The Simple Answers… To Life’s Most Important Questions.
Bible Study Course Lesson 8 – 8
Men have spent 2,000 years developing ideas about the Christian religion that are so deeply ingrained in our thinking we don’t even realize they’re there. But if “church” doesn’t mean “Church”, we have to go through every office, every command that has been applied to the “church”, and apply it as God originally intended.
Don’t underestimate the magnitude of that job. What is a minister, if he isn’t the head of a church congregation? What is an ordination, if it isn’t done by a church body? What is a baptism, if you’re not baptized into a church?
Where is the spiritual authority of God on this Earth, if it is not based upon the hand-to-head chain of baptisms and ordinations supposedly tracing back to St. Peter? Where it always was, of course. We just couldn’t see it, because we thought we already saw it.
PETER – THE FIRST POPE?
The entire world believes that Peter was ordained the head of God’s church, and thus was the first Pope. Many believe there is an unbroken succession of ordinations in all churches that trace back to Peter. But now look at the proof they have: Matthew 16:18-19.
This “primacy of Peter” doctrine, as it’s called, has justified all the atrocities ever committed in the name of religion; the Crusades happened because the Pope, who sat “in the chair of St. Peter”, commanded the Europeans to attack the Muslims.
The Inquisition happened because the Pope, supposedly deriving his authority from God via Peter, commanded the death of heretics – Sabbath-keepers like you and me, among other things. All this because God made Peter the head of the church.
Or did He? Read the scripture carefully. Is that what it says? Think critically! Are you SURE that’s what it says? Who is the head of the church – Peter? Ephesians 5:23, Colossians 1:18. Who is the foundation stone upon which the church is founded – Peter? Ephesians 2:20-22, 1 Corinthians 3:10-11.
Who is the “Rock” of the church – Peter? 1 Corinthians 10:4. Who was David’s rock? Psalms 92:15. Is anyone else but God “the rock”? Psalms 18:31. But are there false rocks out there? Deuteronomy 32:30-32, 37-38.
Jesus is THE Rock. Not Peter. Jesus is the foundation upon which the ekklesia is built, not Peter. Jesus is the head of the church of the firstborn in heaven – not Peter. Now go back once more to Matthew 16:18. Look at it carefully; you see that everything Jesus seems to be promising Peter in fact applies to Jesus, not Peter!
All the confusion dissolves with the explanation of a Greek pun. The name “Peter” is translated from the Greek Petros meaning “a (piece of) rock”. But the word translated “Rock” later in Matthew 16:18 is Petra meaning “ a (mass of) rock”, or “cliff or ledge”.
So it is clear that these similar-sounding words mean something different in SIZE. Petros – Peter – means a small rock; Petra means a massive stone.
Using everything you’ve just read, it is obvious what was being said; to paraphrase, Jesus said to Peter “You are Peter, a mere pebble, but upon THIS ROCK, Myself, I will build My church”. Why say that? Remember: church doesn’t mean Church!
Jesus was saying that HE was going to call people to Himself, not to Peter. And that He would establish them on the foundation of Himself, the rock – not on the foundation of Peter! (1 Corinthians 3:11). But ironically, that’s exactly what most people think He did – the opposite of what He said!
But because Peter was a “chip off the old Rock”, so to speak, Jesus was entrusting him with His authority (Matthew 16:19); but was that authority unique to Peter, or given to ALL the apostles? Matthew 18:15-20. Who was in the audience? Matthew 18:1. Was that authority later given to all who have the holy spirit? John 20:21-23.
Peter was a heavy stone, which would be a part of the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20); but he was not the Rock to which we are anchored! Peter was an apostle, and an important person in the church (Galatians 2:6-9).
But notice that James was mentioned first among the “pillars” of the Jerusalem church. Peter was easily the most impetuous apostle, the most likely to act first and think later; but he was not the head of the church, nor was he the first Pope (nor was there ever a first Pope in God’s true church, nor did God ever have a “church”!).
Also, historically it is very likely that Peter never went to Rome. Paul went to Rome, Peter went to Babylon (1 Peter 5:13), which is a very long way in the opposite direction. And Paul made particular mention about not going to places the other apostles had gone specifically in the context of the Romans! (Romans 15:20).
So why do we have very early legends about Peter in Rome? Well, remember that Peter’s name was Simon Peter. There WAS another Simon in the Bible whom you can read about in Acts 8:9-24. This one-time sorcerer was in love with the attention and wanted to buy the holy spirit in order to keep the worship of the people.
