2 Samuel 16:5-14

Shimei Curses David
5 When King David came to Bahurim, there came out a man of the family of the house of Saul, whose name was Shimei, the son of Gera, and as he came he cursed continually. 6 And he threw stones at David and at all the servants of King David, and all the people and all the mighty men were on his right hand and on his left. 7 And Shimei said as he cursed, “Get out, get out, you man of blood, you worthless man! 8 The Lord has avenged on you all the blood of the house of Saul, in whose place you have reigned, and the Lord has given the kingdom into the hand of your son Absalom. See, your evil is on you, for you are a man of blood.”

9 Then Abishai the son of Zeruiah said to the king, “Why should this dead dog curse my lord the king? Let me go over and take off his head.” 10 But the king said, “What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah? If he is cursing because the Lord has said to him, ‘Curse David,’ who then shall say, ‘Why have you done so?’” 11 And David said to Abishai and to all his servants, “Behold, my own son seeks my life; how much more now may this Benjaminite! Leave him alone, and let him curse, for the Lord has told him to. 12 It may be that the Lord will look on the wrong done to me, [1] and that the Lord will repay me with good for his cursing today.” 13 So David and his men went on the road, while Shimei went along on the hillside opposite him and cursed as he went and threw stones at him and flung dust. 14 And the king, and all the people who were with him, arrived weary at the Jordan. [2] And there he refreshed himself.

a. A man from the family of the house of Saul: Shimei was a distant relative of the former King Saul, and he still resented David for replacing the dynasty of Saul.

b. Cursing continuously . . . threw stones . . . "You bloodthirsty man, you rogue!" Shimei was about as offensive as a person could be. He wanted to destroy and shred of dignity or confidence that David had left.

i. There are always people ready to rejoice when a leader falls. Shimei had this heart against David for a long time, but he could only show it when David was down and out.

ii. "It is very hard to bear a cowardly attack. One is very apt to reply and use hard words to one who takes advantage of your position and deals you the coward's blow. Only the coward strikes a man when he is down." (Spurgeon)

c. The LORD has brought upon you all the blood of the house of Saul . . . you are caught in your own evil: A quick look at the outward appearance of things seemed to confirm Shimei's analysis; but Shimei was wrong. None of this came upon David because of what he did to Saul or Saul's family.

i. Shimei was wrong because David actually treated Saul and his family with great love and graciousness.

ii. Shimei was wrong because David was not a bloodthirsty man. It is true that he was a man of war, but not a bloodthirsty man.

iii. Shimei was wrong because David did not bring Saul and his family to ruin - Saul himself brought the family to ruin.

iv. Shimei was right that the LORD had brought this upon David, but not for any of the reasons Shimei thought.

2. (9-14) David receives adversity in humility.

a. Let me go over and take off his head: Abishai didn't want to listen to Shimei curse or dodge his stones any more. The mighty men surrounding David were more than ready to kill Shimei in an instant.

b. So let him curse: David didn't try to shut up Shimei. He didn't close his ears to unpleasant or critical words. David was willing to hear what God might say to him through a cursing critic.

i. David let Shimei speak because he was not a bloodthirsty man (what have I to do with you). Ironically, if David was the kind of man Shimei said he was, Shimei would be dead.

ii. David let Shimei speak because he saw the hand of God in every circumstance (the LORD has said to him). He knew that God was more than able to shut Shimei up; David didn't need to give the order.

iii. David let Shimei speak because he put the "Shimei problem" in perspective (See how my son who came from my own body seeks my life. How much more now may this Benjamite?). David knew that his real problem was Absalom, not Shimei and he did not lost this perspective.

iv. David let Shimei speak because he knew that God's hand was on the future as well as the present (It may be that the LORD will look on my affliction, and that the LORD will repay me with good for his cursing this day). David knew that if he did what was right in the present moment, God would take care of the future.

