We have removed the study entitled “Authority, Order, and Motivation” (AOM) because we have grown to understand that it was teaching false doctrine about church authority. This false teaching led to legalistic rules and regulations that created a violent cultish environment. We have come to see this was contrary to God’s description of how the local church is to function (Luke 22:24-27).
The essence of disobedience is the denial of the order imposed on us by just authority. The just authority is God Himself and those duly appointed by Him to order our life. (Teaches that God has delegated authority through leadership to direct our life.)
Remember, the purpose of authority in the Church is to direct the movement of saints, judge issues to maintain order, and restore peace in areas where contentions have arisen. (Teaches that leadership has been ordained by God to control believers, render judgement, and restore peace.)
“If we can obediently do what one in authority directs us to do, then the one in authority is responsible before God for what was done.” (Teaches that moral responsibility for an action rests with the authority figure rather than the subordinate who carries it out.)
“If we attempt to excuse ourselves by saying… ‘He would not want me to violate my own conscience’… then we are merely ‘leaning unto our own understanding.’ Both of these 2 excuses are explicitly rejected in the scriptures.” (Defines appeals to personal conscience as illegitimate and treats them as improper reliance on individual judgment.)
“They are to be obeyed because that is pleasing to Him, not because the individual merits it… Sin on another’s part does not give me license to ignore God’s order.” (Requires obedience to leaders based on position alone, regardless of the leader’s conduct or moral condition.)
“We are all priests of God and can get our directions from God directly. We are dependent on no man… The truth is, of course, the very opposite.” (Rejects the idea that individual believers may receive direct guidance from God without mediation by recognized authority.)
“Those under authority do not have the privilege to install or remove… God puts them in and takes them out.” (States that members under authority have no role in appointing or removing leaders.)
“The principle is clear, LEAN NOT. It is just as clear as EAT NOT LEST YE DIE.” (Equates reliance on personal understanding with a fundamental prohibition comparable to the command given in Eden.)
Robert D. Harrison, Jr. (July 1996)
Historical Influences on the AOM Doctrine
The AOM document confirms that it was the result of previous doctrinal debates. The author notes that those who caused division in the past were “wresting the scriptures” to support “self-exaltation”. This 1996 document was therefore a re-assertion of a specific interpretation of authority meant to prevent such “anarchy” from recurring by defining any deviation from leadership as “self-will” or “deception”.
While AOM identifies Robert D. Harrison, Jr. as the author, research into the “assemblies” mentioned and the specific language used (such as “heavenly Father,” “reckoning the old man dead,” and “God-ordained authority”) suggests these doctrines were influenced by the following:
- Plymouth Brethrenism: Particularly the emphasis on the “Body of Christ” and the rejection of “sectarian” denominations.
- The “Overcomer” Doctrine: The idea that only certain “spiritual” Christians (those who submit to the order and deny themselves) will receive a full inheritance in the coming kingdom.
- Watchman Nee: The concept of “Delegated Authority” was popularized by Watchman Nee (a leader in the “Little Flock” movement in China). Nee’s book, Spiritual Authority, mirrors many of the arguments found in AOM, specifically the idea that to rebel against a delegated authority is to rebel against God Himself.
- Geftakys Assembly movement. George Geftakys, who began his ministry in the late 1960s and 1970s, was the primary architect of this high-submission authority structure.
- Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP): Bill Gothard was the sole teacher, interpreter, and authority from the beginning (Campus Teams, 1961). Authoritarian epistemology: truth flows from the “man of God,” not Scripture interpreted in community. “Umbrella of Authority” doctrine mirrors the ministry’s internal structure: unquestioned hierarchy, obedience as safety.
- Authority, Order, and Motivation by Robert Harrison (July 1996) – I have uploaded the document to Google NotebookLM for research and study purposes.
In summary, the AOM document is a formalization of a pre-existing oral and cultural tradition within these assemblies, likely drawing on the “Delegated Authority” concepts popular in mid-20th-century independent fundamentalist and Plymouth Brethren-adjacent circles.
Dangerous Errors in the AOM Doctrine
The doctrine under review places strong emphasis on submission to what it calls “God-ordained authority,” presenting such submission as essential for order and spiritual success. Respect for authority is clearly biblical, yet certain applications of this doctrine raise important theological questions. In particular, concerns arise around the role of individual conscience, accountability in leadership, personal access to God’s guidance, and the biblical responsibility to test teachings and leaders.
