God’s true men throughout history often have been labeled a “dictator.” Accused of being a dictator, John Wesley made the casual statement, “I have no problem with a dictator if he is a good one.” In the light of the Laodicean church age, given to doing that which is right in its own eyes, such a statement certainly is not understood. Wesley was not declaring that he himself was a dictator; he simply was declaring he believed a dictator for leadership was not improper if such an individual was a good one.

Note the World Book Dictionary’s definition of a dictator: “A person exercising absolute authority, especially a person who, without having any claim through inheritance or free popular election, seizes control of a government. In Roman history, an official given absolute authority over the state in times of emergency.” However, the dictionary concludes with a final definition: “a person who says or reads words aloud to another who writes them down.” Perhaps many, including this writer, would fall into the last category in the light of the many letters “dictated” to his secretary.

It is one thing to believe in an honorable dictator and another thing to declare oneself personally to be a dictator. Recently, a visiting pastor at Foundations declared in his message to us that he was a “benevolent dictator.” The congregation smiled, and several laughed, because we understood what he meant. No one was ready to verbally stone him for his words; no blogs were written to attack him.

In the light of this dictionary definition, I believe in the dictatorship of God: He is a Person Who “exercises absolute authority” and Who “without having any claim through inheritance or free popular election seizes control” of all the universe. He was never appointed to this position; He was never elected to this position. Yet He not only created the universe but also has absolute control over it. I believe in a dictator if He is a “good” One. I believe God is a good dictator; His nature, character, and His infinite heart make Him such. There are many gods who dictate their religion to the people. Baal was such a god; he was an “oppressive god.” The people “chose” him; they elected him to be their dictatorial god. That was their choice; they elected him to be so. But I do not believe, by any means, Baal was a good dictator. There is a clear distinction between Adonai, the Master, the Lord God, and Baal, the oppressive lord. But “God is great and God is good”; at least, that is what we tell our children. He is not oppressive. I choose Him to be my God, the Dictator of my life. Yes, I believe in a dictator if He is a good One.

Also in the light of the dictionary definition, I believe in the dictatorship of a father over children. The child does not choose this dictator; there is no election in the home for this dictator. But God appoints the father. The Book of Proverbs is the call of a father to a son: “My son, give me thine heart.” This is not God asking for the heart; this is a father asking. The father in this book is controlling, strongly rebuking, calling, chastening, even to the point he declares, “Train up a child in the way he should go.” The father is to “dictate” the way of the child. There are bad fathers; there are molesting fathers; there are evil fathers; but I will not give up God’s appointment of fathers. I had a “dictatorial” father growing up, but he was a good one, and I have no problem with that.

Now some simpleton may quote Matthew 23:8, “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” Hermeneutic principles warn us of taking any text out of context. The simpleton will tend to do that in order to prove his point. The context here is the attack against the scribes and Pharisees who endeavored to project themselves (or the Greek, “to seat” themselves) in Moses’ seat, or to be equal with Moses in authority. Therefore, I must be careful not to deny “master” and “father” for they are used in many other passages where they are commended. For example, in Proverbs master and father are used equally to refer to God the Father and Christ the Son. A father begets a son, and a master is over servants. He is not God to that child but certainly a representative of God. Yet, a father cannot impart life as the Father in heaven can, and a man is not to be master over soul as well as body. The rabbi is in the context of the teacher who declares truth and the way one must live, and at times very strongly; nevertheless, he himself is not the absolute dictator of life as God would be.

Along with natural fathers there are spiritual fathers: Elijah was a father to Elisha (2 Kings 2:12) as well as a master to him (2 Kings 2:3). Though Elijah was a very strong man in his preaching, in his manner, and in his controlling words, Elisha never viewed Elijah as an “absolute” dictator. He viewed him clearly as his father and master after he had left his natural father in 1 Kings 19. Even the apostle Paul called Timothy “my own son in the faith,” and he dictated to him what he was to do and what he was to preach.

Only those who hate authority in their lives make excuses for not needing it. They even twist Scripture to be freed from any God-appointed authority in their lives. Yes, there are bad fathers, but not all are bad. Therefore, we dare not do away with fathers who dictate to their children what must be done. I have observed that many sons who had a passive father never came to understand and appreciate a dictatorial father in the proper context, but chose to live independent of such a privilege. Yes, I believe in good fathers who are dictators, in the biblical sense.