c. Let him alone, and let him curse: "David could take this fellow's head off and that in a moment, and yet he said, "Let him alone. Let him curse." And this makes a splendid example. If you can revenge yourself, DON'T. If you could do it as easily as open your hand, keep it shut. If one bitter word could end the argument, ask for grace to spare that bitter word." (Spurgeon)

d. So they refreshed themselves there: David was not without hope or comfort. God allowed comfort to find him, even if it was in the small things. David was able to receive the comfort because he was at peace, knowing God was in control of Israel.

i. In refusing to cling to the throne David was like Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross (Philippians 2:6-8). "As we thus follow David through these days of humiliation and shame . . . we nevertheless understand more perfectly that he was indeed a man after God's own heart." (Morgan)

ii. In his book A Tale of Three Kings, Gene Edwards put these words into the mouth of David: "The throne is not mine. Not to have, not to take, not to protect, and not to keep. The throne is the LORD'S." It was that kind of heart that kept David on-track through such a difficult time and enabled him to even be refreshed.

iii. "This is radiant illustration of the deep and inward peace given to any man who is living in fellowship with God in motive and desire." (Morgan)


Ryle's Holiness... http://www.biblebb.com/files/ryle/holinessJR-018.htm

Arsène Wenger's motivational handout

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

The full text of Arsène Wenger's motivational handout:

The team:

A team is as strong as the relationships within it.

The driving force of a team is its member's (sic) ability to create and maintain excellent relationships within the team that can add an extra dimension and robustness to the team dynamic.

This attitude can be used by our team to focus on the gratitude and the vitally important benefits that the team brings to our own lives. It can be used to strengthen and deepen the relationships with it and maximise the opportunities that await a strong and united team.

Our team becomes stronger by:

Displaying a positive attitude on and off the pitch

Everyone making the right decisions for the team

Have an unshakeable belief that we can achieve our target

Believe in the strength of the team

Always want more - always give more

Focus on our communication

Be demanding with yourself

Be fresh and prepared to win

Focus on being mentally stronger and always keep going until the end

When we play away from home, believe in our identity and play the football we love to play at home

Stick together

Stay grounded and humble as a player and as a person

Show the desire to win in all that you do

Enjoy and contribute to all that is special about being in a team - don't take it for granted

Leadership Reproduction

Blog: Learning from the Boss

Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, still unbeaten as United's reserves coach, talks about the valuable lessons he's learned from the man he calls the gaffer...

It’s very important for me to learn from Sir Alex Ferguson. The things I hope to take are little things: how he prepares for games, how hungry he is and how he’s always looking to gain that little extra. Plus the way he’s managed all of his players, his management skills, he’s had 25 internationals every year and not many of them have asked to go. After 20 years here, that is spot on.

The manager always wanted his players and staff to have high hopes and big dreams. I remember a meeting before the 2006/07 season. We’d just signed Michael Carrick and Tomasz Kuszczak, and we’d had three seasons without being close to winning the league. He looked at us, asked us to look around at our team mates and told us we were the best players in the country with the best preparation. He said that if we didn’t challenge for the Champions League, Premier League and FA Cup that season, then it was our fault, it was us there was something wrong with.

That was psychology at its best. We won the league, were close in the Champions League and lost in the FA Cup final. That little input made us players think. That’s what the manager is best at and that is hopefully something I will do with the reserves. You don’t want to keep saying things again and again and again because they’ll stop listening to you. The gaffer came in, said that and walked out. That made us think. Sometimes less is more.

I’m sure I’ll benefit from being a coach here because you develop all the time and this is something I needed. As a coach you need to be in charge of something and be responsible, of course, but I’m also here to help these lads be ready to play first team football.

I know that the young players are just as ambitious for themselves as I am for them. As soon as someone drops off… it’s not me they’re letting down, it’s themselves and I’ll need to let them know.

Being tough on the players won’t be an issue for me - I’ve played Championship Manager my whole life and have sold many players! But seriously the players know what I expect of them and as long as they do that, they won’t have a problem.

Get involved! Have your say on this article - and post your own blogs - on our message board at www.manutd.com/talkingreds.

Women better, but we still want the men

WHEN it comes to leadership qualities, the women have the men beat.

According to a poll by Washington-based Pew Research Center, both men and women agree that women are more honest, intelligent, compassionate, outgoing and creative.