Scripture affirms both authority and responsibility. Healthy Christian obedience must hold these truths together rather than elevating one at the expense of the other. The following sections examine five areas where an imbalance toward unquestioning submission may conflict with broader biblical teaching. The goal is not to promote rebellion, but to encourage careful discernment grounded in Scripture, where obedience to God remains the highest priority and spiritual maturity includes both humility and discernment.
The Role of Individual Conscience
This doctrine discourages believers from relying on personal understanding or conscience when it conflicts with commands from recognized authority. Appealing to conscience is portrayed as dangerous, even equated with rebellion or spiritual anarchy. Proverbs 3:5–6 is often cited to support this emphasis on submission rather than personal judgment.
Scripture, however, also places significant weight on individual moral responsibility. Believers are repeatedly called to act in faith with a clear conscience before God. The New Testament teaches that actions not rooted in faith are sinful and that each believer must be personally persuaded in matters of conviction. While conscience can certainly be misused to justify disobedience, the Bible does not present conscience as disposable or irrelevant.
A biblically balanced view recognizes that conscience must be shaped by Scripture, not suppressed by authority. Submission to leaders is important, but it does not eliminate a believer’s responsibility to think, discern, and act faithfully before God.
Obedience to Leaders Despite Moral Failure
The doctrine asserts that believers must submit to leaders regardless of the leader’s personal merit or moral condition. Obedience is framed as pleasing to God even when leadership decisions are questionable, with the assurance that God alone will hold the leader accountable.
While Scripture affirms respect for authority, it also clearly establishes limits. The apostles themselves taught that obedience to God takes precedence over obedience to men. Scripture further warns believers not to participate in or enable the sins of others. Blind compliance risks entangling a believer in wrongdoing under the guise of submission.
Biblical obedience is never morally neutral. Each believer remains accountable to God for their actions, even when those actions are performed under authority. Submission is not absolute; it is conditioned by faithfulness to God’s revealed will.
Personal Access to Spiritual Guidance
This doctrine challenges the idea that individual believers can receive direction from God apart from institutional oversight. Appeals to personal guidance are portrayed as prideful or deceptive, and spiritual independence is viewed as opposition to God’s order.
Yet Scripture affirms that every believer has direct access to God through Christ. The New Testament teaches that believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, who instructs, convicts, and guides them in truth. The priesthood of all believers emphasizes this personal relationship without denying the value of teaching and accountability within the church.
Healthy biblical teaching recognizes both realities. God uses pastors and teachers, but He also works directly in the hearts of His people through His Word and Spirit. Spiritual authority should equip believers to discern truth, not replace their responsibility to know God personally.
Addressing Unqualified Leadership
According to this doctrine, those under authority have no legitimate role in removing or correcting leaders. Any attempt to do so is labeled as rebellion or carnality. The prescribed response to harmful leadership is quiet endurance and prayer, waiting for God alone to intervene.
Scripture, however, presents a more active role for the church. The New Testament shows congregations participating in leadership selection and exercising discipline when serious sin threatens the body. Believers are instructed to confront, correct, and, when necessary, remove unrepentant individuals for the health of the church.
Prayer and patience are vital, but they do not exclude responsible action. Biblical church life includes accountability, not passive silence in the face of persistent wrongdoing.
Questioning Authority and Biblical Discernment
The doctrine equates questioning authority with despising government and promotes caution against engaging a culture it sees as anti-authority. While acknowledging that authority is not infallible, it discourages believers from openly challenging leaders or teachings.
Scripture, however, repeatedly commends discernment. Faithful believers are praised for testing teachings against Scripture, even when those teachings come from respected leaders. Biblical faith is not anti-authority, but it is truth-centered.
Respectful questioning rooted in Scripture is not rebellion; it is obedience to God’s Word. A church that discourages testing risks elevating authority above truth. True biblical authority welcomes examination because it stands on God’s revealed Word, not personal control.
Conclusion
Biblical submission and biblical discernment are not enemies. Scripture calls believers to respect authority while remaining personally accountable to God. Any doctrine that diminishes conscience, discourages testing, or removes responsibility from individual believers must be carefully reexamined in the light of the whole counsel of God.
