The Process of Leadership Development: A Repeatable Pattern for Forming Leaders

Series Introduction: The Apostles’ Teaching

The risen Jesus did not leave his church without instruction, direction, or protection. After his resurrection, he entrusted the apostles with authoritative teaching that explained who he is, what he accomplished, how people must respond, and how churches are to live and endure until he returns (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:1–8). The New Testament presents this teaching not as abstract theology but as a coherent body of truth entrusted to the church to start churches, strengthen believers, guard the gospel, and sustain God’s mission across generations. This apostolic teaching flows from the saving work of the Triune God: the Father who purposes redemption, the Son who accomplishes it through his death, resurrection, and reign, and the Holy Spirit who applies it by giving life, power, holiness, and endurance (Eph. 1:3–10; Acts 2:36; Rom. 8:9–17).

These documents are organized around four interrelated domains that reflect what the apostles consistently taught wherever churches were planted:

Core Truths: Establishes the unified body of truth revealed by the Triune God and entrusted to the apostles, including who God is, what he has done in Christ, the condition of humanity, the nature of salvation, the identity of the church, the reality of spiritual opposition, and the future consummation of all things. These teachings form the doctrinal foundation that governs the church’s faith, worship, obedience, endurance, and hope across generations.
Evangelism: Clarifies how the gospel of Jesus Christ is proclaimed, received, embodied, defended, and commended in the world. This domain addresses God’s initiative in preparing people, the required human response of repentance and faith, the public confession of baptism, and the church’s responsibility to guard and commend the gospel amid misunderstanding, opposition, and cultural resistance.
Life in Households and the Church: Addresses how apostolic teaching shaped everyday Christian life in homes, relationships, gatherings, and shared community. These teachings show how faith is lived out through holiness, suffering, marriage and parenting, hospitality, prayer, generosity, spiritual gifts, intergenerational discipleship, and visible obedience as believers learn to follow Christ together.
Leadership Development: Explains how Christ shepherds and preserves his church through the formation, recognition, and entrustment of qualified leaders. This domain clarifies how leaders are identified, tested, and supported, how men and women participate in ministry, how elders and deacons serve distinct roles, and how churches guard the flock against false leadership to ensure generational continuity.

Together, The Apostles’ Teaching equips churches to remain faithful, resilient, and missionally effective in every context. These documents do not prescribe modern programs or institutional structures. They recover the durable teaching that enabled ordinary believers, households, and churches to obey Jesus, endure hardship, resist false teaching, and multiply across cultures and generations (Acts 2:42–47; 2 Tim. 2:2). By returning to what the apostles taught, the church learns again how to live under the lordship of Christ by the power of the Spirit for the glory of God.

Document Summary: The Process of Leadership Development

Purpose: This document clarified how the risen Jesus forms, tests, equips, and entrusts leaders through the Spirit and the Word inside the ordinary life of the church, so that his mission continues faithfully across generations (Matt. 28:18–20).

Central Claim: The New Testament presented leadership development as a church-embedded, Spirit-empowered process in which Christ formed men and women for meaningful service through Scripture, shared life, tested character, real responsibility, and mission, while reserving the office of shepherd/elder/overseer for qualified men who can teach sound doctrine and guard the flock (2 Tim. 2:2; 1 Tim. 3:1–7).

Why This Matters: When leadership development is detached from Scripture, the life of the church, and the pressures that expose motives, churches drift toward fragility, doctrinal confusion, and dependence on personalities. When the process is unclear, churches either rush people into authority before they are ready or delay entrustment until structure replaces obedience, leaving the flock vulnerable and the mission weakened.

What This Document Does:

Traces leadership development to its source in the Father’s purpose, the Son’s authority, and the Spirit’s work through the Word in the church
Identifies the recurring New Testament movements by which leaders were recognized, formed, tested, equipped, and entrusted over time
Clarifies how leaders were prepared to teach what accords with sound doctrine, guard the gospel, practice corrective discipline, and shepherd God’s people faithfully
Shows how strengthening existing churches and participating in new works belonged to the same apostolic mission
Integrates the meaningful ministry of women in church and mission life, while maintaining clear biblical boundaries for the elder office and for teaching or exercising authority over men

What This Document Is Not: This document is not a modern credentialing pathway, a classroom-based leadership curriculum, or a professional ministry pipeline. It does not assume institutional scale or paid roles, and it does not redefine biblical offices or responsibilities beyond what Scripture teaches.

Primary Outcome: Churches and church networks gain a clear, Scripture-governed understanding of how Christ develops leaders and are equipped to build simple, durable, reproducible processes that produce workers of tested character, doctrinal faithfulness, pastoral courage, and missionary endurance, who can strengthen existing churches and help extend the mission without collapsing biblical role distinctions (Acts 20:28).

Document Introduction: How Christ Forms and Entrusts Leaders in the Life of the Church

The Central Question: How did the risen Jesus form leaders who could faithfully teach the truth, guard the gospel, shepherd God’s people, and extend the mission across generations without relying on formal institutions or professional ministry systems? The New Testament showed churches multiplying rapidly across cities and regions, yet leadership did not emerge recklessly or without order. When this question is left unclear, churches either rush people into authority before they are ready or delay entrustment until structure replaces obedience, leaving the church vulnerable and the mission weakened.

