided into two groups. In the Catholic Church, there are priests and the laity. Meanwhile, in Protestantism, there are clergy (pastors) and congregants. Both Catholics and Protestants no longer question this, because this condition has been legitimized by the false teaching of the Nicolaitans.

The second matter damaged by the Nicolaitan false teaching concerns submission. In the Catholic Church, submission to the Pope is absolute. Once the Pope has spoken, there is no further need for discussion; discussion ends when the Pope speaks. In Protestant denominations, the submission taught by leaders to their congregations is not as “rigid” as in Catholicism. Nevertheless, the matter of submission has still become “one-directional,” namely from the congregation to the leaders.

Meanwhile, the New Testament teaching on submission is what we call ‘mutual submission’. Why mutual submission? Because the authority of the church is the authority of the Life of Christ, and we are all brothers (Matthew 23:8). There are approximately thirteen expressions in the New Testament such as ‘wash one another’s feet’, ‘admonish one another’, ‘rebuke one another’, ‘confess your sins to one another’, ‘build one another up’, and so forth.

We have emphasized that the existence of a false teaching implies the existence of the genuine one. The genuine teaching concerning “subduing/conquering the congregation” is written in 1 Corinthians 10:5: “…we take captive every thought and make it obedient to Christ….” The leaders of the organic church wage war against thoughts within the congregation that oppose the knowledge of Elohim, and they subdue those thoughts to Christ. Thus, it is not the person who must be conquered, but the thoughts that oppose the knowledge of Elohim—these are what must be conquered by the power of Elohim.

Let us continue with another false teaching, namely the false teaching of Balaam. Let us consider 2 Peter 2:15 and Jude 1:11 respectively: “…they have followed the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness…” and “…for the sake of gain they have rushed headlong into the error of Balaam….” The way of Balaam and the error of Balaam are related to loving payment in ministry. In short, the teaching of Balaam is a teaching that justifies a wage-based system in serving God.

Let us look at how this teaching of Balaam first emerged within the church. It all began when some church leaders drew the Lord’s disciples to themselves (Acts 20:30). Church leaders should only equip the Lord’s disciples (Ephesians 4:11–12). However, when church leaders draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves, leaders begin to need money to build their ministry (read: their enterprise).

Leaders need places (buildings) to gather the disciples. They also need money to meet their own needs and the needs of those who work with them. Therefore, leaders begin to extract money from congregants through various false teachings, such as tithes, firstfruits (money), faith pledges, and others. All of these behaviors and methods were never practiced by Paul or the other apostles, because they only equipped the Lord’s disciples and did not draw disciples to themselves.

Leaders who draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves need to manage finances for various needs and to pay those who work with them. Here we begin to see the teaching of Balaam. Those who serve (read: work) begin to receive regular wages, whether called salaries, love offerings, or whatever name is given. Thus begins the wage system in serving God.

In reality, church leaders who adhere to the teaching of Balaam inevitably engage in commerce within their ministry. A trader sells goods or services. These leaders sell their ministerial services in preaching and teaching the Bible. In a church whose fundamental nature has already been altered by the teaching of Balaam, it is no longer possible to apply Paul’s teaching on church finances. Paul’s teaching on church finances can only be applied to those who minister outside the teaching of Balaam, namely the teaching that justifies a wage-based system in ministry. Paul’s teaching can only be applied within the context of the church as an organism.

Let us now examine the genuine teaching regarding church finances, specifically what Paul taught. By observing the genuine teaching on church finances, we can more clearly recognize the false teaching of Balaam. Let us consider the following facts.

First, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain” (1 Corinthians 9:9; 1 Timothy 5:18). These verses do not support a wage system at all, as practiced in the Christian world today. The church in Corinth, which Paul himself founded, criticized Paul regarding the legitimacy of his apostleship. This occurred because there were false teachers/false apostles teaching in the Corinthian congregation. These false teachers certainly expected money from the Corinthian church, because the most reliable indicator of whether someone is a false teacher is always related to money. Therefore, Paul did not want to receive money from the Corinthian

congregation, even though it was indeed his right as a servant of God to be supported ‘occasionally’ (1 Corinthians 9:12). We must emphasize ‘occasionally’, because Paul never received ‘regular’ financial support from any church, including those he had founded. The church in Philippi only helped Paul from time to time.