But here's the irony - despite these views, those polled still believed that generally men make better leaders than women.

About one in five respondents (21 per cent) said men made better leaders, more than three times the number who said women were better (6 per cent).

The rest (69 per cent) believed that men and women made equally strong leaders, reported McClatchy News Service.

Men and women held those views almost equally.

'You've got a public that, on some level, has a complex mix of views on this subject: admiring of women, admiring of traits that they associate with leadership, (but) not yet admiring of women in top leadership roles,' said Mr Paul Taylor, the lead author of the report and the executive vice president at the research centre.

He added that the researchers hadn't 'cracked the code' for the contradictory findings.

The findings are based on phone interviews with 1,060 men and 1,190 women in the US from 16 Jun to 16 Jul by Princeton Research Survey International.

Those who were surveyed were asked questions regarding eight leadership traits.

Both men and women were ranked as equals on two of them: being hardworking and ambitious. Men ranked higher in decisiveness.

Women were seen as superior in honesty, intelligence, compassion, creativity and how outgoing they are.

Researchers also conducted a separate analysis to see whether respondents had skewed their answers to avoid appearing prejudiced.

They found no such hidden bias.

Ms Carol Hardy-Fanta, the director of the Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, said that women yielded too much when they favoured men over women as leaders.

'If women are not distinguished from men in their view of men and women in politics, then there is no hope for change,' she told Mr McClatchy.

Acceptance still slow

She added that the preference by Americans for male leaders could help to explain why Mrs Hillary Rodham Clinton was edged out by Mr Barack Obama as the Democratic presidential nominee and why acceptance of women as leaders in politics and business has been slow.

Women make up just 2 per cent of the CEOs of the US Fortune 500 companies. In the political realm, they make up just 17 per cent of all members of the US House of Representatives; 16 per cent of all US senators; 16 per cent of all governors; and 24 per cent of all state legislators.



This article was first published in The New Paper on Sep 7, 2008.

When the Conflict Involves You When the Conflict Involves You

The following article is located at:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/smallgroups/articles/whentheconflictinvolvesyou.html

Practical guidelines for leading in a difficult situation.
by Betty Veldman Wieland

Conflict is a normal part of small-group life. In fact, if we don't have conflict, someone is not being honest. People are just too different from one another to avoid it completely.

Personally, I do not like conflict. It makes me feel, well, conflicted! At the same time, I believe that understanding the nature of conflict and being prepared to deal with it as a small-group leader, coach, or staff person is essential for people's spiritual growth and for a small-group ministry to thrive.

The following guidelines have been helpful for me in dealing with conflict, and I hope they can help you as well in your small-group leadership role.

Know How You Deal With Conflict
The old adage, "Physician, heal thyself!" truly applies here. Leaders who understand their own conflict management style approach conflict in an informed way. We all have strengths and weaknesses in dealing with conflict. Whether we will be helpful or a hindrance may depend on our understanding of what we bring to the conflict table.

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Inventory is a helpful tool for understanding the various conflict management styles. What is your primary style? Do you compete or collaborate? Do you compromise and accommodate or try to avoid conflict completely? No one style is right for every situation, but understanding your primary response will help to keep conflict in perspective.

I like to avoid conflict. When I confront it, I first look for a compromise. Knowing that about myself has been important when I need to die to my "preferred" conflict management style in order to do what is best for others. I remember well when I needed to confront a small-group leader about talking too much.

I tried tactfully, gently, and indirectly to approach the subject. The leader looked me straight in the eye and asked, "Betty, what are you trying to say to me?" My astonishment at such a direct approach must have been written all over my face because the leader leaned forward, touched my arm and said, "Please, I need to hear this from you. Tell it to me straight."

Adapt to the Other Person
I learned a valuable lesson in the above situation. Though I wanted to avoid conflict, this leader needed me to be direct and confrontational. In dealing with conflict, we need to consider the conflict management style of those we deal with as well as our own style. We need to adapt to the people with whom we are dealing. This does not necessarily mean compromising—though it might—but it means communicating in a manner in which they can understand and relate.