The Biblical Answer: The Scriptures consistently taught that Christ continued to lead his church by forming leaders through the Word and the Spirit inside real congregations and mission teams. Leaders were identified through observable faithfulness, formed through teaching and imitation, tested through suffering and responsibility, and entrusted gradually within the life of the church. This process equipped leaders to teach what accords with sound doctrine, guard the flock from false teaching, practice correction and discipline for restoration, and participate in the advance of the gospel. Leadership development was not separated from discipleship, proclamation, holiness, or mission, but grew out of them.

How This Document Fits in the Series: This document belongs within the Apostles’ Teaching and addresses the question of how the gospel and the life of the church were sustained beyond the founding generation. After establishing the apostles’ message, doctrine, gatherings, and communal life, Scripture showed how those realities produced leaders capable of carrying the work forward. This document focused on the process by which Christ raised and entrusted such leaders, without redefining biblical offices or collapsing role distinctions. It functioned as the connective tissue between sound teaching and long-term faithfulness in churches and church networks.

Purpose and Approach: This document traced the New Testament pattern of leadership development across the life of the early churches. It followed the recurring movements by which leaders were recognized, formed, tested, equipped, and entrusted over time. It accounted for leaders who strengthened existing churches and those who participated in starting new works, recognizing these as inseparable aspects of the same mission. It also integrated the meaningful ministry of women within church and mission life, while preserving the biblical restriction that the office of shepherd elder overseer is reserved for qualified men.

The Source and Context of Leadership Development

Leadership development comes from God himself and unfolds within the ordered life he has established. Scripture located its source in the purpose of the Father, the authority of the Son, and the work of the Holy Spirit. Scripture also located its context inside the Word-shaped life of the church rather than in detached training environments.

Leadership development originates in the purpose of the Father to bless the nations through obedient servants. God revealed his purpose to bless all the families of the earth through Abraham, establishing a pattern of calling people to participate in his saving work (Gen. 12:1–3). Throughout Israel’s history, God raised leaders to shepherd his people so his covenant purposes would continue (Num. 27:16–17; Deut. 34:9). The prophets testified that God himself would shepherd his people and give them leaders after his own heart (Jer. 3:15; Ezek. 34:11–16). This purpose extended beyond Israel to the nations and reached its fulfillment in the mission announced through the Servant of the Lord (Isa. 49:6). Leadership development therefore flowed from God’s redemptive purpose rather than human initiative.
Leadership development operates under the authority of the risen Son who calls, commands, and sends his servants. Jesus declared that all authority in heaven and on earth belonged to him, grounding leadership in submission to his lordship (Matt. 28:18). During his earthly ministry, Jesus called disciples to be with him and to be sent by him, establishing formation under his authority (Mark 3:13–15). After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his followers to make disciples by teaching obedience to everything he commanded (Matt. 28:19–20). The apostles consistently described themselves as servants of Christ who acted under his command rather than their own authority (1 Cor. 4:1; Col. 1:25). Leadership development therefore remained inseparable from obedience to Jesus as Lord.
Leadership development is carried forward by the Holy Spirit who empowers, appoints, and sustains workers. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would teach his disciples and remind them of his words, ensuring continuity in leadership formation after his departure (John 14:26). At Pentecost, the Spirit empowered the church for witness and formed a community devoted to teaching, fellowship, and prayer (Acts 2:1–4, 42). The Spirit set apart workers for mission and directed their deployment according to God’s will (Acts 13:2–4). Scripture testified that the Holy Spirit appointed overseers to shepherd the church of God (Acts 20:28). Leadership development therefore depended on the Spirit’s work rather than human control.
Leadership development is governed by the Word of God as the authoritative means of formation and discernment. The apostles devoted themselves to teaching the Scriptures in light of Christ, forming believers and leaders through the Word (Acts 5:42; 6:2). Paul declared that the whole counsel of God was necessary for guarding the church and shaping faithful shepherds (Acts 20:27–32). Scripture was described as breathed out by God and sufficient to equip God’s servants for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Leaders were charged to teach what accords with sound doctrine and to hold firmly to the trustworthy message (1 Tim. 4:11–16; Titus 1:9). Leadership development therefore remained Word-centered and Word-governed.
Leadership development takes place within the life of the church as God’s household and mission-bearing community. The church was described as the household of God and the pillar and foundation of the truth, establishing its central role in forming leaders (1 Tim. 3:15). Early believers lived in shared devotion, mutual care, and obedience, creating the environment where leaders could be recognized and tested (Acts 2:42–47). Elders were appointed within local congregations to shepherd, teach, and guard the flock entrusted to them (Acts 14:23; 1 Pet. 5:1–3). Churches were instructed to take responsibility for appointing qualified leaders according to Scripture (Titus 1:5). Leadership development therefore occurred inside the relational, doctrinal, and missional life of the church.
Leadership development affirms the meaningful service of men and women while preserving biblical boundaries for the elder office. Scripture testified that men and women labored together for the work of the gospel and the strengthening of churches (Luke 8:1–3; Rom. 16:1–4; Phil. 4:2–3). Women participated in prayer, instruction within appropriate settings, hospitality, and support of mission work (Acts 1:14; 18:26; Titus 2:3–5). At the same time, Scripture restricted the office of shepherd elder overseer to qualified men and prohibited women from teaching or exercising authority over men in the gathered church (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7; Titus 1:5–9). These instructions preserved order, faithfulness, and clarity within the church. Leadership development therefore honored women’s real ministry without redefining the elder office.