Having the same first name as the apostle Peter, there is some historical evidence that this Simon the sorcerer – Simon the magus in Greek, meaning magician, or Simon Magus for short, went to Rome and started the “mystery of iniquity” we call the Catholic Church and was indeed the first Pope.
By pretending to be the apostle Simon (Peter), which Revelation 2:2 shows was a real problem in the first century, and by teaching a false doctrine of “buying your salvation” with money and penance, he could easily have started the first feel-good, false Christian church.
We know SOMEONE did this in the time of Peter and Paul, for the “mystery of iniquity” was already at work only 30 years after the death of Jesus (2 Thessalonians 2:7). Simon Magus is a likely culprit.
But regardless, Peter never held the preeminent position in the Christian church, except as the most brash and headstrong of any of the twelve apostles. He was sometimes a spokesman for the ekklesia, such as in Acts 2-5, but so were many others at other times, such as Stephen, James, Philip, etc.
DEMOCRACY OR HIERARCHY?
God’s government system is not democratic. It is clearly hierarchical. It is obvious from every example in the NT that God’s government is never run democratically. Did Paul listen to the democratic opinion of his companions? Acts 20:22-24, 21:3-12. Was Paul persuaded by their arguments (even when they were right)? Acts 21:13-14.
I may risk wearing out that passage in your Bible; yes, Paul should have listened to their advice, instead of being bound by his own spirit. But this time, that’s not the point; the point is, he didn’t. Paul went his way, and those who were interested in learning from him… followed. That’s what it means to lead.
Likewise, Jesus never asked advice or took a vote from the disciples. A few particularly clear examples would be Matthew 16:21-23 and Luke 9:54-56. That was Jesus – our perfect example, and the head of the church.
Therefore the authority for the church comes through Him, and this is how He ran things. This is also the example of all the apostles in the NT; all the apostles apparently led around an entourage (1 Corinthians 9:5) [“Cephas” is yet another name for the apostle Peter (John 1:40-42)].
The largest objection to hierarchy stems from Acts 15; but as usual, the very scripture that raises the contradiction actually proves the point. Paul had raised up churches all over modern Turkey and Greece, and was teaching things that the apostles and Jews violently disagreed with – particularly, the abolition of the law of Moses, circumcision, and the opening of the gospel to Gentiles (Acts 15:1-6).
They could not argue that God was with Paul. But so large loomed the statutes of Moses in their spirits, that they couldn’t turn loose of circumcision either, no matter how persuasively Paul argued. So they went behind Paul’s back, sending up men to persuade Paul’s converts to be circumcised and do Moses’ rituals and become naturalized Jews.
So they called a conference to settle the issue. All the apostles and elders in the church came together to discuss it and Peter – who had personal knowledge of the Gentiles being given the gospel (Acts 10-11) weighed in to give his opinion (Acts 15:7-11).
This is another place where the entire world says “SEE! Peter was Pope!” But keep reading and you’ll see who was REALLY the leader of the twelve at this point. Paul and Barnabas told their story in Acts 15:12, and when they were done, who spoke? Acts 15:13-18. Remember, Simeon/Simon is another name for Peter.
And when James was done speaking, what did he say? Acts 15:19-21. James said, “my SENTENCE [some translations say “ my JUDGMENT”] is…” That’s what a LEADER says. A leader gives his JUDGMENT on a matter after he has heard all sides!
So James was the head of the heads, just as Levi was the head of the heads in Israel (Numbers 17). Nothing is said about why; perhaps he was the oldest; perhaps because he was Jesus’ brother (Galatians 1:19), perhaps he just understood the most; regardless, the point is they did not take a vote on the matter.
But look at EXACTLY what James’ judgment WAS: “WE should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God” (Acts 15:19). James didn’t make a decision about what PAUL should do – he made a decision about what the JERUSALEM CHURCH should do!
Why? Because Paul derived his authority from God directly, not from James or Jerusalem! (Galatians 1:15-19). James had no authority to command Paul! Paul was “another man’s servant” to him. Paul had gone to the Jerusalem church to get THEM to stop sending people up to trouble his churches! ( Galatians 1:6-7).
Where did Paul get his authority and his understanding? Galatians 1:11-12. Was the Jerusalem church, of which James was the “chiefest apostle”, greater in authority than Paul? 2 Corinthians 11:5. But neither was Paul greater than them; they held the same office of Apostle, and were appointed by the same God; so they were independent of each other.
