Search
Scripture Reading: Exo. 28:29-30; Acts 15:6-22, 28-29
In the church life the principle of discussing matters in the elders’ meeting is of great importance. The church is an assembly of many persons; if we think that the discussion of matters in the elders’ meeting is the same as the discussion of official business in the world, this view is absolutely wrong. The Bible contains no such thought, and strictly speaking, it does not allow us to do so. According to the record in Acts 14:23, once the church came into being, elders were appointed in the churches locality by locality.
The designation elders is derived from the Old Testament. It is not a new term in the New Testament. In Genesis the record is mostly of individuals, not of a congregation. This record extends from Adam until Jacob, including Joseph. It is not until Exodus that the congregation of Israel appears. This congregation consisted of the descendants of Jacob. Thus, in Exodus there is a congregation including a group of elders (cf. 4:29; 12:21; 19:7; 24:9).
The appointment of elders is based on the outward manifestation of their actual condition. For example, elders in a clan are determined by age and conduct, that is, by the manifestation of the maturity of the clan members. No doubt, Moses appointed the elders of Israel based upon their age and conduct. When Moses ascended Mount Sinai to draw near to God, he brought with him seventy elders (vv. 1, 9). In the Old Testament, before there were kings among the children of God, the elders were the rulers and administrators; nevertheless, if the elders wanted to understand God’s intention toward His people, they needed the help of the priests. In the Old Testament the elders were a group of older ones who were responsible for the administration and management of practical affairs, and the priests were a group of people who drew near to God to seek God’s will.
In the Old Testament the Levites served God by bearing the responsibility of slaughtering cattle for the offerings, and the priests lit the lamps and burned the incense. In addition, the priests bore a great and important commission to teach the children of Israel concerning the law in the Old Testament and to let them know all the words written by God in the Old Testament. Although God’s written word is extensive, it could not cover every matter. In addition to the written word, there was a need for another item, that is, the breastplate, which the high priest wore when he came near to God. The Bible calls this item the “breastplate of judgment” (Exo. 28:29-30). Every time a question or problem arose among God’s people that the priests could not answer based on the law of the Old Testament, the high priest was needed to bear the breastplate of judgment before God to receive a direct revelation from Him.
In the Old Testament the administration of God among His people was neither a democracy nor an autocracy but a theocracy; that is, God ruled His people directly. God led and governed His people by His written word and by instant instruction transmitted through the breastplate of judgment worn by the high priest. Hence, two categories of people carried out this government: the elders and the priests. The elders carried out God’s administration, and the priests received instructions from God. If there had been only elders but not priests, there would have been only administrative personnel without a channel, or means, to receive divine revelation. The priests were the channel and means through which divine revelation was received.
In the New Testament God still desires to administrate His children through the elders, and they must be assisted by the priests. In the New Testament all Christians, those who have been saved and regenerated, are priests (1 Pet. 2:9). Hence, the elders appointed from among the believers are also priests. In the age of the Old Testament the elders and priests were two separate groups of people, but in the New Testament age elders and priests are the same group of people. On the one hand, they rule the children of God; on the other hand, they seek God’s instructions. In the New Testament age every one of us has a Bible in our hands through which we can search and know God’s intention. However, the written word is not written so completely that there is no need for the instant revelation of the Holy Spirit, typified by the breastplate of judgment in the Old Testament.
The principle of the discussion of church affairs in the elders’ meeting is to let the Holy Spirit be the presiding One. In the elders’ meeting, we should never elect a presiding officer; if we elect one, we annul the authority of the Holy Spirit. We need to believe that every time we meet together, the Lord is in our midst (Matt. 18:20). Today the Lord is the life-giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45b), that is, the Holy Spirit, who is with us in all the gatherings of the church. The elders’ meeting is no exception, and it surely has the presence of the Holy Spirit. We must bear in mind that to elect someone to preside over the meeting is offensive to the Holy Spirit. In the church the Holy Spirit is the presiding One in all the meetings; thus, we should not have another presiding officer. The unique presiding One is the Holy Spirit.
In the elders’ meeting, all the attendants may bring up matters to be decided upon by following the Lord’s leading. There is no need for an agenda in the elders’ meeting. When the elders come together, if someone senses the leading within to mention a certain matter that needs a decision, he may mention it. After this, everyone needs to seek the Lord’s leading together. Perhaps some may have the same feeling, and some may have a different feeling; all may speak forth their feeling so that everyone may seek the Lord’s leading together. We can see this principle clearly from the example in Acts 15.
In the elders’ meeting, we need to learn to follow the Holy Spirit in discussing matters. Hence, the elders should not only be elders but also priests who draw near to God and contact God. It is not sufficient for the elders to merely carry out the administration of the church; they must have direct contact with God and seek God. Their relationship with God must be so intimate that He can tell them His intention at any time. God tells man His intention by two means: the Bible and the Holy Spirit, which is represented by the breastplate of judgment in the Old Testament.
When the elders follow the Holy Spirit in discussing matters, there is neither a democracy nor an autocracy but a theocracy, that is, the rule of God. Although the elders take care of the church administration, they need to fully submit to God’s leading. The elders ruled the children of Israel under God’s instructions; hence, strictly speaking, God ruled the children of Israel in the Old Testament.
We must remember that the way to administrate the church is not like the way worldly governments administrate. Today, in both democracies and autocracies, man governs. However, God does not want a democracy or an autocracy; rather, He desires that we seek His instruction. Today God’s rule is based on the Bible outside of us and on the Holy Spirit within us. Therefore, the elders must understand the Bible; if they do not understand the Bible, they will not be able to properly discuss and make decisions regarding church matters.