Leadership development was grounded in God’s purpose, exercised under Christ’s authority, empowered by the Spirit, governed by the Word, and embedded in the life of the church. This foundation established the theological and ecclesial framework for understanding how leaders were identified, formed, tested, and entrusted over time.

The Apostolic Pattern of Leadership Development

Leadership development in the New Testament followed a recognizable and repeatable pattern rooted in apostolic practice. Scripture revealed a small number of core activities through which leaders were raised, sustained, and multiplied as the mission advanced. These activities belonged together and must be understood as a unified process rather than isolated steps.

The apostles identified leaders through observable faithfulness, godly character, and proven reputation within the life of the church. The apostles instructed the churches to recognize individuals who were already known to be full of the Spirit, wisdom, and good reputation before entrusting responsibility to them (Acts 6:3). Timothy was well spoken of by believers before being brought into wider ministry (Acts 16:2). Qualifications for leadership emphasized character, self-control, faithfulness, and integrity rather than ability alone (1 Tim. 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9). Scripture showed leaders being discerned through how they served and lived over time. Identification therefore protected the church by grounding leadership in proven faithfulness.
The apostles trained leaders through teaching, modeling, shared life, and direct ministry experience. Paul taught publicly and from house to house so that leaders would be formed by the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:20–21, 27). Emerging leaders learned by observing the apostles’ conduct, endurance, and manner of life (Acts 20:18–19, 31–35). Timothy’s formation included close apprenticeship that joined doctrine with lived example (2 Tim. 3:10–11). Scripture itself functioned as the primary tool for equipping leaders for every good work (2 Tim. 3:14–17). Training therefore combined instruction, imitation, and practice over time.
The apostles commissioned leaders through prayerful, public entrustment of responsibility. Workers were set apart through fasting, prayer, and the laying on of hands before being sent into ministry (Acts 13:1–3). Elders were appointed in every church with responsibility for shepherding God’s people (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5). Spiritual gifts connected to ministry were affirmed and stirred through formal entrustment (1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6). Commissioning occurred within the gathered community rather than in private decisions. This practice clarified calling, affirmed trust, and authorized service.
The apostles supported leaders through encouragement, provision, instruction, and continued relational care. Churches shared in supporting workers materially so the mission could continue unhindered (Phil. 4:15–16). Apostolic coworkers were sent to strengthen and encourage leaders facing pressure or opposition (Acts 11:22–24). Instruction and correction were provided to guard sound doctrine and faithful practice (1 Tim. 1:3–5). Paul revisited churches to strengthen leaders and confirm their faith (Acts 15:36, 41; 18:23). Support preserved leaders from isolation and helped sustain long-term faithfulness.
The apostles reunited leaders to report on God’s work, discern doctrine, and coordinate the mission. Leaders gathered to recount what God had done through their ministry and to rejoice together (Acts 14:26–28). Doctrinal disputes were addressed through collective discernment and submission to apostolic teaching (Acts 15:1–35). Paul met with leaders to warn, exhort, and prepare them for future challenges (Acts 20:17–38). These reunions fostered unity, clarity, and shared direction. Reuniting leaders strengthened the churches and advanced coordinated obedience to the Spirit.

This apostolic pattern provided a durable framework for leadership development that could be repeated across contexts and generations. The five activities that follow must be read together as a single, integrated process shaped by Scripture and apostolic practice.

Activity 1: The Apostles Identified Leaders

Leadership development in the New Testament began with careful recognition rather than rapid appointment. The apostles discerned leaders from within the life of the church by observing faith, character, and conduct over time. Identification functioned as a protective and formative act that grounded leadership in God’s work already evident in people’s lives.

The apostles identified leaders by observing faithfulness, godly character, and good reputation within the community. The church was instructed to look for people who were known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom before entrusting them with responsibility (Acts 6:3). Timothy was identified for wider ministry because he was well spoken of by believers who knew his life (Acts 16:2). Qualifications for overseers and deacons emphasized visible character rather than hidden potential (1 Tim. 3:1–13). Titus was instructed to recognize elders whose lives met clear moral and relational standards (Titus 1:5–9). Identification relied on what could be seen and confirmed by others.
Leadership identification focused on proven faithfulness rather than giftedness alone. Jesus taught that faithfulness in small matters revealed readiness for greater responsibility (Luke 16:10). The apostles followed this principle by entrusting leadership only after reliability had been demonstrated (Acts 6:1–6). Paul emphasized faithfulness as the primary criterion for entrustment to future leaders (2 Tim. 2:2). Scripture consistently warned against elevating people based on ability without testing character (1 Tim. 3:6). Identification therefore guarded the church from unstable leadership.
The apostles identified leaders through communal discernment rather than private ambition. Those selected for leadership were recognized by the gathered church and affirmed through prayer (Acts 6:2–6). Paul instructed churches to participate in identifying leaders according to apostolic teaching rather than personal preference (Titus 1:5). Scripture warned against self-appointment and rivalry within leadership (James 3:14–16). Desire for leadership was acknowledged as good, but it was not treated as self-authenticating (1 Tim. 3:1). Identification required submission to the judgment of the church under Scripture.
Character qualifications governed identification for all leadership roles, with particular care given to eldership. Scripture required overseers to be above reproach, faithful in household life, self-controlled, and able to teach (1 Tim. 3:2–7). Deacons were likewise required to demonstrate dignity, integrity, and tested faithfulness (1 Tim. 3:8–10). These qualifications ensured that leadership reflected God’s holiness and order. Eldership carried particular responsibility for teaching and guarding the church, requiring careful discernment (Titus 1:9). Identification therefore varied by role while remaining grounded in character.
Men and women were identified for meaningful service according to Scripture’s affirmations and boundaries. Scripture recognized women who were known for faithful labor in the work of the gospel and the strengthening of the church (Rom. 16:1–4, 6, 12). Women were identified for service through prayer, hospitality, instruction within appropriate settings, and partnership in mission (Acts 16:14–15; Phil. 4:2–3). At the same time, Scripture restricted the office of shepherd elder overseer to qualified men and prohibited women from teaching or exercising authority over men in the gathered church (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). Identification honored women’s real contributions without redefining biblical offices.
Identification prepared leaders for formation rather than conferring authority immediately. Those who were identified were often entrusted first with limited responsibilities so their faithfulness could continue to be tested (Acts 6:3–6). Paul observed and encouraged emerging leaders before assigning them broader authority (Acts 11:25–26). Scripture warned against haste in leadership decisions because of the harm it could bring to individuals and churches (1 Tim. 5:22). Identification marked the beginning of development, not its completion. This practice safeguarded both leaders and the church.