This is why God said to these twelve apostles “be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren” (Matthew 23:8). None of the twelve, nor Paul, were masters of the others; none were parents of the others, all were brethren.
When you just READ this chapter, it PROVES that the church was a hierarchy! But not a hierarchy of one man, then twelve men, then a hundred in their flock, and so on; but rather, a hierarchy of God, Jesus, then twelve apostles who were brethren, then men under each of them, and so on.
APOSTLES
Like literally every word in the Bible, we have associated special, holy meaning around an unremarkable Greek word. “Apostle” is copied directly from the Greek apostolos, which literally means “he that is sent”, or “one sent with orders”.
So in that sense, if I were to send you into town to buy me something, you would be my apostle for that mission. As always, the word has no special religious meaning, no sacredness about it. It’s just a word, like “church”.
Christianity has confused many things by taking simple verbs and nouns and turning them into holy, ecclesiastical terms, complicating matters which are absurdly simple if you just read the Bible without preconceptions!
So when you read the word “Apostle”, you should think “One sent [by someone] [to do something]”. Everyone knows there are thirteen apostles in the Bible; the twelve disciples minus Judas Iscariot makes eleven; then a new twelfth apostle (Acts 1:15-26).
Then later Paul was sent by God personally to go to the Gentiles (1 Timothy 2:7), and since he was sent, he was an apostle… since that’s all the word means! In the Biblical sense, it generally means “one sent by God [to do a certain job]”.
Any man who derives his authority directly from God and whom God sends to do a spiritual task is an apostle. Did Paul get his authority from Jerusalem? Galatians 1:15-17. Likewise, Jeremiah did not get his authority from the kings or priests of his day – he was called by God and sent to do a job directly (Jeremiah 1:4-10).
In that sense, Jeremiah was an apostle because he was one sent! (Although, since that part of the Bible was written in Hebrew, naturally it didn’t use the Greek word apostolos.) Was Paul an apostle of the Father, or an apostle of Jesus? Who sent him? Ephesians 1:1. Was Paul sent by men? Galatians 1:1.
Paul was an apostle (one sent) by Jesus Christ at the Father’s command! Anyone else who has ever been sent by God is, likewise, an apostle. For example, was JESUS an apostle? Hebrews 3:1. Yet clearly, He wasn’t one of the thirteen! Why was He an apostle? Luke 4:43.
Because HE HAD BEEN SENT! And who sent Him, thus making Him an apostle? John 5:30. If you believe there are only the thirteen original apostles, then you have to also believe that God never sent another man to do anything in the 2,000 years since! Which, clearly, is not true.
Therefore, there have been apostles in every age, and they exist today. And yet that fact is trivial because “apostle” isn’t a specific holy title – it’s simply a job description. Who cares if you’re an apostle or not? Just do your job, before God sends someone else in your place!
LATER APOSTLES
After the death of the apostles, God would send other apostles to do other jobs; read Revelation 2:2. Remember to read that as God meant it… by translating the word “apostle” into English! They had “tested those who said they were sent by God but were not”.
How did Paul expect the people to “test” his apostleship? 2 Corinthians 12:12. The point of all this is that anyone who is sent by God to do a job, anyone who was not sent by proxy through another man, is an apostle.
Like most prophecies, Revelation 2-3 has both contemporary and prophetic meanings (Revelation 1:19), both of which were equally true. So long after the apostles were dead, God expected those future churches to be testing apostles… because Jesus promised there would be (Matthew 23:34). And if He sent people, there would be future apostles because that’s all the word meant!
And that means that John the Baptist was also an apostle! You don’t know that because the word wasn’t meant to be a fancy title! It is a simple verb, so it wasn’t always translated as a title. But the Bible says “there was a man sent from God, whose name was John” (John 1:6).
The verb “sent” used in that verse was apostollos, which literally means “God apostled John”! Thus John the Baptist was as much an apostle as Peter or Paul! Later in John 1:33, the same thing is repeated but this time with a different Greek word for “sent”, pempo. Was John changing his title? Was he now a Pemp? Or was God simply using common verbs that have no particular spiritual meaning!
The world’s churches are hung up on titles; on being anointed priests, evangelists, bishops, ministers, apostles, popes, or whatever is next up in authority and garners them more praise from men and power and influence in their carnal church. Does God like that? Job 32:21-22.