Since the Bible does not provide an answer to every question, the elders not only need to understand the Bible but also need the Holy Spirit to give them revelation through the Bible. The Holy Spirit is typified by the breastplate of judgment worn by the high priest. This breastplate was composed of twelve stones upon which were engraved the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. These twelve names contained eighteen of the twenty-two letters in the Hebrew alphabet. Thus, four letters were missing.
Because there were four letters missing from the breastplate, another object — the Thummim — was added. The word Thummim means “perfecters, or completers.” Without this object, the Hebrew alphabet on the breastplate of the high priest would have been short of four letters and would not have been complete. When the Thummim was added, four letters were added, and thus the twenty-two letters in the Hebrew alphabet were present.
Moreover, there was the need to add another object — the Urim. Urim means “lights, or illuminators.”
Every time the high priest went into the presence of God, there were two kinds of plates on him: one was the shoulder plates, representing strength, for bearing God’s people, and the other was the breastplate, which implies caring in love. The Lord cares for us by holding us in His bosom and supplies us with power by bearing us on His shoulders. Today the elders should also hold the saints in their “bosom” and bear them on their “shoulders.” The bosom’s holding is an expression of love, and the shoulders’ bearing is a supply of power. Every time the elders draw near to God, they need to wear these two kinds of plates; that is, they need to bear the saints upon themselves as they come into the presence of God. The elders’ receiving of God’s revelation reflects the receiving of revelation through the letters on the breastplate.
Many years ago I read an article concerning the Urim and the Thummim written by a Hebrew scholar. The author of this article said that in Joshua 7 Achan’s sin was probably discovered through the Urim and the Thummim. He stated that when the high priest came to seek God, he was able to put words and sentences together through the illumination of the letters on the breastplate. Thus, through the Urim and the Thummim the high priest discovered that the one who sinned belonged to the tribe of Judah; then he identified the household and finally the person. The principle related to the use of the Urim and the Thummim is that the elders’ administration of the church is not through human government. Instead, it is a divine government, a theocracy, not a democracy or an autocracy. The elders must submit to God’s authority and seek God’s leading.
How does God lead the elders? First, He speaks through the Bible; second, through the Holy Spirit; and third, through the saints as an alphabet. When the elders come before God, they must bear the brothers and sisters on their shoulders and hold them in their bosom. As they bear the saints in God’s presence, God enlightens and enables them to read the condition of the saints. The longer the elders stay before God, the more they will understand God’s intention. This is an excellent type in the Old Testament, and when it is realized in the New Testament, it preserves the principle of God’s government.
There are three means by which the elders administrate the church: the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and the saints as an alphabet. Our experience confirms these points. When the elders take care of God’s children, they need to seek God’s guidance; they need not only the Bible and the Holy Spirit but also the brothers and sisters as the alphabet. This means that they need to bear the brothers and sisters before God and read the condition of every brother and sister before God. In this way the elders will know what God wants them to do and what God’s present will is in the church life.
Apart from the above points, we also need to use facts and experiences as references. Acts 15 shows that the brothers had a discussion (v. 7); this means that all the attendants had an equal right to speak. Today when the eighty-some elders of the church in Taipei come together, every elder has an equal right to speak. However, this kind of speaking should not be the same as in the worldly conferences in which quarrels and fights occur. We need to understand that even in our discussion, we need to follow the Spirit. When we follow the Spirit, our spirit will not desire to fight but will require us to be calm. There are no chairmen in our meetings; no one pounds a gavel and holds a sign to ask people to be quiet; rather, the Holy Spirit within us always pounds a small gavel and reminds us inwardly.
Peter’s speaking in Acts 15 was a testimony (vv. 7-11). Peter was in Jerusalem not long after being rebuked by Paul (Gal. 2:11-14). Peter was severely rebuked by Paul and fully put to shame. Humanly speaking, he did not seem to have the position to be an apostle; nevertheless, in Acts 15, at the conference in Jerusalem, he was full of courage. When everyone finished the discussion, Peter stood up to speak to the people. He said, “Men, brothers, you know that from the early days God chose from among you that through my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe” (v. 7). This is to read the facts, experiences, and present condition of the brothers and sisters; this was Peter’s testimony.
After Peter’s speaking, Barnabas and Paul further strengthened his speaking with their testimonies. They related to the elders and apostles who were at the conference in Jerusalem the signs and wonders that God had done among the Gentiles through them (v. 12).
After the brothers finished their testimonies, James decided the matter by offering his views based upon the truth in God’s word. We can see that James spoke very well. His speaking was fully in tune with the testimony of Peter and also with that of Barnabas and Paul. He was fully in coordination with the brothers (vv. 13-21). However, we must also point out that James’s decision was still very much under the influence of his Jewish background. The Scriptures he quoted were correct, but in the end he added something of Judaism by speaking of “what is strangled and blood” (v. 20). It was right that James spoke according to the truth, but he also added something of himself. Hence, we need to be careful not to add our own ideas to God’s idea because of our background.
Eventually, a resolution was formed in Acts 15, which was the decision of the Holy Spirit and the apostles with the elders; this is beautiful (vv. 22, 28-29). The apostles and elders had the revelation of the Bible and the instant revelation of the Holy Spirit according to the condition of the saints at that time. Then based on this they made a decision. Sadly, although the decision was correct, it was mixed with James’s opinion. We absolutely believe that Paul was not satisfied with part of the decision, because it contradicted his concept in Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews. The matter of abstaining from blood and from that which is strangled belongs to Judaism and should not be added to the New Testament. May we all learn the lesson.