Leadership identification in the apostolic pattern rested on observable faithfulness, tested character, and communal discernment under Scripture. By identifying leaders carefully, the apostles ensured that those entrusted with responsibility had already begun to reflect Christ’s character and obedience. This practice established a stable foundation for training, commissioning, support, and reunion in the life of the church.

Activity 2: The Apostles Trained Leaders

Leadership development advanced through intentional training that shaped belief, character, endurance, and skill for ministry. The apostles formed leaders through teaching, shared life, imitation, and participation in real ministry contexts. Training unfolded over time and required sustained proximity to faithful leaders and the Word of God.

The apostles trained leaders through comprehensive teaching grounded in the whole counsel of God. Paul taught publicly and from house to house so that leaders would understand the full scope of God’s saving purposes (Acts 20:20–21, 27). Teaching addressed repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus rather than isolated topics (Acts 20:21). Timothy was instructed to devote himself to teaching so that growth would be evident to all (1 Tim. 4:13–15). Scripture was treated as authoritative and sufficient for forming leaders in truth and obedience (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Training therefore rested on sustained exposure to God’s Word.
The apostles trained leaders through modeling a life of obedience, endurance, and pastoral care. Paul reminded leaders of how he lived among them with humility, tears, and perseverance under trial (Acts 20:18–19). He pointed to his conduct as an example to imitate because it aligned with the way of Christ (1 Cor. 11:1). Timothy learned ministry by observing Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance (2 Tim. 3:10–11). Scripture presented visible example as a legitimate and necessary means of formation (Phil. 3:17). Training therefore involved learning by watching faithful lives.
The apostles trained leaders through apprenticeship that joined instruction with shared ministry. Timothy accompanied Paul in ministry so that learning occurred within real service rather than apart from it (Acts 16:3–4). Paul described this relationship as one in which Timothy served with him in the work of the gospel (Phil. 2:22). Leaders learned how to proclaim, shepherd, and endure by participating alongside more experienced workers (Mark 6:7–13). Scripture consistently paired instruction with practice. Training therefore required shared labor and responsibility.
The apostles trained leaders through Scripture that shaped doctrine, discernment, and obedience. Timothy was reminded to remain in the Scriptures he had learned because they made him wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus (2 Tim. 3:14–15). Scripture was described as profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16). Leaders were equipped by Scripture to discern truth from error and to respond faithfully to opposition (Titus 1:9). The Word formed leaders who could teach, correct, and endure. Training therefore remained Scripture-centered at every stage.
The apostles trained leaders through exposure to hardship, suffering, and endurance. Paul taught that suffering was a necessary part of entering the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22). Timothy was exhorted to share in suffering as part of faithful service to Christ (2 Tim. 2:3). Endurance under trial produced maturity and steadfast faith (Rom. 5:3–4). Scripture treated perseverance as essential preparation for leadership responsibility (James 1:2–4). Training therefore included learning to remain faithful under pressure.
Men and women were trained for meaningful ministry according to Scripture’s design and order. Women were present among those taught by Jesus and shared in ministry contexts where learning and service occurred together (Luke 8:1–3). Women were trained to instruct others appropriately, to practice hospitality, and to labor in the work of the gospel (Acts 18:26; Titus 2:3–5). Training honored the Spirit’s work in women while maintaining the biblical restriction that the office of shepherd elder overseer is reserved for qualified men (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). Formation occurred without collapsing roles or responsibilities. Training therefore reflected both inclusion and order.

Apostolic training shaped leaders through teaching, example, Scripture, shared ministry, and endurance. This formation prepared leaders to handle responsibility faithfully and to serve the church and the mission with maturity. Training created leaders who were ready to be entrusted publicly and supported over time.

Activity 3: The Apostles Commissioned Leaders

Commissioning made leadership responsibility public, prayerful, and accountable within the church. The apostles did not treat responsibility as private self-appointment. They entrusted roles in ways that honored Christ’s authority, strengthened the church’s unity, and clarified who had been set apart for particular work.