Dare we project the dictator in the context of a mother? A mother was not appointed by some election of her children, but was God-appointed. Yea, the child is to live by the “law” of his mother (Prov. 1:8). I am never to forsake the law of my mother, “her law.” First Timothy 5:14 declares that the wife/mother is to “guide the house,” or the Greek is oikodespotein, to be the “despot” of the house. Dare we investigate what this word house despot means? Vine, in his word studies, gives the definition of despotes as “one who has absolute ownership and uncontrolled power.” When carefully read, Proverbs 31 exemplifies the wife/mother who rules that home while that husband is away, representing him with uncontrolled power. Yes, I had a dictatorial mother, but she was a good one. I have no problem with this.

Certainly Elijah controlled the life of Elisha, and Joshua was controlled by Moses. But Elisha and Joshua both chose willingly to be under such men who dictated to them how to live, what to be, and gave dictatorial words even for their future. So many other examples can be given in the natural context of such “good” dictators.

But above them all, when Christ comes to earth and sets up His kingdom, He will “rule with a rod of iron” (Rev. 19:15). Not one thing will be done on this earth in the Millennium without His declaration. He will be the dictator, a perfect one. The statement is an important, true statement: “I have no problem with a dictator, if he is a good dictator.”

Is it appropriate to call the papacy a dictatorship? Remember the definition is, “A person exercising absolute authority, especially a person who, without having any claim through inheritance or free popular election, seizes control of a government.” The Pope has a claim through inheritance that he calls “Apostolic Succession.” And he is appointed by popular election called a conclave. He is not self-proclaimed. In the light of this, I cannot call him “a dictator,” for he has come to it through the appointed channels of the Roman Catholic Church. Now, if we are talking about what the Pope is presented to be “theologically,” then we are adamantly opposed to his Pontifex Maximus, his papal infallibility, his being the “Vicar” of Christ, and so forth. Yes, the Pope controls the people; yes, he controls their lives (through the local priests); but he has been given this authority of absoluteness, and would not fall under the proper definition of a dictator. We must be careful in how we use terminology for which we do not know its true definition.

There are those who attack honorable pastors and teachers, believing they all are dictators; they suggest we should accept governmentally the so-called “Body Ministry” of the plurality of elders. We believe this is not biblical. Of course, there are those who have their “own interpretation” of Scripture in order to do away with pastors. By doing so, they endeavor to preserve their own independence of and accountability to any authority. I have always found that such people are even independent of Christ’s authority over them. They do not live according to the standards and principles of Christ. They tend to be worldly and deny biblical separation. They are the “Christ” of themselves, and they dictate the truth and how it is to be interpreted.

Yes, there are bad pastors, there are bad teachers. There are bad and evil students and parishioners. Even false Christs and false prophets shall arise (Matt. 24:24), but does this mean we are to do away with the true Christ and the true prophets? My heart goes out to anyone who had a bad father, or a bad mother, or a bad teacher, or a bad pastor. But God forbid because we experienced such an individual that we do away with these biblically-appointed positions. A child may not be able to leave a bad father, mother, teacher, or pastor. But when he grows up, he can make the choice to leave a bad teacher and a bad pastor for good ones. No one has a gun pointing at him forcing him to be under what he believes to be the bad. Sad it would be, if for the rest of his life he never wanted a teacher or a pastor. I have met married men who refused to have children because they hated the concept of father in the light of their own bad father. But why not remedy the problem by accepting Christ and His guiding Word into the life to become what one did not have? The same would hold true with having a bad pastor.

In Ephesians 4:11, 12, a pastor is an appointed gift from the Lord; and Paul goes on to declare the reason for a pastor: “For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive,” and it continues on. This is what a pastor is to do for a local body of people as a gift from the Lord. If he does not do this, then he is a pastor in title only. He may have to become strong and specific in his preaching and teaching when some in the flock are being “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men.” Yes, he may have to get strong in the preaching and admonition. But this is part of preaching the Word according to 2 Timothy 4:2–4, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Such words will not be accepted by the lukewarm, Laodicean professing Christian. They will hate these words and create interpretations to do away with them. They will hate the light, and they will hate the man who sheds light on their sins and failures.

