Warnings against the abuse of hierarchical authority constitute a rejection of hierarchical authority? That's a pretty fancy bit of rationalization, and I'm sure it takes that to avoid the fact that the Kingdom of God is, in fact, a kingdom.
Of course the Kingdom of God is a kingdom, but that fact does not indicate any authority to create a descending order of hierarchy below King Jesus.
Just like on a human body, there is one head on Christ's body, and that's Jesus himself.
"Remember your leaders who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith… Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you." Hebrews 13:7, 13
There are two meanings to the word "leader" and you have chosen the wrong one.
1). Leader. Someone in authority, a king, ruler, president, policeman, teacher. etc.
2). Leader. Someone who arrived there before others, as in a race, in discoveries, in inventions, in landing on the moon, etc.
You will note that No1. has power to control other people, whereas, No2 has no control over other people.
It is the No2 type of leadership that scripture expects of the church. Sadly carnal human nature craves power over others, and will invariably choose No1.
And proof that your Hebrews quotes refer to those who have done the journey first, and not to ruling powers, is clearly given by the context.
The preceding chapters gives a long list of the faithful believers who have gone first, starting at Abel, Enoch Noah Abraham Sarah Isaac Jacob...…..etc.
It is this type of leader your verses refer to, not commanders and kings!
“I repeat the request I made of you when I was on my way to Macedonia, that you stay in Ephesus to instruct certain people not to teach false doctrines” 1 Tim 1:3
Irrelevant.
"This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you; through them by way of reminder I am trying to stir up your sincere disposition, to recall the words previously spoken by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and savior through your apostles." Pet. 3:2
Proves my point above.
“Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." Luke 10:16
If you think that the faithful were free to ignore the Apostles that Christ set in authority, or free to ignore the men who they in turn set in authority over us, then that's your business. But don't pretend that you think it because of what the Bible says.
And I advise you to stop pretending the bible supports the church hierarchy when its only support is tradition.
Obviously Jesus appointed apostles, but they were never given command power like you believe. Carnal power like that belongs to earthly governments.
Jesus was Lord of all creation, but he never used that power against the saints, nor does he call us to do so.
The following scripture shows the nature of Jesus's leadership, and it is the polar opposite of what you advocate.-
John6v66From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. 67Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
The disciples who walked away were free to do so, and here we see Jesus giving the twelve that same freedom.
The hierarchical structure of the church is a complete offense against the nature of Jesus himself, and against the Godly nature he called the church to walk in.
Still less can you blame what the immediate successors of the Apostles wrote. So when some self-appointed clowns show up fifteen hundred years and more later and start spouting a lot of nonsense that contradicts both Scripture and what all of the earliest Christians believed, I'm sure not gonna trust them.
I have no interest in your church fathers, given they are the ones responsible for starting all the heresies.
And thankyou, thankyou thankyou for the following brilliant quote, straight from the mouth of the antichrist!
“I exhort you to be careful to do all things in the unity of God, since the bishop sits in the place of God,
Anyone who
"sits in the place of God" is an antichrist, a clear proof that the power behind the bishop's throne is the spirit of antichrist, and not Christ!
For surely they wished all those and their successors to be perfect and without reproach, to whom they handed on their authority…It is necessary to obey those who are the presbyters of the Church, those who, as we have shown, have succession from the Apostles;
There you go again, another heresy,
"apostolic succession!"
those who have received, with the succession of the epicopate, the sure charism of truth according to the good pleasure of the Father. But the rest, who have no part in the primitive succession and assemble wheresoever they will, must be held in suspicion…For all of these [heretics] are of much later date than are the bishops to whom the Apostles handed over the Churches…” Againt Heresies (inter AD 180/199)
Here we go again,
"handed over the church"! The church belongs to Christ, but your hierarchical tradition makes it belong to power hungry leaders.
“Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings;
There you go again,
unauthorised meetings. Who gave these
evil self pleasing vainglorious leaders power over the how and when Christians can meet together?
by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul;
Hahaha!
The minute you refer back to Rome, any authority you might have had goes straight down the plug hole!
All the vain glory mentioned in your last passage is rooted back to the heretical traditions of Rome and has no place in any discussions of church leadership.