The apostles commissioned leaders through prayer and the laying on of hands. The church prayed and laid hands on those chosen for service, marking them out before the congregation (Acts 6:5–6). The leaders in Antioch fasted, prayed, and laid hands on Barnabas and Saul when the Holy Spirit set them apart for the work (Acts 13:1–3). This pattern tied commissioning to worship and dependence on God. It treated ministry as God-assigned rather than self-assigned. It also established visible accountability to the sending church.
The apostles commissioned leaders by appointing elders in established churches. Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church and did so with prayer and fasting (Acts 14:23). Titus was instructed to appoint elders in every town according to apostolic standards (Titus 1:5). This commissioning was local and concrete. It did not assume centralized structures. It required churches to recognize qualified men who could shepherd God’s flock (1 Pet. 5:1–4).
The apostles commissioned leaders by entrusting real authority and responsibility, not mere titles. Paul left coworkers in places to carry defined responsibilities for teaching, order, and correction (1 Tim. 1:3; Titus 1:5). Timothy was charged to command and teach, and to give attention to the public reading of Scripture, exhortation, and teaching (1 Tim. 4:11–13). Titus was charged to teach what accords with sound doctrine and to insist on these things (Titus 2:1, 15). Commissioning therefore involved a defined trust. It placed weight on the leader to act faithfully under Christ.
The apostles commissioned leaders by recognizing spiritual gifts without detaching gifts from character and doctrine. Timothy’s ministry involved a gift that was recognized and affirmed in a public setting connected to the laying on of hands (1 Tim. 4:14). Paul reminded Timothy to fan into flame the gift of God that was in him through the laying on of hands (2 Tim. 1:6). This recognition did not replace qualification. Paul required character and sound doctrine as non-negotiable for leadership roles (1 Tim. 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9). Commissioning affirmed God’s enabling while maintaining God’s standards.
The apostles commissioned leaders carefully and warned against haste in appointment. Paul commanded Timothy not to be hasty in the laying on of hands, linking haste with shared responsibility for sin (1 Tim. 5:22). Overseers were not to be new converts, lest pride lead to ruin (1 Tim. 3:6). Deacons were to be tested first and only then serve if found blameless (1 Tim. 3:10). Scripture treated time and testing as protections for the church. Commissioning therefore followed proven faithfulness.
The apostles commissioned leaders within the gathered church so the community could recognize and support them. Those commissioned in Jerusalem were set before the apostles in a public setting, making their service visible to the church (Acts 6:6). The sending from Antioch occurred while the church leaders were gathered in worship and fasting (Acts 13:2–3). Paul instructed the churches to respect and esteem those who labor among them and lead them in the Lord (1 Thess. 5:12–13). Hebrews called believers to obey their leaders and submit because leaders keep watch over souls (Heb. 13:17). Commissioning therefore clarified relationships of responsibility within the body.
Men and women were commissioned for service and partnership in the gospel while preserving biblical restrictions on the elder office. Women were publicly recognized as coworkers and servants in the mission of the churches, and their labor was to be received with honor and help (Rom. 16:1–2). The church was commanded to honor widows who are truly widows, which required recognized roles of service and support within the household of God (1 Tim. 5:3–10). Women were instructed to teach what is good and to train younger women in godliness within the church’s life (Titus 2:3–5). At the same time, the teaching and authority of the gathered church in a way that governs men was restricted, and the overseer office was defined in male terms (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). Commissioning therefore affirmed meaningful ministry for women while maintaining clear obedience to Scripture’s order.

Commissioning made leadership visible, accountable, and rooted in prayer and apostolic standards. It protected the church from self-appointed authority and from hasty recognition. It also strengthened the church’s unity by clarifying who had been entrusted with specific responsibilities under Christ.

Activity 4: The Apostles Supported Leaders

Leadership development required ongoing support so that those entrusted with responsibility could endure, remain faithful, and serve effectively. The apostles did not assume that commissioning ended the church’s responsibility. They strengthened leaders through prayer, encouragement, provision, instruction, and personal presence over time.

The apostles supported leaders through prayer and spiritual intercession. Paul repeatedly told churches that he prayed for their leaders and endurance in faith (Eph. 1:15–19; Phil. 1:9–11; Col. 1:9–12). He asked churches to pray for him and his coworkers so that the word would advance and they would be delivered from evil (2 Thess. 3:1–2). Prayer was treated as a means by which God strengthened leaders for faithfulness. Intercession acknowledged dependence on God rather than self-sufficiency (Rom. 15:30–32). Support therefore began with prayer.
The apostles supported leaders through encouragement and strengthening in the faith. Paul and Barnabas returned to churches to strengthen the disciples and encourage them to continue in the faith (Acts 14:21–22). They taught leaders to expect hardship as part of following Christ rather than as a sign of failure (Acts 14:22). Barnabas was sent to Antioch to encourage believers and strengthen emerging leadership (Acts 11:22–24). Encouragement guarded leaders from discouragement and confusion. Support therefore included verbal strengthening grounded in truth.
The apostles supported leaders through material provision and financial partnership. The churches shared materially with those laboring in the gospel, recognizing their needs and sacrifices (Phil. 4:15–16). Paul taught that those who proclaim the gospel have a right to receive support from it (1 Cor. 9:13–14). Material support enabled leaders to continue their work without distraction or undue burden (2 Cor. 11:8–9). Scripture treated generosity as participation in ministry rather than charity (Rom. 15:26–27). Support therefore included tangible provision.
The apostles supported leaders through ongoing instruction and doctrinal guidance. Paul remained engaged with leaders by writing letters to instruct, correct, and encourage them in their responsibilities (1 Tim. 1:3–5; Titus 1:9–11). He warned leaders about false teachers and provided guidance for guarding sound doctrine (Acts 20:28–31). Timothy was urged to continue in what he had learned and to rely on Scripture for perseverance (2 Tim. 3:14–17). Instruction protected leaders from drift and error. Support therefore included continued teaching.
The apostles supported leaders through personal presence and relational investment. Paul desired to return to churches to see leaders face to face and to supply what was lacking (1 Thess. 2:17–18; 3:10). He sent trusted coworkers to strengthen churches when he could not come himself (1 Thess. 3:1–2; Eph. 6:21–22). Personal presence conveyed care, accountability, and shared burden. Scripture treated relationship as essential to perseverance (Acts 20:36–38). Support therefore included ongoing relational connection.
The apostles supported leaders by addressing conflict, discipline, and hardship with clarity and care. Paul instructed leaders on how to handle accusations, correction, and discipline within the church (1 Tim. 5:19–20). He guided churches through conflict so that leaders would not be overwhelmed or isolated (2 Cor. 2:5–11). Leaders were taught to correct opponents with gentleness while remaining firm in truth (2 Tim. 2:24–26). Support included helping leaders carry the weight of difficult decisions. Support therefore strengthened leaders in moments of strain.
Men and women were supported in their labor for the gospel according to Scripture’s design. Women who labored in the gospel were to be received, helped, and honored by the churches (Rom. 16:1–2). Paul spoke of women who struggled alongside him in the work of the gospel and treated their labor as worthy of support (Phil. 4:2–3). Support affirmed faithful service without redefining the office of overseer or violating Scripture’s boundaries (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). The church upheld both partnership and order. Support therefore extended to all faithful workers.

