Pass It On!

It is impossible to consider the nature of our Lord Jesus’ leadership without the scope of its long lasting effect. Jesus imparted Himself in the lives of His followers in a way that ensured the plan of the Father would be fulfilled. David DeSilva supports this in his book (An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods, and ministry Formations) with his observation: “After Jesus’ ascension his disciples, whom Luke describes as “eyewitnesses and servants of the word” (Lk 1:2 NRSV) and who were clearly not limited to the twelve (see Acts 1:15,21-23), proclaimed his death and resurrection, and sought to make disciples through passing on Jesus’ teachings and example. Sayings of Jesus, parables, stories of his confrontation with members of various groups all served this catechetical purpose (that is, the task of instructing and shaping disciples and communities of disciples). Stories about Jesus’ acts of healing and miracles both enhanced the community’s appreciation of Jesus’ authority to prescribe a way of life and opened them up to the possibilities of God’s power in their midst to heal and deliver.” This progression prioritizes impartation as a major factor in understanding Jesus’ leadership and its support of the over-arching purpose of God. The nature of our Lord’s leadership style was to duplicate Himself in respect to plan and purpose.

It's all about "LOVE"

The nature of our Lord’s leadership can be summed up in one word. That word is “Love”. We see this in Mark 12:30-31. In response to the scribe’s question of priority, Jesus places the emphasis on love. He also prioritizes our application of love in the order He presents the commandment.
Notice:
“Love” God with all your heart
“Love” God with all your soul
“Love” God with all your mind
“Love” God with all your strength
“Love” your neighbor
“Love” yourself
The repetition of the word “Love” shows the importance while the progression of the application shows the priority: God first…others second…me last.
Love as a leadership style is supported by Bruce Winston in his book (Be a Leader for God’s Sake) who declares that “Leadership is first of all love”. It is further supported by John Hoyle in his book (Leadership and the Force of Love) who goes as far as to assert: “If you can’t love, you can’t lead.” Jesus used many leadership styles during His earthly ministry; however, in identifying one that can qualify as the “Nature” of our Lord’s leadership, it would have to be love. Love embodies the very essence of God’s plan and purpose. This is personified through Christ as He imparted this into His followers.

How We Treat People is Key

Leadership is all about how we treat people. Paul emphasizes this point in his letter to Timothy. Using Socio-Rhetorical analysis we see a progression in respect to the leaders (The Bishop’s) dealing with people. The progression is in how the leader deals with:
A) One Person – “Self Controlled; Not Violent; Not Quarrelsome” (1 Timothy 3:2-3)
B) Family – “Manage his own family well” (1 Timothy 3:4)
C) All People – “Good Reputation with Outsiders” (1 Timothy 3:7)
This is, as Paul makes clear, important in the church, but it is also key in successful leadership and organizational development. This is supported by Jeffrey Pfeffer in his book (The Human Equation) as he declares: “the most important source for organizational success is how companies treat their people! This confirms what all good leaders know: people are an organization’s most important asset! Organizations need to place a premium of their people by putting them first.” Paul has a desire for his “spiritual son” (Timothy) to be successful in his leadership role as a Bishop. If we are to be successful in our organizational development we, like Timothy of old, must be mindful of how we treat people. 1 Timothy 3:2-7 is a model that can be used by leaders in any organizational construct.

Christian Leadership in Action

Matthew 9:1-7 shows the leadership skills of Jesus as he places a priority on the reason for His ministry. While He is in the process of gathering His disciples, Jesus takes advantage of a situation to place an emphasis on what He wanted His followers to prioritize. On the surface, it looks as though this is a story about healing but a deeper look reveals an emphasis on forgiveness. The inner textual approach to socio-rhetorical interpretation concerns itself with features like the repetition of words. Three times in these seven verses, Jesus refers to forgiveness of sins. They brought Jesus a man sick with the palsy in order to get him healed, yet Jesus looks beyond the temporal and prioritizes the eternal by forgiving his sins. This is real Christian leadership in action. Aubrey Malpurs, in his book Being Leaders: The Nature of Authentic Christian Leadership, states: “A Christian leader is a servant with the credibility and capabilities to influence people in a particular context to pursue their God-given direction.” Jesus establishes His credibility by healing the man, but the repetition indicates that He was most interested in the mans eternal soul as well as influencing His followers to pursue their “God given direction” which was to preach the forgiveness of sins through Christ.

Which one is the most important?

When I began to consider the difference between exegesis and exposition I asked my self: “Which one is the most important?” Both of these are components of the over arching discipline of hermeneutics. Hermeneutics by definition is the “science of biblical interpretation”. (Henry A. Virker. 1981. Hermeneutics. Baker Books. Grand Rapids, MI ) It is considered a science because it has rules and these rules can be classified into an orderly system. This “system” can be defined by observing the difference between these two components. Exegesis is the process of interpretation designed to find the original meaning of the verse whereas exposition address the application of the passage to modern times. The first asks: “What was the message heard by the original recipiet?” and the other asks: What is the relevence of the passage to us today?”. Can you see the system? First there is the premise which is interpretation. (Hermeneutics). Then comes the foundation which is true meaning. (Exegesis). Lastly we have the value which is application. (Exposition) First I grow (Exegesis) so that I can make others grow (Exposition). Exegesis deepens my resevior so that others can drink from the fresh waters of application. Which is the most important? They both are!

Misunderstanding the Bible

When I consider the vast world of misunderstanding that invades Christian circles, I often wonder: “Are all these people reading the same Bible?” One problem is too much eisegesis and not enough exegeses. Eisegesis is a form of construal that causes someone to read his own interpretation into a given text. This approach to Biblical hermeneutics implies a subjectivity that can narrow ones view to the arena of personal experience. How shallow our understanding and narrow our world view if we were limited to our own familiarity. Contrast this to the approach using exegesis and you have a much more objective view.

Exegesis, as a term, means to “draw the meaning out of”. Exegesis is the discipline of reading out from the text what is in it, whereas eisegesis is the practice of reading into a text what the person wishes to see there. With this understanding it is easy to see how this subjective approach can be so dangerous.

The universe of hermeneutics is much larger than just this one distinction; however in light of these two I would have to conclude that (Spirit inspired) exegesis is indeed the preferred approach.

Joseph as a Leader

Recently I re-read the story of Joseph and Pharaoh found in Genesis 37-41. This time, I looked at the account in the light of Leadership theories. No doubt the Pharaoh of Egypt was a top down leader that would embrace the (Great Man Theory). This theory says, in essence, that leaders are born and not made. Contrast this with Joseph as a leader and you see something that might more closely resemble the (Behavioral Theory) which includes the idea that leaders are made and not born. We see this in the development of Joseph and in how he manages the supernatural. Early on, God gives him a dream and he parlays it into disaster. Later he handles the interpretation God gives him with humility and is elevated through promotion to productivity. It could be argued that Joseph was born with inherited traits that made him an excellent candidate for leadership. (Trait Theory) In his book “Handbook of Leadership” R.M. Stogdill gives a list of such traits. Here, I have compared them to Joseph’s leadership progression:
Assertiveness – He shared his dream
Self Control – He resists Potiphars wife
Dependable – He is promoted in prison
Responsible – He is elevated to Prime Minister