Next, Paul taught Timothy that elders who lead well, especially those who preach and teach, are worthy of double honor, meaning they may receive financial support from the church. Even here, we do not see any indication that this support must be given regularly. On the contrary, true widows are to be supported regularly by church funds (1 Timothy 5:3). Supporting widows on a regular basis was indeed the practice of the early church (Acts 6:1).

Second, giving must be voluntary (2 Corinthians 9:7). Paul never taught tithing, firstfruits, or faith pledges, which are commonly practiced by teachers in the Christian world.

Third, giving to the poor and assistance to churches in need. For Paul, ministry to the poor and to churches in need of help was very important (Galatians 2:10). Paul also brought aid to the church in Jerusalem to be distributed to members who were lacking. The finances of the early church were indeed prioritized for widows and the poor. This stands in contrast to the Christian world today, where collected funds are generally used for the needs of ministers and their ministries, including buildings and other expenses.

In truth, Paul’s teaching on church finances is not difficult to understand. It is clear that church funds are primarily to be given to members who are in need, while church ministers only receive support occasionally. This is the essence of Paul’s teaching on church finances. The early church never used its money to build buildings, because during the first 200 years of Christianity, no buildings were ever constructed. Since Emperor Constantine accepted Christianity (AD 313), the construction of buildings, cathedrals, and so on began. Buildings are indeed needed by church leaders who draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves. However, the early church simply met in homes.

We have briefly explained the three false teachings promoted by Christian religious leaders in order to draw the Lord’s disciples to themselves, namely the false teachings of Jezebel, the Nicolaitans, and Balaam. Through these three false teachings, the Lord’s disciples no longer follow the Lord Jesus wherever He goes. They no longer worship in spirit and in truth, as taught by the Lord Jesus. They no longer listen to the whisper of the Holy Spirit and follow His leading, as occurred in the early church. Instead, the Lord’s disciples merely follow what has been arranged and determined by their leaders.

Thus the word of God in 1 Corinthians 1:12 is fulfilled: “…One of you says, ‘I follow Paul’; another, ‘I follow Apollos’; another, ‘I follow Cephas….’” And 1 Corinthians 3:4 affirms, “For when one says, ‘I follow Paul,’ and another, ‘I follow Apollos,’ are you not merely human?” By following leaders, the Lord’s disciples become worldly people rather than spiritual people. Even more tragically, the false teachings of Jezebel and Balaam lead the Lord’s disciples into idolatry (Revelation 2:14, 20). The idols of the Lord’s disciples may be the leaders they follow, or mammon, or something else.

In the Christian world, these three false teachings have produced many religious regulations, all of which bind the Lord’s disciples within a particular movement, denomination, or leader. Indeed, Christian religious leaders must create religious regulations in order to bind the Lord’s disciples to themselves. Such regulations include the obligation to attend Sunday services in a particular building, the obligation to give monetary offerings such as tithes, firstfruits, faith pledges, and others. Not to mention the programs devised by leaders that the Lord’s disciples must follow. All of these divert the Lord’s disciples from following the Lord Jesus wherever He goes. The problem is that none of the apostles of the Lord Jesus ever made such regulations.

Paul rightly said in Acts 20:29-30, "I know that after I leave, ferocious wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. And even from among you yourselves will arise, teaching falsehoods to draw away disciples after them." So, these ferocious wolves have led Jesus' disciples astray, so that they no longer follow the guidance of His Spirit, but rather follow religious rules, programs, and adhere to certain sects/denominations.

Generally, Christian religious leaders call these denominations churches. This proves that ferocious wolves have blinded the leaders. They have even created the doctrine of the "visible church" (denominations) and the "invisible church" (true disciples of God throughout the world), a teaching that only covers up the division of the early church into tens of thousands of denominations. Instead of repenting, these leaders have created teachings that justify their actions in dividing the church.

But, once again, the Lord Jesus has His sheep who hear His voice and follow Him wherever He goes. May we be among them. Amen.