Apostolic support sustained leaders through prayer, encouragement, provision, instruction, and presence. It protected leaders from isolation and fatigue. It enabled long-term faithfulness under Christ’s lordship.

Activity 5: The Apostles Reunited Leaders

Leadership development was sustained through intentional reuniting that preserved unity, clarity, and shared mission. The apostles regularly gathered leaders after seasons of labor so that the work of God could be reported, discerned, corrected, and strengthened together. Reuniting prevented isolation and ensured that leadership remained communal, accountable, and aligned with the gospel.

The apostles reunited leaders to report and discern what God had done through the ministry. Paul and Barnabas gathered the church and reported all that God had done with them and how he had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles (Acts 14:26–27). Reporting focused on God’s work rather than personal achievement. This practice helped leaders interpret ministry fruit through the lens of God’s action (Acts 15:4). Scripture treated shared testimony as a means of encouragement and discernment. Reuniting therefore clarified God’s work among the churches.
The apostles reunited leaders to preserve doctrinal unity and resolve disputes. Leaders gathered in Jerusalem to address disputes that threatened the truth of the gospel and the unity of the churches (Acts 15:1–6). Scripture, apostolic testimony, and the work of the Spirit guided their deliberation (Acts 15:7–18). The resulting decisions were communicated clearly to the churches for obedience and peace (Acts 15:22–31). Unity was guarded through collective discernment rather than private judgment (Eph. 4:3–6). Reuniting therefore protected the gospel.
The apostles reunited leaders to strengthen one another through shared exhortation and prayer. Paul met with the elders of Ephesus to exhort them, pray with them, and commend them to God and the word of his grace (Acts 20:17–32). These gatherings included warning, encouragement, and mutual affection grounded in shared service (Acts 20:36–38). Scripture treated prayer together as essential for perseverance (Col. 4:2–4). Leaders were strengthened by standing together before God. Reuniting therefore renewed courage and faithfulness.
The apostles reunited leaders to plan future work and coordinate mission. Paul proposed returning to visit the brothers in every city to see how they were doing (Acts 15:36). He revisited regions to strengthen disciples and to advance the work in an orderly way (Acts 18:22–23). Planning occurred within relationships shaped by prayer and discernment rather than ambition (Rom. 15:22–24). Scripture presented coordination as part of faithful stewardship (1 Cor. 16:1–4). Reuniting therefore aligned leaders for continued mission.
The apostles reunited leaders to reinforce accountability and pastoral responsibility. Paul reminded elders that they were overseers appointed by the Holy Spirit to shepherd the church of God (Acts 20:28). He warned them about false teachers and charged them to remain vigilant together (Acts 20:29–31). Accountability was communal and ongoing rather than assumed once authority was granted (Gal. 2:11–14). Scripture treated shared vigilance as necessary for protection. Reuniting therefore sustained faithful oversight.
The apostles reunited leaders across churches and regions to maintain relational unity in the body of Christ. Letters were carried and gatherings were shared so that churches would know one another’s condition and stand together (Col. 4:7–9; 2 Cor. 8:16–24). Leaders were connected across regions so that no church stood alone (Rom. 16:16). Unity was expressed relationally as well as doctrinally (1 Cor. 1:10). Scripture treated the churches as one body under Christ. Reuniting therefore expressed the oneness of the church.
Men and women were reunited as coworkers and partners in the gospel within the order of Scripture. Paul greeted men and women together as fellow workers and servants in the churches (Rom. 16:1–12). Reunions acknowledged shared labor and mutual dependence in the work of the gospel (Phil. 4:2–3). These gatherings affirmed partnership without redefining governing authority in the church (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). Scripture upheld both cooperation and order. Reuniting therefore strengthened gospel partnership.

Apostolic reuniting preserved unity, guarded doctrine, strengthened leaders, and coordinated mission. It ensured that leadership remained relational and accountable rather than isolated. Through reuniting, the apostles sustained the long-term health of the churches and the mission.