Pray!
This may seem like a no-brainer, but it needs to be underscored. The potential for conflict to be destructive is huge. It is hard to be objective as a leader. We all have biases and personal viewpoints. There is great temptation to defer to our preferred outcome rather than to facilitate an honest confrontation of an issue. It takes being submissive to the Holy Spirit's leading to keep us honest and in tune with what God desires.

Think Gray And Listen
Discerning where God is leading in times of conflict includes reserving judgment until we have all the evidence. It is what The Contrarian's Guide to Leadership calls "thinking gray." Most issues are not black and white. We need to listen carefully—for feelings as well as facts—and to reserve judgment until all parties involved have had a fair hearing. Doing this builds trust. It also gives us the time needed to sense where the Holy Spirit is at work.

Differentiate between Problems and People, Issues and Emotions, Facts and Feelings

The statement, "A problem well-defined is a problem half-solved" is especially true when dealing with conflict. When the focus is on the problem, whether a difference of opinion or perspective, the parties involved can together often reach a compromise or collaborate to come to a better outcome than each would have come to alone. We simply mediate and ask questions to clarify the issue. In such a case, the conflict is substantive and can be positive. It becomes an opportunity for growth and change.

Sometimes, however, the conflict is due to a personality conflict, and emotions run too deep to come to a positive outcome. When people begin attacking people instead of problems, the conflict is affective and, if left unchecked, can be highly destructive.

One of the most difficult things I have ever had to do is remove a volunteer leader from leadership. I did not do so lightly, but it became apparent that the leader in question was using a top-down, authoritative approach to intimidate people into doing what the leader wanted. Those who did not comply were personally undermined, belittled, and discredited. Everyone in the small group was up in arms. When I confronted the leader, I was personally attacked as well.

Be Willing To Take A Stand
When the above happened, I was tempted to apologize and back down. After all, avoidance is my primary conflict management style. However, this was not about me and it was not about the leader in question. It was about the issue at hand and the people affected by the conflict. The leader had supporters who were waiting to see how I would handle what had become a major problem. I needed to carefully and positively address the impasse at hand, to isolate the problem, and to address it without attacking any of the people involved.

Then, I needed to take responsibility for the decision I made. I called a special meeting of all the people involved to explain my decision. The leader chose not to attend. I remember well that a highly-respected member of the group and an advocate for the leader I had removed came and talked with me after the meeting. She admitted she was "loaded for bear" and ready to let me have it for the decision I made. Instead, she thanked me and said, "I have even more respect for you as a leader because of how you handled this situation." No one needed to know the nitty gritty details of the conflict, but everyone needed to know it was handled prayerfully and with integrity, addressing the problem without attacking any person involved in the conflict. We can only do that on our knees.

Look For A Win/Win Solution
I looked desperately for a win/win solution in this situation, but found none because the leader in question could not get beyond blaming others and attacking them personally. In conflict, a win/win is always the solution of choice. It safeguards the dignity of the people involved, respects the diversity that God created, and allows for a difference in perspectives.

Isolating what we can compromise on helps us to be able to hold our ground on those things that are non-negotiable. A win/win requires that both parties seek the good of the other, not just their own. One cannot dig in one's heels and declare, "I'm right and you need to come over to where I am." When that happens, someone loses. Though there may be principles we cannot compromise, there are usually extraneous circumstances that we can. When we can collaborate to come to an even better outcome, that is the best win/win of all.

Leave the Results To God
In the end, we do our best in dealing with conflict and leave the results to God. Not everyone will like us when we mediate conflict. That is the price of leadership. The leader I removed from leadership has never spoken to me again. That is painful for me, but I followed the above steps and did as I believe God directed me. Though the leader may continue to blame me, I have peace in knowing that the group involved benefited from my willingness to make that hard decision. The group itself thrived under new leadership.

Being faithful and obedient to God's call in leadership is the most important part of dealing with conflict. That is what God honors most.

—Betty Veldman Wieland; copyright 2005 by the author and Christianity Today International.