Restoration of Those Taken Captive by AOM
Those under high-control authority structures are rarely rebellious or naïve. They are often earnest, teachable, and fearful of displeasing God. Many have been trained to equate questioning leaders with questioning God Himself.
Scripture calls for gentleness when correcting those who are ensnared:
Do not begin by attacking leaders or labels. Begin by listening. Let them tell their story. Affirm their desire to obey God. Restoration almost always fails when it starts with arguments rather than love.
Identifying the “Mental Traps” of the AOM Doctrine
High-submission authority-over-man (AOM) doctrine does not merely demand obedience; it trains the mind to distrust itself in ways that short-circuit discernment. These mental traps form a closed system of thought where disagreement is impossible without self-condemnation. Recognizing these traps is a critical step toward restoration.
- The Invalidity of Personal Thought: The doctrine teaches that “leaning unto [one’s] own understanding” is a sin. If a member has a concern, they are told their “heart is deceitful” and that they are “deceived” by their own “carnal mind”.
- The “Conscience” as a Cloak: Legitimate moral objections are dismissed as a “cloak for rebellion”. A member is taught that if they “struggle” with a command from authority, the problem is not the command, but their own “guilty” conscience.
- Demonizing External Influence: The doctrine characterizes all external information—books, movies, and even other Christians—as “media bombardment” and a “deceiver’s mechanism” intended to control them.
Trap One: The Invalidity of Personal Thought
Members are taught that “leaning on your own understanding” is itself sinful. Any concern, hesitation, or internal resistance is immediately reframed as evidence of a “deceitful heart” or a “carnal mind.” The conclusion is predetermined: if you disagree, you are deceived.
This is circular logic. The doctrine assumes its own correctness and then uses Scripture selectively to disqualify any internal questioning of it. Thought is not tested; it is pathologized. Over time, the believer learns that thinking independently equals spiritual danger, which produces fear, passivity, and dependence on authority figures to think for them.
Trap Two: Conscience Recast as Rebellion
In Scripture, conscience is a God-given moral faculty that must be informed by truth. In AOM systems, conscience is redefined as suspect by default. Moral objections are dismissed as a “cloak for rebellion,” and inner conflict is interpreted as proof of a “guilty conscience.”
This reverses biblical logic. Instead of asking whether a command is righteous, the member is trained to assume the command is right and the conscience is wrong. The result is profound moral confusion. The believer is taught to suppress conviction rather than examine commands, leading to obedience without faith and action without moral clarity.
Trap Three: Demonizing All External Input
Another powerful control mechanism is the demonization of outside information. Books, sermons, media, and even other Christians are labeled “media bombardment” or “deceiver mechanisms.” This isolates the member intellectually and spiritually, ensuring that the doctrine is never meaningfully challenged.
When all external voices are treated as threats, the system becomes self-sealing. Truth is no longer evaluated by Scripture, but by proximity to approved authority. This isolation increases dependence and makes leaving feel terrifying and unsafe.
The Solution: Re-establish the Absolute Authority of Scripture
The way out of these mental traps is not self-trust, but Scripture-trust. High-submission systems subtly replace the Bible with people who “interpret” the Bible for others. Restoration requires patiently re-centering the believer on Sola Scriptura.
Return to simple, honest Bible reading. Ask basic questions:
- What does the text actually say?
- Who is being addressed?
- What is commanded, and to whom?
Key passages include:
- Acts 17:11, believers commended for testing teaching
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17, Scripture as sufficient
- Colossians 2:8, warning against captivity through human systems
Scripture itself commends this approach. Believers are praised for testing teaching against the Word. Scripture is declared sufficient to equip the believer for every good work. Believers are warned against captivity through human traditions and systems.
The goal is not to exchange one authority hierarchy for another. The goal is to restore confidence that God’s Word is clear, sufficient, and accessible, and that obedience flows from truth understood, not fear enforced. When Scripture is restored to its rightful place, the mental traps lose their power, and genuine spiritual freedom becomes possible.
Breaking the Authority Loop
At the heart of high-submission systems is the doctrine of delegated authority, a teaching that appears orderly and spiritual on the surface but produces profoundly dangerous results when followed consistently. The danger lies not merely in strong leadership, but in a closed authority loop that displaces conscience, Scripture, and personal accountability before God.