The titles in the Bible are not so much titles as they are descriptions. For example, Jesus was the Messiah, which means “anointed one”. But anyone who was anointed to do anything is also a messiah. Thus Saul was a messiah (1 Samuel 24:10), as was David, everyone in the family of the high priest (Leviticus 8:30), Cyrus the Mede who wasn’t even an Israelite or a believer (Isaiah 45:1)… even Lucifer was a messiah (Ezekiel 28:14).
So “Messiah” isn’t a title. It’s a description of something that happened to him. Likewise, Jesus was the savior, because He came to save man. It’s the job He did. It’s not a title to be worshiped or a position you should seek so you can get more praise. It’s just… a description of what He did and does.
So likewise in the ekklesia, titles like bishop, priest, minister, and so on are not life-long positions of honor and glory, as they are in the Gentile religions, but rather jobs these people do. Jesus is not only the Messiah, He is also the “shepherd and bishop of your souls” (1 Peter 2:25).
Jesus is also the high priest AND an apostle (Hebrews 3:1), and many other titles because He does many jobs like most true Christians must! That’s why Paul was “ordained a preacher, and an apostle… a teacher of the Gentiles” (1 Timothy 2:7).
He also performed the job of a deacon, by distributing funds to the needy in Jerusalem (2 Corinthians 8-9). Like any good leader, he leads because he can do any of the jobs anyone under him does – and usually do them better.
When the need arises, he performs them even though he is “God’s apostle”, because ultimately “he that is greatest among you shall be your servant” (Matthew 23:11). So don’t think about these words as positions to lust after or flattering titles to fawn before.
All these things are merely jobs, burdens, responsibilities that must be done because there is no one else who can (James 3:1), the same reason Jesus did what He had to do (Isaiah 63:5). The only glory will come when you have successfully performed those jobs, and are no longer an apostle because you have died in faith and finished your mission.
THE AUTHORITY OF APOSTLES
Each of the apostles were given a common task in Matthew 28:18-20. But though they were given the same general job, each of the apostles were sent to do certain specific, and different, jobs –suited to their individual strengths and weaknesses.
So when Jesus told Peter to “feed my sheep”, this was NOT a general command given to all the apostles (John 21:15-22). Because when Peter demanded of Jesus “what shall JOHN do??” Jesus replied that it was none of his business; he had been given his job to do, and what John did was between John and Jesus!
Only those who give the authority can take it away. If I give you authority, I can tell you where to go and what to do with that authority; but if God gives it to both of us, what you do is between you and Him. I can offer opinions, even criticize; but ultimately, what you do with it is not my problem.
I stress this because apostles were independent of one another. Their authority was parallel to each other, because each one was sent by God to do a different job. And each was responsible for the job he had been given and nothing else… isn’t that what Romans 14:4 said, after all?
So could Paul be an apostle to some people, but not to others? 1 Corinthians 9:1-2. Of course… because “Apostle” means “sent”, and Paul was “sent” to talk to Gentiles, thus he was their apostle! But the twelve had been forbidden from preaching to Gentiles (Matthew 10:5-6); granted, that was a while ago, but Jesus confirmed that Peter should still focus solely on Israelites by saying “feed my sheep”.
Peter’s job was to feed sheep, not dogs (Matthew 16:24-28). Paul, you might say, was the crumb Jesus tossed the Gentiles. And so when Peter and James interfered with that job, Paul went to Jerusalem to protest that they were out of their jurisdiction, which James agreed with (Acts 15:19).
The twelve, and others, were trying to correct Paul’s “mistakes” and build on Paul’s foundation – something Paul did not do to them, for the Golden Rule forbade it (Romans 15:20). Their attitude was “good work Paul, we’ll take it from here and get them circumcised and make them good Jews like God wants!”
But that was STEALING the work Paul had done from him, kidnap-adopting his children into their houses for their glory (Galatians 6:12-13). As if I were to cook a meal for hours, then you show up, carve the turkey and get all the credit.
But what they should have realized, as Paul did (Philippians 1:12-18), is that what Paul allowed, or didn’t allow, in his churches wasn’t their business (Proverbs 26:17). But that goes both ways… so read 1 Timothy 2:8-12 carefully. Is that a command from God? Or from Paul?
Or consider 1 Corinthians 7:25, 40; this is – Paul went out of his way to tell us – his judgment, explicitly NOT a commandment of the Lord, but a commandment of PAUL. This does not mean it’s wrong. Rather the opposite, in fact; for as Paul said, he had the spirit of God and his judgment is meaningful, and not to be disregarded lightly.