As for men who have been called dictators, such as Bill Gothard, Jack Hyles, Robert Schuller, the blame needs to be upon the people and the Boards for permitting them. Our founder, when he left the controlling leadership of the denomination, still wanted a Board over him. Therefore, he created two: the Board of Trustees (over the properties and the natural dealings of the ministry, including being over him), and the Board of Elders and Deacons (over the ministry’s spiritual direction). A founder naturally needs a greater authority to establish a ministry. On the other hand, I have chosen as a second-generation leader to draw from other appointed authorities within the ministry already established.

A person is not a dictator simply because he has authority and uses that authority. How often people will ask me, “Pastor, what am I to do in this matter to please the Lord?” If we had a problem physically, we would ask a doctor; and if he answered our inquiry, we would not view him as a dictator because we have given him the authority to tell us.

However, there may be times when a pastor or teacher must declare what he believes to be a “Thus saith the Lord” and His Word, knowing those words will be contrary to the soul and way of living of an individual. If that person believes that to be dictatorial, then he needs to go where he will have no problem in doing what he wants to do. A true shepherd of the Lord is ever conscious of his accountability one day to the Chief Shepherd as to whether he was a hireling or a truly appointed under-shepherd of the Lord. Paul was very strong in writing to Timothy and Titus of what they were to preach in the churches they pastored. They were accountable to that which was committed unto them as well as for the souls placed in their charge.

There have been proud young men who have tried to debate Hebrews 13:7 and 17, believing it was not in the Bible. But surprisingly, those verses are still in the Bible. In these passages the problem is not those that rule over them, for the writer only gave commendation for such rulers. The exhortation is given by the writer to the reader: “Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.” And, “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit [yield the stubborn self-will] yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.” Such obstinate ones do not realize the unprofitable end they will have. Their pride blinds them to such needed sight. Their “self” has taken the place of the Word of God in their lives; they hate counsel; they hate authority. Their attack is upon that Word or that one who reveals through the Word what they are.

For those of us who are called by God to be preachers, teachers, ministers, and pastors, for the sake of our calling, and for the sake of the people and the students, it will be imperative to exercise the rights appointed in that calling by God’s Word in the accountability of the souls laid to our charge. If we do not warn the righteous and the wicked, their blood (not their souls) will be upon our hands. There will be those whose obstinacy despises any correction from the Lord’s Word through his men, but we must still somehow deal with their foolishness: “In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will” (2 Tim. 2:25, 26).

God’s true people will know a true shepherd: “And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers” (John 10:5). To simply call someone a dictator with words does not make him a dictator, just as calling Jesus “Beelzebub” does not make Him so. It is not the words that we use in attacking a man that ultimately declare what a man is; the truth of the matter will be found in the man’s character and the life he has lived.

Finally, one of the precious passages that should control the under-shepherd is 1 Peter 5:2 and 3, “Feed the flock of God [tending, feeding, guarding] which is among you, taking the oversight thereof [the charge of oversight, of looking carefully], not by constraint [Gr., not having to be forced to take your responsibility], but willingly; not for filthy lucre [money], but of a ready mind. Neither as being lords [Gr., the intensified form of kurios] over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.” Possessing this spirit and heart, the man of God must take charge of that which has been committed to him: “These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee” (Titus 2:15).

A final postscript needs to be observed from Numbers 16 when Korah and the sons of Reuben “rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown: and they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord?” Those who hate authority speak the same words today but perhaps with a contemporary twist to them. This was the cry for the “plurality of elders” in the camp, believing that Moses had become a dictator. Though the people had not chosen him, God had chosen him. Yet, it is very clear that Moses was not of their spirit, for he was the meekest man on the face of the earth. The story of Numbers 16 will continue to unfold how God vindicated Moses and was against the philosophy and theology of Korah. He was overthrown by the God of heaven Who was against such evil accusations. Though God may not do this in every situation of the rising of present-day Korahs, it is still a biblical principle of God’s appointment of authority.

This age is out to destroy any God-called individual who is in a position of authority. Such an age has a way of beating down and intimidating the servant of the Lord in whatever appointed authority he is given by the Lord, including his preaching and implementing of that Word. May the Lord speak to His “angels,” His messengers who are to be found in His Right Hand, that they might deliver to the End-time Church that which must be declared.