- Unconditional Obedience: Members are taught to obey leaders not because the leader is right, but because the leader holds a “God-ordained” position.
- Responsibility Shift: The doctrine reassures members that if they obey a leader’s questionable direction, the leader is responsible to God for the sin, while the subordinate remains “right in God’s sight” for being submissive.
- Deprogramming Insight: To counter this, one might use the biblical conflicts discussed earlier, such as the mandate to “obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29), to show that personal moral accountability cannot be delegated away.
Unconditional Obedience Detached From Truth
Members are taught to obey leaders not because the leader’s instruction is biblically sound, but because the leader occupies a “God-ordained” position. Obedience becomes positional rather than moral. Over time, this conditions believers to stop asking whether something is right and to ask only whether it came from the proper authority.
This is dangerous because Scripture never commands obedience divorced from truth. Biblical submission is always tethered to righteousness. When obedience is detached from truth, authority becomes self-validating. Whatever the leader commands is presumed right by virtue of who they are, not by what God has said. This subtly replaces Scripture with hierarchy.
The Illusion of a Responsibility Shift
Even more dangerous is the claim that responsibility for sin transfers upward. Members are reassured that if they obey a questionable or even sinful directive, the leader bears the guilt before God, while the subordinate remains “right in God’s sight” for being submissive.
This teaching directly contradicts the biblical doctrine of judgment. Scripture repeatedly affirms that each person will give account of himself to God. God does not judge chains of command; He judges hearts and deeds. By promising moral immunity through obedience, the doctrine trains believers to participate in sin while silencing their conscience. This is not protection, it is deception.
How the Authority Loop Becomes Self-Sealing
Once obedience is unconditional and responsibility is reassigned, the system becomes impossible to challenge from within. Questioning authority is reframed as rebellion. Appealing to conscience is labeled pride. Testing teaching by Scripture is portrayed as disorder. Any internal check is neutralized.
The result is a closed loop:
- Leaders interpret God’s will.
- Members obey regardless of conviction.
- Consequences are blamed on leadership failure, not participant sin.
- The system remains intact, even as spiritual damage accumulates.
This is precisely how abuse, doctrinal error, and moral compromise persist unchecked.
Scripture Breaks the Loop
The biblical antidote is clear and uncompromising:
This does not abolish authority, but it establishes its limit. Obedience to God is never delegated. Moral responsibility is never transferable. Every believer stands directly before God, accountable for what they choose to do, even under pressure.
Breaking the authority loop is essential because any system that teaches believers to sin with a clean conscience is not producing obedience, but bondage. True biblical authority leads people toward Christ, truth, and holiness. Any doctrine that shields sin under submission is not from God and must be rejected for the safety of Christ’s people and the honor of His name.
Restoring Personal Responsibility Before a Holy God
A recurring claim in high-submission delegated-authority teaching is that when a believer obeys a leader’s directive, moral responsibility transfers upward. According to this view, the authority figure answers to God for the outcome, while the subordinate remains “right in God’s sight” so long as obedience is maintained. Scripture, however, consistently rejects this idea. From beginning to end, the Bible affirms that God holds each person personally accountable for their own choices, even when those choices are made under authority.
The Word of God never teaches a moral “responsibility shift.” While God establishes authority for order and good, He never removes individual responsibility for sin. Obedience to authority is always subordinate to obedience to God.
God Judges Individuals, Not Hierarchies
Acts 5 provides a sobering correction. Sapphira followed her husband’s lead in deception. She acted within a recognized authority structure, yet God held her personally responsible. She was not excused because she was a subordinate. Her judgment demonstrates that participation in sin, even under leadership, brings personal accountability.
Likewise, Scripture praises those who refuse sinful commands. The Hebrew midwives disobeyed a royal decree to murder infants, and God rewarded them for fearing Him rather than the king. Saul’s servants refused to slaughter the priests of the Lord, recognizing that obedience to God outweighed obedience to a corrupted ruler. Their refusal was not rebellion but righteousness.
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego provide the same testimony. They did not quietly comply with idolatry while waiting for God to remove the king. They openly refused to sin, accepting the consequences rather than violating their loyalty to God. Their faith affirms that believers are responsible for their own worship and obedience, regardless of commands from above.