Principles That Govern Apostolic Leadership Development

Apostolic leadership development operated according to identifiable governing principles that shaped how the five activities functioned together. These principles regulated pace, authority, responsibility, and accountability so that leadership remained faithful to Christ and durable across generations. They are derived from repeated apostolic instruction and practice rather than from isolated examples.

Leadership development was governed by Christ’s authority rather than human initiative. Jesus declared that all authority in heaven and on earth belongs to him and that leadership flows from his commission (Matt. 28:18–20). The apostles acted as stewards under Christ rather than as originators of authority (1 Cor. 4:1–2). Leaders were recognized and entrusted because Christ had already been at work among them (Acts 20:28). Scripture presents authority as received, not seized (Heb. 5:4). Leadership development therefore remained submissive to Christ’s lordship.
Leadership development was regulated by Scripture rather than charisma or pragmatism. The apostles taught and trained leaders according to the Scriptures and the pattern of sound teaching (Acts 17:2–3; 2 Tim. 1:13). Scripture defined qualifications, responsibilities, and boundaries for leadership (1 Tim. 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9). Leaders were required to hold firmly to the faithful word as taught (Titus 1:9). Scripture functioned as the governing rule for formation and evaluation (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Leadership development therefore remained Word-centered.
Leadership development required visible character before entrusted authority. The New Testament consistently placed character ahead of role or function (Acts 6:3; 1 Tim. 3:2–7). Faithfulness in ordinary life preceded recognition for greater responsibility (Luke 16:10–12). Scripture warned against elevating the untested or immature (1 Tim. 3:6). Leaders were examined over time before being entrusted (1 Tim. 3:10). Leadership development therefore protected the church through patience.
Leadership development progressed through testing before affirmation. The apostles observed how individuals handled pressure, opposition, and responsibility before commissioning them (Acts 6:5–6; Phil. 2:22). Scripture treated testing as a necessary proving ground for endurance and maturity (James 1:2–4). Leaders who shrank back under trial were not advanced (2 Tim. 4:10). Testing exposed faithfulness and clarified readiness. Leadership development therefore included measured exposure to difficulty.
Leadership development joined formation to real responsibility rather than simulation. Leaders were trained by doing the work alongside mature workers rather than by theoretical preparation alone (Acts 16:3–4; Phil. 2:19–22). Scripture consistently linked learning with obedience and practice (Matt. 7:24–27). Responsibility revealed both strength and weakness in ways instruction alone could not (1 Tim. 4:15–16). Formation occurred within real ministry contexts. Leadership development therefore remained embodied and practical.
Leadership development operated within communal discernment rather than private judgment. The apostles identified, commissioned, and corrected leaders within the gathered community (Acts 6:2–6; 13:1–3). Decisions were made through prayer, Scripture, and shared discernment rather than individual preference (Acts 15:6–22). Leaders were accountable to one another and to the churches (Gal. 2:11–14). Scripture treated communal discernment as protective (Prov. 11:14). Leadership development therefore remained relational and accountable.
Leadership development preserved order while affirming diverse participation. Men and women participated meaningfully in gospel labor and service (Rom. 16:1–6; Phil. 4:2–3). Scripture simultaneously restricted the governing teaching office of the church to qualified men (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). The apostles did not collapse roles in the name of inclusion or suppress participation in the name of control. Order and contribution were both maintained (1 Cor. 12:4–7). Leadership development therefore upheld clarity and obedience.
Leadership development assumed multiplication rather than permanence of roles. Paul instructed Timothy to entrust what he had learned to faithful people who would teach others also (2 Tim. 2:2). Leadership was never treated as terminal but as generational (Titus 1:5). Scripture presented leaders as stewards preparing successors (Acts 20:17–32). The goal was continuity of faithfulness rather than personal legacy. Leadership development therefore aimed toward multiplication.
Leadership development was sustained through reunion, encouragement, and correction. The apostles repeatedly revisited and regathered leaders to strengthen, warn, and align them (Acts 14:21–28; 20:17–38). Scripture treated perseverance as communal rather than individual (Heb. 10:24–25). Correction and encouragement were exercised together (2 Tim. 4:1–5). Leaders were not left to drift in isolation. Leadership development therefore required ongoing relational investment.

These principles regulated how identification, training, commissioning, support, and reuniting functioned together. They prevented haste, protected the church, and ensured continuity across generations. Apostolic leadership development remained faithful because it was governed by Scripture, community, and submission to Christ.

Implications for Churches and Church Networks Today

The apostolic process of leadership development places clear demands on how churches and networks order their life, priorities, and expectations. These implications arise directly from Scripture’s pattern and must be received as responsibilities rather than optional strategies. They describe what obedience requires if leadership is to be durable, faithful, and reproduccing.