But it was not binding in Peter’s house; not among Paul’s brethren… only among Paul’s children. It might be foolish for us to ignore good advice from an apostle with such experience… but it is not a sin to do so ( 1 Corinthians 7:28).
For like all statutes, the day may come when those statutes no longer apply. And when it no longer fulfills the spirit of the 1-2-10 law the soul can choose to disregard it… because God didn’t say it!
ORDINATION IN THE CHURCH
God knew the apostles couldn’t do these jobs alone. So just as God took of Moses’ spirit and gave it to the seventy elders (Numbers 11:17), by ordaining men under them, these men could share the burden of their God-given mission with others.
The word “ordain” is translated from several different Greek words into one English word, but the best general translation to modern English is “appoint”. Paul was ordained, or appointed, as an apostle to the Gentiles (1 Timothy 2:7).
As always, this is not a fancy church word; it does not mean there was a fancy ordination ceremony, with prayers and robes and formal injunctions; it just means that Paul was SENT to do this job, a job which God had APPOINTED him to do. Why does that need to be complicated with ceremonies and rituals?
If I send you to town to buy bread, you’ve been ordained to shop for me. In modern terms, I’ve given you “power of attorney” to do a job in my place. There’s no need for thunder and lightning and miracles… I simply say “go” and you “goeth” (Matthew 8:9).
Not needing to over-complicate that impressed Jesus! ( Matthew 8:10-13). Because it’s something Hagar’s children couldn’t accept! Why isn’t “being sent” enough? Luke 11:29. If you won’t believe I’ve given you a real credit card unless I slap you on the forehead and spray you with holy oil, then I’ll probably just get someone else to do my shopping.
That’s why you will look in vain in the NT for an ordination taking place. Because it happened all the time, you just were looking for something more complicated. For instance, Paul told Titus, “these things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee” (Titus 2:15). That is an ordination.
This is Paul giving Titus the authority to speak all these things, the things God had given Paul to teach! Paul was passing these things on to Titus and ordaining him to “speak, exhort, and rebuke with all authority”.
In very real sense, Paul was taking “of the spirit which was upon him”, which is to say, taking of the words God had given him to say, and passing them on the elders he ordained to help him do his job… just like Moses had with the seventy, or Aaron and the twelve, later Aaron and the Levites.
And Titus’ authority was limited by the bounds of Paul’s own authority; obviously, Paul could not grant him more authority than he himself had! So Paul did not give Titus authority to teach in James’ church “with all authority”. Only James or God could give that!
Yet Paul had not ordained the sons of Sceva; so when they tried to use Paul’s authority to rebuke a demon (Acts 19:13-16), the demon didn’t listen… because the sons of Sceva were taking Paul’s name in vain!
And since Paul spoke to people in God’s stead (2 Corinthians 5:20), they were taking God’s name in vain at the same time! And so they delivered themselves to the devil for the destruction, quite literally, of their flesh! (And of their clothes as well.)
None of us can grant more authority than we ourselves have. Which is why Elijah had to let God decide if Elisha could have it or not! (2 Kings 2:9-11). This, too, was an ordination, a passing of authority from one leader to another, an appointing of Elisha in Elijah’s office (1 Kings 19:16). Only rather than receiving only a portion of Elijah’s spirit, Elisha asked for double the spirit, double the words… something Elijah could not give!
He asked for, in effect, double the understanding that Elijah had… meaning he would have twice as much authority, for he would have twice the understanding, people could have twice the confidence in his decisions for there was double the likelihood he was judging as God would judge!
ABUSE OF GOVERNMENT
The apostles were all brethren, all more-or-less equal; so far, we’ve focused on the “more”. But what about the “less equal” part? For even among brethren, the eldest leads; he just doesn’t “exercise lordship over them” (Mark 10:42-43). No he doesn’t have the strength of authority their father would… but he does still carry weight.
And that’s why we see James rendering judgments for the twelve in Acts 15; and yet, those judgments were only somewhat binding. For when one brother/apostle disagrees strongly with what the elder thinks, he should say something, as Jesus commanded them in Matthew 18, and try to “gain your brother”.
If that fails, he should provoke those who follow him in the congregation to “love and good works” (Hebrews 10:24-25). If that fails, vote with your feet, saying “I have hated the congregation of evil doers; and will not sit with the wicked” (Psalms 26:5).