Scripture’s Own Logic Refutes Responsibility Transfer
Even proponents of responsibility-shifting language often contradict themselves. Scripture plainly states that each person “shall give account of himself to God” (Romans 14:12). We reap according to our choices. We are not forced into righteousness or sin; we yield to whom we choose to obey. Yielding to a sinful command is itself a moral decision, not a neutral act.
The story of Joab confirms this principle decisively. Though he acted under King David’s orders, Scripture ultimately places the guilt of murder on Joab himself. He was later executed for those crimes, and the blood was said to rest on his own head. Following orders did not absolve him.
Conclusion
God does not judge abstractions, systems, or chains of command. He judges hearts and deeds. Authority does not nullify conscience, and submission does not erase accountability. Every believer stands directly before God, responsible for discerning right from wrong and choosing obedience to Him above all others.
- Christ alone is Head of the Church (Colossians 1:18)
- Each believer answers directly to the Lord (Romans 14:4, 12)
- Leaders are servants, not mediators (1 Peter 5:2-3)
True biblical submission never asks a believer to sin so that another may answer for it. God holds each of us responsible for our actions, and He calls His people to obey Him, even when obedience is costly.
Healing a Wounded Conscience to Trust God Again
One of the deepest and most lasting injuries caused by high-submission delegated-authority systems is damage to the conscience. In these environments, believers are repeatedly taught that inner conviction is dangerous, unreliable, or even sinful. When conscience conflicts with authority, the conscience is blamed, suppressed, or “crucified.” Over time, this produces fear, anxiety, confusion, and spiritual paralysis.
Many were trained to equate conscience with rebellion. If something felt wrong, they were told the problem was not the command but their heart. If they hesitated, they were accused of pride or carnality. If they felt moral tension, they were warned that Satan was exploiting their thoughts. The result was a learned reflex to quench conviction and submit, even when Scripture and conscience protested.
The Biblical Role of the Conscience
Scripture never treats the conscience as an enemy to be silenced. While conscience is not infallible, it is a God-given moral faculty that must be informed by truth, not overridden by authority.
Romans 14 emphasizes that each believer must act from personal conviction before God and warns against violating conscience, even in disputable matters. Paul teaches that actions taken apart from faith are sin, regardless of external permission.
First Timothy 1:5 identifies “a good conscience” as a core aim of biblical teaching, alongside love and sincere faith. A damaged conscience is not a mark of maturity, but of spiritual harm.
James 4:17 affirms personal moral responsibility plainly: “To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” No appeal to authority can cancel that accountability.
How the Conscience Becomes Defiled
High-submission systems force believers to repeatedly act against conviction “for obedience’ sake.” Over time, the conscience becomes wounded, dulled, or defiled. What once felt clearly wrong begins to feel confusing. What once prompted moral resistance now triggers fear. Scripture describes this condition as a harmed conscience, not a healthy one.
This is why many who leave such systems struggle to make even simple decisions. Their internal moral compass has been systematically mistrained. Healing is not instant, and it must not be rushed.
The Path to Healing the Conscience
Healing begins by restoring permission to listen. Encourage the believer to slow down and re-engage Scripture honestly, without pre-filtered interpretations. Help them relearn that conviction is not rebellion and that moral discomfort may be the Spirit’s warning, not the flesh’s resistance.
Encourage them to act in faith before God, not merely in compliance with people. Healing often begins with a simple but profound sentence they were never allowed to say:
“I must obey God with a clear conscience” – This summarizes a central biblical principle: obedience is not merely external compliance but a personal, faith-filled response before God Himself. Scripture teaches that each believer stands individually accountable to the Lord, who judges the heart as well as the deed (Romans 14:12). To act against conscience is to act without faith, and “whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Romans 14:23). The conscience, though not infallible, is a God-given witness that must be informed by truth, not silenced by fear or overridden by human authority (1 Timothy 1:5). James affirms that when a believer knows the good they ought to do and refuses it, they sin personally, regardless of pressure or command (James 4:17). For this reason, the apostles declared, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29), establishing that no earthly authority can relieve a believer of moral responsibility before God. True obedience, therefore, requires a clear conscience shaped by Scripture, willing to follow God faithfully even when obedience is costly.
This is not autonomy. It is biblical obedience. A healed conscience does not reject authority, but it refuses to sin for it. As Scripture reshapes the conscience and fear loosens its grip, the believer can once again walk in joyful obedience, grounded not in coercion, but in truth, faith, and love before God.