Churches must locate leadership development inside the ordinary life of the church. In the New Testament, leaders were formed within gatherings devoted to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, prayer, and obedience (Acts 2:42–47). Scripture presents the church, not external institutions, as the household of God where leaders are shaped (1 Tim. 3:15). Leadership development separated from church life lacks biblical grounding. Churches must therefore treat formation as part of discipleship, not as a specialized track.
Churches must actively discern and identify leaders rather than wait for self-nomination. The apostles instructed the church to select qualified individuals based on observable faithfulness and character (Acts 6:3). Scripture warns against elevating those who seek authority prematurely (1 Tim. 3:6; James 3:1). Identification requires watchfulness and patience over time (Luke 16:10–12). Churches must recover deliberate discernment rather than reactive selection.
Churches must train leaders through Scripture, shared life, and real responsibility. Apostolic training joined teaching with modeling, imitation, and participation in ministry (Acts 20:18–21; Phil. 2:22). Scripture describes formation as learning that leads to obedience, not information alone (Matt. 7:24). Leaders were shaped through proximity to faithful examples and immersion in the Word (2 Tim. 3:14–17). Churches must therefore create relational pathways for training.
Churches must restore the seriousness and clarity of commissioning. The apostles publicly entrusted responsibility through prayer and the laying on of hands (Acts 6:6; 13:3). Scripture warns against haste in recognizing leaders (1 Tim. 5:22). Commissioning clarified authority and accountability under Christ (Titus 1:5). Churches must treat commissioning as a sacred act, not an informal affirmation.
Churches must provide sustained spiritual, relational, and material support for leaders. The apostles continued to strengthen leaders through prayer, encouragement, provision, and instruction (Acts 14:21–22; Phil. 4:15–16). Scripture does not assume leaders become self-sufficient once appointed (Heb. 13:17). Ongoing support guards against discouragement and drift (Acts 20:28–31). Churches must remain responsible for those they entrust.
Churches and networks must establish rhythms of reuniting leaders for unity and discernment. The apostles repeatedly gathered leaders to report God’s work, resolve disputes, and align mission (Acts 14:26–28; 15:1–35). Scripture calls believers to preserve unity through shared discernment and prayer (Eph. 4:3). Reuniting prevented isolation and fragmentation (Col. 4:7–9). Churches and networks must practice intentional reconnection.
Churches must prepare leaders to strengthen existing works and to initiate new ones. The apostles appointed elders to shepherd established churches and also sent workers to pioneer new regions (Acts 14:23; 13:1–3). Scripture presents strengthening and sending as complementary, not competing, callings (Acts 15:36). Leaders were trained to care for the flock and to advance the mission (2 Tim. 4:5). Churches must form leaders with both capacities in view.
Churches must affirm the labor of men and women while maintaining biblical order for governing office. The New Testament honors women as coworkers and servants in the gospel (Rom. 16:1–6; Phil. 4:2–3). Scripture also restricts the teaching and governing authority of the gathered church to qualified men (1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). Faithfulness requires both affirmation and obedience. Churches must hold these together without confusion or compromise.
Churches must pursue leadership multiplication rather than dependence on a few individuals. Paul instructed Timothy to entrust the gospel to faithful people who would teach others also (2 Tim. 2:2). Scripture presents leadership as generational stewardship rather than permanent possession (Acts 20:17–32). Churches that fail to plan for multiplication drift toward fragility. Leadership development must therefore aim toward reproduction.

These implications call churches and networks to recover apostolic seriousness and simplicity. Leadership grows where Scripture governs, community forms, responsibility is entrusted carefully, and unity is preserved. When these implications are obeyed, the Spirit raises leaders who endure and multiply for the glory of Christ.

Conclusion: Christ Continues to Form Leaders Through His Church

From the beginning, the risen Jesus formed leaders through the ordinary, faithful life of his churches. The apostles did not invent a leadership system. They received and practiced a pattern shaped by Christ’s authority, governed by Scripture, sustained by the Spirit, and embedded in real communities marked by obedience, suffering, prayer, and mission. Through identification, training, commissioning, support, and reuniting, leaders were formed who could shepherd God’s people, guard the gospel, and advance the mission with endurance (Acts 20:28–32; 2 Tim. 2:1–2).

This process protected the church from haste, personality-driven authority, and institutional dependence. Leaders were not produced quickly or privately. They emerged slowly and visibly through faithfulness, character, testing, and communal discernment (1 Tim. 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9). Men and women were drawn into meaningful gospel labor according to Scripture’s design, while the governing office of shepherd elder overseer remained clearly defined and guarded (Rom. 16:1–6; 1 Tim. 2:12; 3:1–7). The result was not uniformity of gifting but unity of faith and purpose.

The same Lord who formed leaders in Jerusalem, Antioch, and the churches of the nations continues to form leaders today. Christ has not changed his means. Where churches submit to Scripture, practice patient discernment, share life together, entrust responsibility carefully, and remain united in truth and love, the Spirit raises leaders who endure. The task of the church is not to improve the pattern but to receive it faithfully and to trust Christ to supply what he has promised until he returns (Matt. 28:18–20; Eph. 4:11–16).

Questions for Reflection and Action

Understanding the Architecture: How do the five core activities of identification, training, commissioning, support, and reuniting work together as a single process rather than as isolated steps?
Evaluating Our Practice: Where does our church or network currently align with this apostolic pattern, and where have we substituted speed, convenience, or assumption for Scripture-shaped discernment?
Guarding Faithfulness: How clearly do we distinguish between meaningful gospel partnership and the governing office of shepherd elder overseer, and where might confusion be creating tension or drift?
Strengthening the Present: What concrete changes would help our leaders receive better prayer, encouragement, instruction, and relational support so they can endure faithfully?
Preparing the Future: How intentionally are we identifying and forming the next generation of leaders who can both strengthen existing churches and help initiate new works under Christ’s lordship?
Concrete Obedience: What is one step we can take, with God’s help, to more fully submit our leadership development to the pattern Christ has given through the apostles?