Christianity Today International
www.ChristianityToday.com
Copyright © 2008 Christianity Today International

A Wise Ruling

1 kings 3:16-28
16 Now two prostitutes came to the king and stood before him. 17 One of them said, "My lord, this woman and I live in the same house. I had a baby while she was there with me. 18 The third day after my child was born, this woman also had a baby. We were alone; there was no one in the house but the two of us.

19 "During the night this woman's son died because she lay on him. 20 So she got up in the middle of the night and took my son from my side while I your servant was asleep. She put him by her breast and put her dead son by my breast. 21 The next morning, I got up to nurse my son—and he was dead! But when I looked at him closely in the morning light, I saw that it wasn't the son I had borne."

22 The other woman said, "No! The living one is my son; the dead one is yours."
But the first one insisted, "No! The dead one is yours; the living one is mine." And so they argued before the king.

23 The king said, "This one says, 'My son is alive and your son is dead,' while that one says, 'No! Your son is dead and mine is alive.' "

24 Then the king said, "Bring me a sword." So they brought a sword for the king. 25 He then gave an order: "Cut the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other."

26 The woman whose son was alive was filled with compassion for her son and said to the king, "Please, my lord, give her the living baby! Don't kill him!"
But the other said, "Neither I nor you shall have him. Cut him in two!"

27 Then the king gave his ruling: "Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is his mother."

28 When all Israel heard the verdict the king had given, they held the king in awe, because they saw that he had wisdom from God to administer justice.
--------------------------------------------------------------

this passage strikes me this morning. we all know that this passage comes after king solomon had asked for wisdom. now i was thinking thru the issue of practical wisdom (along with ecc 7 in the morning) , and this passage shines thru in my mind while on my way to orchard. wisdom is seen not just in the thinking, but significantly in the application process that leads to outcome or result. there are usually 2 extremes when dealing with problems: (1) sweep it under the carpet (avoidance of problems) ; (2)deal with it head on with harshness

here are some observations from this passage:
1. King solomon assume responsibility to even listen to 2 prostitutes. he could have passed this issue to someone else to settle it, however as the issue has come into his courts, he took up the responsibility to try to solve the issue .

2. did he deal with harshness? on surface, he seems to thought of a ridiculous idea of splitting the child into 2. but he made the resolve of thinking of the bigger picture; he KNOWS what goal he is working towards. He sees the sun . (ecc7: 11 Wisdom, like an inheritance, is a good thing and benefits those who see the sun.)
bottom line: know what direction you are heading and choose the most appropriate outcome you want to see.

3. he did not split up the child. of cos, he didn't . but in the course of it, you also see his power and authority, the first woman did believe he has the power to do it. do all leaders have the same power?

the lesson i learn this morning is that wisdom is to consider ALL ends of the issue. and to work towards what is the best and appropriate outcome (NOT necessarily a win-win situation). Sometimes it would be better to settle for a win-lose,lose-win situation if the issue call for it! eg. sacking a staff? removal of someone who is a disturbance in the team.

quoted :
ii. Trapp on bring me a sword: "For what purpose? Thought the standers by; wondering and perhaps laughing within themselves. The actions of wise princes are riddles to vulgar constructions: nor is it for the shallow capacities of the multitude to fathom the deep projects of sovereign authority."

They feared the king, for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him to administer justice: The people of Israel saw that Solomon had both the wisdom and the courage to do the right thing as a leader. This made them hesitant to disobey the law of the king.

An isolated leader

NIV: Advancement Is Meaningless

Ecclesiastes 4: 13 Better a poor but wise youth than an old but foolish king who no longer knows how to take warning. 14 The youth may have come from prison to the kingship, or he may have been born in poverty within his kingdom. 15 I saw that all who lived and walked under the sun followed the youth, the king's successor. 16 There was no end to all the people who were before them. But those who came later were not pleased with the successor. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

From New Bible Commentary: An isolated leader. Some ambiguous pronouns in v 14 mean that this passage can be read in several ways. The NIV is probably correct. The elderly king of v 13 was wise once (as no longer suggests) but lost his wisdom. The word for poor refers to humble origins. Youth ranges in age from teens to forties. In v 14 his refers to the king. A young man arises; he had everything against him but the king became isolated (implied in v 15). The isolation of the older man led to the success of the younger. The younger man was successful for a while (15). In v 16 before them means ‘were their subjects’. For the younger man also popularity was not lasting. [p. 613] He repeated the cycle. Two main points that are true universally arise from the story: that isolation is part of the painfulness of human experience, and that the new generation did not solve the problem of the older generation (see 1:9-11).