If an apostle can’t work things out with an elder brother, it’s due to pride – usually on both sides (Proverbs 13:10). And yet boys will be boys; it doesn’t mean the “one” (or both) who is wrong is not a Christian, or belongs to the Antichrist; it just means his beast is too proud, or his spirit is too arrogant, for him to hear the truth right now.
And that’s certainly disappointing to their Parent; but not necessarily the end of the world. It may take time for them to realize they acted like children, and that one or both were wrong. Until then… maybe Barnabas should run his own house (Acts 15:36-39). And later, much later, when you realize that Mark wasn’t completely a waste of time, you can admit that (2 Timothy 4:11).
Because at the end of the day, an apostle has the authority to teach. He has the authority to lead others, and appoint others to lead after him. He may even have the authority to call down fire from heaven and kill you. But he does not have the power to compel anyone against your conscience. No Being does (Galatians 1:8).
You should respect authority; righteous or otherwise. But it is wrong to let anyone do evil and keep silent (Psalms 15:4). You are not allowed to speak evil of your ruler (Exodus 22:28)… but if a wicked high priest smites you without cause, what should you say? John 18:22-23. (Note: the wrong answer, as Paul admitted, is given in Acts 23:3-5.)
So if someone is abusing their authority, what should you do? 3 John 1:9-11. You are not to follow evil (Exodus 23:2); no matter how much authority that person may have once had, or may still have. No matter how many miracles you’ve personally witnessed; no matter how much authority and power he wields, NO BEING has authority to command you contrary to the Bible.
Remember, the purpose of authority is to help you FIND God. If it starts to hide God from you, then you have outgrown that authority… and it may be time for you to be an apostle.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Everyone knows that Jesus went to the Jews, and the Jews rejected Him. But no one really knows WHY they rejected Him. See, the Jews were not stupid. They knew that Jesus had power from God (John 3:1-2). Nicodemus was a powerful, influential man. He had talked to the other priests, and they KNEW that Jesus was from God.
And the Jews were not only open to the idea of a Messiah, they were DESPERATE for one. They had been humbled under Gentile rule for 600 years, and were eagerly awaiting the Jesus (Matthew 11:2-3). They knew He was coming (John 1:44-45) and based on the prophecies of Daniel’s 70 weeks (Daniel 9:25-27), it is very likely they knew precisely WHEN.
So they were keyed up and ready for the Messiah to come. They WANTED the “king of the Jews” to come, as promised, and restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6)! …So what was wrong? Why did they reject Him and kill Him? Because they wanted Him to come on their terms and to vindicate their traditions when He did so!
They wanted Jesus to come from one of their prominent, respected families in Jerusalem (John 7:52); graduate with top honors from their highest learning institutions (John 7:15); be anointed by their high priest (Hebrews 7:14); THEN they would have gladly followed Him to the ends of the Earth!
How did they feel about Jesus’ origins? John 7:40-53, Matthew 13:54-58. Were they shocked by His attitude of confidence? Mark 1:22. But if they knew He was a teacher from God, as Nicodemus had said, why didn’t they believe Him? John 12:42-43.
They DID believe Him! They KNEW He was speaking the truth, and many knew – or at least, had reason to suspect – that He was the Messiah! Even among the highest ranking Jews! But because Jesus was not part of THEIR sect – even though they KNEW He spoke the truth – they rejected Him! Because He did not carry THEIR authority! And God’s authority wasn’t enough for them!
It bothered them greatly that Jesus didn’t have any herd who said to Him “you have our authority to teach”. He only had truth on His side – and that is only enough for people who love truth. It is NOT enough for the world.
The world needs MORE than a Messiah, MORE than an apostle, MORE than a teacher of God. They need a man whom OTHER MEN say is wise, righteous, and qualified to teach! They need Amazon and Yelp reviews, because not being souls, they can only follow the herd.
You shouldn’t need to hear your herd’s review of a man, nor his religion, his past, or his credentials to know if he speaks for God or not; your soul should be able to judge the truth based on how the words “taste” to your spirit (Job 34:3).
But the world needs you to be ordained by one of THEIR ministers; taught in one of THEIR seminaries; approved by THEIR rules and righteous by THEIR definitions! But no man can be beloved by God AND be beloved by the world! (Galatians 1:10, James 4:4).
And that is exactly why Jesus came “in the form as a servant” (Philippians 2:7). To save, as always, them that believe… and only them.