Addressing the Fear of Leaving
One of the strongest tools used by high-submission delegated-authority systems is fear. Leaving is not presented as a matter of conscience or doctrinal disagreement, but as a spiritual catastrophe. The fear is carefully cultivated so that even contemplating departure feels dangerous, sinful, and disloyal to God Himself. Any effort at restoration must patiently expose these fears and answer them with Scripture.
Fear of Being a “Castaway”
Those who leave are often labeled “castaways from usefulness,” implying that spiritual fruitfulness exists only within that specific assembly or authority structure. This subtly replaces Christ as the source of usefulness with an institution.
Scripture teaches otherwise. Fruitfulness flows from abiding in Christ, not remaining under a particular leader (John 15:4-5). The apostle Paul himself ministered in many contexts and even parted ways with fellow workers, yet was never rendered useless. A believer does not cease to be called, gifted, or loved by God simply because they leave a controlling environment. God’s gifts and calling are not revoked by human institutions (Romans 11:29).
The “Cain” and “Absalom” Labels
Comparing those who leave to Cain or Absalom is a powerful form of spiritual intimidation. These figures are associated with rebellion, pride, and destruction, and the implication is clear: leaving will inevitably lead to moral collapse.
This tactic depends on guilt by association, not careful biblical interpretation. Scripture records many righteous separations commanded or commended by God, including Abraham leaving his father’s house, the prophets separating from corrupt leadership, and believers withdrawing from those who teach error. Leaving a system is not the same as rejecting God. The Bible distinguishes rebellion against God from obedience to Him in the face of corrupt authority.
Fear of Social and Spiritual Exile
High-submission systems often preemptively frame leavers as bitter, divisive, or self-exalting. This prepares the community to withdraw fellowship, view the person with suspicion, or even treat them as spiritually dangerous. The resulting isolation can be terrifying, especially when one’s entire social and spiritual world is bound to the group.
Here it is crucial to remind the believer that Scripture never authorizes shunning as a tool to enforce control or suppress conscience. The New Testament vision of fellowship is built on truth, love, and mutual edification, not fear-driven exclusion. Being rejected by people does not mean being rejected by God. Christ Himself was cast out by religious authorities, yet perfectly pleasing to the Father.
Address Fear with the Gospel, Not Autonomy
The solution to these fears is not independence for its own sake, nor isolation from all authority. Fear must be met with the gospel. High-submission systems thrive on fear of deception, fear of judgment, and fear of abandonment. The gospel replaces fear with assurance.
Freedom in Christ is not lawlessness. It is the freedom to obey God from the heart, with a clean conscience, grounded in grace rather than coercion. Leaving a controlling system does not mean leaving Christ. Often, it is the necessary step toward recovering His rightful lordship.
Rebuilding Confidence and Belonging
Those who leave often need time to heal. Encourage slow, Scripture-saturated rebuilding, not rushed decisions. Help them see that healthy authority exists, that godly churches welcome questions, and that Christian community can be safe again. Most importantly, remind them that their standing before God rests on Christ alone.
Restoration is not about “winning an argument.” It is about patiently leading people out of fear and back into the light of truth. The goal is not freedom from all authority, but freedom under Christ’s lordship, where obedience flows from love, faith, and truth, not fear.
Digging Deeper
- A Short History of Modern Non-denominational Evangelical Churches – Non-denominational evangelical churches blend Reformation doctrine, Anabaptist convictions, and Revivalist conversion urgency,
- Ten considerations before appointing church leaders – The importance of taking time to approve church leaders, which ensures godly, faithful, experienced, proven leadership
- Do you have Religious Trauma Syndrome? – Man-made, fear-based, religions have enslaved people for thousands of years. This leads to RTS (Religious Trauma Syndrome). You need to escape!.
- Warning about second-generation Christian leadership – Be cautious about second-generation Christian leadership. If we look at Biblical precedent, the second generation almost never ends well.
- Biblical Instructions for godly leadership – Throughout history godly leadership strives to feed the flock but ungodly leadership seeks position, authority, and wealth.
- God-given dominion for self, family, community, church – The Bible provides a clear order for a man’s dominion: self, family, community, and then church to bring glory to his name.