Ryan's reflections.
leaders come and go. every generation complain about the leaders of their time; and they seem to always think they have the know-how or answers to solve problems. "wait till you become a leader youself.... wait till you become a father yourself" while there may me some truth, the point of reflection is : it is meaningless. there will surely be something people will not be satisfied with - either with the current life or with the life to come. (assume one believes and go to heaven!) leaders come, leaders go... no one can outlast God. It is still God who decides who shall reign, who shall end well, and who shall end badly. He is sovereign ; if there is anything to ask... (see ecc 3:14-15)

Who Shall Shepherd the Flock?

By John Piper
April 24, 1994
1 Peter 5:1-4

Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.
The Seriousness of Elder Accountability for the Flock

Probably no issue has occupied more of the elders' time over the past several years than the issue of how to provide pastoral care and oversight to about 1,100 people scattered all over the Twin Cities. Verse 4 says that someday the "Chief Shepherd" is going to appear and there will be a reckoning with the under-shepherds, the elders. That is a sobering thing to those of us in leadership.

We have become increasingly convicted by texts like Hebrews 13:17, which says to the church:

Your leaders [the elders] keep watch over your souls, as those who will give an account [namely, to God]. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you.

Or Acts 20:28 where Paul says to the elders of the church in Ephesus:

Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

You can hear the earnestness and the seriousness in those words: you elders shepherd the people "whom God purchased with his own blood." In other words, don't take this work lightly. Don't be casual and cavalier and breezy about this responsibility.

An Emerging Vision of "District Pastoral Care"

The fruit of all our study and prayer and work is an emerging vision of a district pastoral care eldership teamed up with district deacons and small group leaders who together will shepherd the flock of God called Bethlehem, and give an account of each member before the Lord.

The aim is to build a people, through the Word of God and prayer and all kinds of practical caring ministries in the districts, who in their hearts have a vision of a great, glorious, sovereign, gracious, wise, all-sufficient, all-satisfying God; and who savor that vision of God in worship, strengthen that vision of God in mutual encouragement and care, and spread that vision of God in works of love, local evangelism, and world missions.

Tom Steller will say more about the details of the pastoral care elders in a few minutes.

What I want to do is put the vision in a biblical context from 1 Peter 5, that proved to be far more relevant to our situation when I began to study it, than I thought it was going to be.

Why Does Peter Exhort the Letter Here?

The text begins in chapter 5: "Therefore, I exhort the elders among you." If we ask, "Why did Peter feel the need to exhort the elders here at the end of his letter?" we get a clue to the answer in the word "therefore." Something is happening . . . "Therefore, I exhort the elders." (Again I build half my message on a word that the NIV simply chooses to drop!!! Look to the NASB or RSV.)

Warnings of the Coming "Fiery Ordeal" of Judgment

Peter has been warning the church about the "fiery ordeal that is coming upon them for their testing" (4:12). He says (in 4:13) that the Christians may share the sufferings of Christ for a season and then exult in the glory of Christ when he comes. This is what Peter says about himself in 5:1 when he calls himself a fellow elder with the elders he's writing to. He says he is a witness to Christ's sufferings and a sharer in the coming glory. This alerts us that this "fiery ordeal" (4:12) probably has something to do with the elders in chapter 5.

This gets even clearer in 4:17. Peter explains why this "fiery trial" is coming on the church. He says (v. 17), "For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? (18) And if it is with difficulty that the righteous is saved, what will become of the godless man and the sinner?"

These verses have to do with the whole church. The fiery ordeal that comes as punishing condemnation on unbelievers hits the church first as fires of purification and refining (cf. 1:7).

The Background of Ezekiel 9

But what about the elders? Is there anything special for them in this? There are two Old Testament background texts that suggest there is. One is Ezekiel 9. God's own people have committed abominations and God resolves to judge his own city. God says to his angel (v. 4),

"Go through the midst of the city, even through the midst of Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations which are being committed in its midst." [Like blood on the doorpost at the Passover.] 5 But to the others He said in my hearing, "Go through the city after him and strike; do not let your eye have pity, and do not spare. 6 Utterly slay old men, young men, maidens, little children, and women, but do not touch any man on whom is the mark; and you shall start from My sanctuary [same idea and words as here in 1 Peter 4:17]." So they started with the elders who were before the temple.

So if Peter has in his mind the way God once began his judgment from the house of God—especially from the elders—he may well see a special need to exhort the elders in view of the fiery ordeal that is coming.

The Background of Malachi 3:1–3
The other background text is Malachi 3:1–3 where God says that his messenger is going to come to his temple—to his house or his people as Peter says (in 2:5):

2 But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears? For He is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap. 3 . . . He will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, so that they may present to the Lord offerings in righteousness.

The "sons of Levi" are the priests. Now it's true that in 1 Peter 2:5, 9 all believers are priests. But it is not easy for a leader to read this and fail to see that the refining fire of judgment has a special reference to leaders. The fire purifies the leaders first.

The Judgment of God Begins with Elders

So when Peter says in 4:17, "It is time for judgment to begin with the household of God," it is easy to see why he would say in 5:1, "THEREFORE, I exhort the elders among you . . ."

So my answer to the question, "Why does Peter feel the need to exhort the elders?" is that this "fiery ordeal" in 4:12 is a judgment from God that begins with the house of God—and in the house of God begins with the elders, the leaders.

It is a fearful and wonderful thing to be an elder in the house of God. If the elders lead the church into strength and glory, they will also lead the church into the refiner's fire of God's purifying judgment. They will not stand above the church or outside the church giving suggestions for how to cope with fire; they will lead the church into the fire.

Peter Practices What He Preaches

So when Peter calls himself in verse 1 a "fellow elder," it's not that he is laying claim to an exalted title (he could have called himself an apostle!); he's expressing a willingness to suffer in the refiner's fire along with the rest of the elders. In fact I think this is what he means when he calls himself in v. 1b a "witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed." I think "witness" here means more than, "I was there and I saw them." I think he means, "I bear witness to them by my words and by my life. I am with you in the struggle. I am with you in the fire that purifies and refines the elders of God's people."

In other words he is practicing what he preaches in verse 3—that elders lead by example not by lording it over the flock.

So Peter believes that the elders need a special exhortation here at the end of his letter. Fire is painful; judgment is serious. It is coming on the house of God; and on the elders first. In this situation elders need warning and they need hope. Peter gives both.

Three Warnings for Elders

Three warnings. Warnings against three typical failures in the eldership. A warning against laziness; a warning against greed; and a warning against pride. The lust for ease, the lust for money, and the lust for power and prestige.

1. A Warning Against Laziness

First, a warning against laziness—the lust for leisure and comfort and ease. Verse 2: "Shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God."

He warns them against drifting into a lazy or distracted pattern of ministry that requires some kind of external "compulsion" to overcome. Don't be sluggish and unconcerned. Don't be like the mule that has to have a bit and bridle. Be willing.

Or it might be that it's fear he is warning against here and not laziness. It might be fear that makes an elder unwilling to serve. Don't be fearful of doing what you are called to do. Do it voluntarily.

This is why we do not want to pressure anyone into the eldership at Bethlehem. God wants men who want the ministry, not those who act out of external compulsion.

2. A Warning Against Greed

Second, Peter warns the elders against greed—the lust for money. Verse 2c: "Shepherd the flock . . . not for sordid gain, but with eagerness." This would apply especially to us who make our living in the ministry. Do not begin to look on your eldership merely as a means of making a living. Watch out for the temptation to make "godliness a means of gain," as Paul said in 1 Timothy 6:5.

Rather do your ministry with "eagerness." That is, love your work. Find joy in your work. Remember, as Paul said to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20:35, "It is more blessed to give than to receive." And remember what Hebrews 13:17 says, "Let [the elders minister] with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you."

3. A Warning Against Pride

Third, Peter warns the elders against pride—the lust for power and prestige. Verse 3: "[Shepherd the flock . . . not yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock." Pride is the failure to realize deeply that without Christ we can do nothing. And so the proud heart starts to feel that it can be self-reliant. And then it begins to feel that it is indispensable. And then it starts to act that way and exalt itself and seek the praise of men.

But Peter says to the elders, don't exalt yourselves like that; lead—you must lead (as v. 5 implies)—but lead with servant lowliness; lead by example.

When the fiery trial comes to you first, lead by example. You don't escape it or run from it. You walk through it with the sheep.

Those are the warnings we need. A warning against living for ease; a warning against living for money; and a warning against living for power and prestige and praise.

Hope for Elders

But in this fiery situation elders also need hope. This is what Peter gives them in verse 4: "And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory."

Yesterday in the seminar on the urban poor Viv Grigg referred to the words of Jesus in Luke 14:13–14 about ministry to the poor. Jesus holds out the same kind of hope Peter does here:

When you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, since they do not have the means to repay you; for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.

In other words there are ministries we should do that may be thankless in this world. If we need a lot of strokes, we will probably not do what Jesus calls us to do. It's too hard and there's not enough reward here and now.

But if we really believe that we will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous, if we elders really believe that "when the Chief Shepherd appears he will give us the unfading crown of glory," then we will have motivation and strength to do what he calls us to do.

There may be times when our elders feel like the refining fire is too hot. We may feel that, if it takes this much fire to burn away our sloth and our greed and our pride, then it's not worth it. But that would be because we have taken our eyes off eternity, and off the all-satisfying Chief-Shepherd, our Lord Jesus.

Tom Steller is going to come and say a word about the pastoral care eldership at Bethlehem. My prayer as he comes is that God would cause gifted and qualified men at Bethlehem to sense the call of God on your life. There is a great work to do. A great fiery battle to be fought. And a great reward beyond all measure.

Miriam and Aaron oppose Moses.

New Bible Commentary [p. 181] A third rebellion followed at Hazeroth, the next camp site. Moses had married a Cushite wife, probably Ethiopian (in Gn. 10:6 Cush means Ethiopia), and this was probably his second wife (his first wife was Zipporah, a Midianite; Ex. 2:16-21). Making this an excuse, Miriam and Aaron spoke against him. They desired equality with him as leaders of Israel. Miriam seems to have been the main culprit and she bore the punishment. It may seem strange that she, being a woman, should have challenged the authority of her brother. However, she was a prophetess and leader of the Israelite women (Ex. 15:20-21).
Again, we read that the Lord heard their hostile words. His response was to confirm his choice of Moses (6-8) and then to judge Miriam and Aaron (9-10). There are many parallels between Miriam’s rebellion and Israel’s craving for meat (ch. 11:4-35). On both occasions, God’s provision (the manna; Moses’ leadership) was rejected, and in response, God confirmed Moses’ position (by giving him elders and by his word) and judgment fell (the plague; Miriam’s leprosy). The author comments about Moses’ humility (3). True humility consists in a commitment to obeying God’s will to the point of self–denial. Such self–sacrifice can leave a man vulnerable and forced to cast himself on God to protect and sustain him. Further, as he strives to serve God, he discovers his own weaknesses and failings, and in that way reaches a proper view of himself. Humility is not a negative quality (devaluing of self) but a positive commitment to service, supremely exemplified in Christ (Phil. 2:3-8). Moses showed humility in continuing to lead Israel through the desert for forty years, even though it was a burden. He did not defend himself but turned to God, who defends and helps the humble (Pss. 147:6; 149:4; Mt. 5:5; 1 Pet. 5:6). On this occasion, the Lord left Miriam and Aaron in no doubt as he upheld his servant Moses. Thus, Numbers records three ‘complainings’ before Israel was half way to Canaan.