In the creation account of Genesis Chapters 1 through 3—which calls people created in His image to be fruitful and multiply and exercise authority over creation—God established principles related both to leadership and to dynamics inherent to organizations. God revealed Himself as one God in three Persons, specifically when He used the plural in referring to Himself: “Let Us make man in Our image” (Gen. 1:26, CSB, emphasis added). Based upon the relationship among the persons of the Trinity, God called humanity to reflect His nature and character in the ways they live—first in relationship with Him—and further in relationship with other people. The purpose of this article is to outline leadership principles first expressed in creation, which were most clearly seen in the life of Jesus (Shaw, 2006).
Leadership in the Creation Account
The creation account of Genesis Chapters 1 through 3 is foundational to all that follows in the Bible. In fact, the opening words of the Bible function “as the foundational credo of biblical theology, because life begins with God” (Klingbeil, 2015, p. 2). Genesis, the account of beginning, sets the direction and provides a framework for all things to follow—these things came to be only by the command and under the guidance of God.
God as Head
The first words of Scripture, “In the beginning” (Gen. 1:1, CSB), are the translation of a single Hebrew word, bĕrēšît, a derivative of “head.” This “term [is] normally used to designate one who is leading in a given situation” (Doukhan, 2018, p. 28). This opening phrase of the Bible “encapsulates the essence of leadership” (Doukhan, 2018, p. 28). In the creation account, Scripture gives a picture of the first acts of leadership and provides an example for all future leaders to follow, with God being the one leading.
Leadership is, according to Yukl, Gardner, and Uppal (2020), “the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives” (p. 6). Similarly, Northouse (2016) defines leadership as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3). Finally, according to Grey (2005, as cited in Hanna, 2006), “Leadership is a dynamic relational process of influencing the thinking, behavior, and actions of others toward a shared purpose” (p. 23). From these definitions, it becomes clear that leadership is a process: “an activity which takes place over time and which has a precise aim regarding the result to be achieved” (Muller, 2021, p. 2). When God established creation, He had a particular aim in mind, “namely, to bring glory to God Himself” (Grudem, 1994, p. 479) as well as to bring joy to the people made in His image. According to God’s purpose, the process would inherently take place over time with movement toward God’s aim.
Additionally, according to the previous definitions, leadership involves influence (Yukl, Gardner, & Uppal, 2020; Northouse, 2016; Grey, 2005, as cited in Hanna, 2006, p. 23). When God created people in His image, He pronounced over them the first blessing in the form of a command: “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every creature that crawls on the earth” (Gen. 1:28, CSB). These words not only communicated to humanity the expressways they were to carry out their purpose, they also revealed God as the agent of influence. God would exercise that influence among the people of earth through His image-bearers.
Finally, the previous definitions recognize the nature of leadership as an individual’s influencing others, inviting them to work collectively toward an aim established by the leader (Yukl, Gardner, & Uppal, 2020; Northouse, 2016; Grey, 2005, as cited in Hanna, 2006). More specifically, when a leader provides vision and direction, it involves “a dynamic relational process” (Grey, 2005, as cited in Hanna, 2006) in influencing those who would follow. When God created humanity in His image as male and female (Gen. 1:27), calling them into relationship with Himself and one another, He established the family as an organization to reflect His own nature and as the means for accomplishing His purposes.
Elohim as Plural
Just as the phrase “in the beginning” (Gen. 1:1, CSB) points to God as “head,” the following word says something else very specific about the Creator. The word for “God” (Gen. 1:1), who created the heavens and the earth, is “Elohim” in the original Hebrew. This name points not only to God’s strength and power but is also in the plural form (Mathews, 1996). Scripture is very clear that there is one God (Deut. 6:4; Is. 44:6; 1 Tim. 2:5). However, from the first verse of Scripture, it is reasonable to understand “that there is a plurality within God” (Mathews, 1996, p. 135). The plural noun is followed by a singular verb (Hasel, 1975), which points generally to the relational nature of God, more specifically to the relationship that exists among the persons of the Trinity, and finally to there being one God.
Later, in Genesis 1:26, readers are given a glimpse into a conversation within the persons of the Godhead. Communication is foundational to healthy relationships (Johnson, 2021). Before creating humanity, when God said, “Let Us make man in Our image” (Gen. 1:26, CSB), it revealed the communication behind the cooperative efforts expressed in the creative work. Bowers (2016) states that it is “not only God the Father creating” (p. 29) but also the Spirit hovering and breathing life (Gen. 1:2), and the Word, Jesus Himself (John 1:2, 14), is carrying out what God had spoken (Genesis 1:3). Hasel (1975) states that the phrase “let us” of Genesis 1:26 is a “plural of fullness” (p. 65) that reveals the unity among the persons of the Godhead as well as a “unanimity of intention and plan” (p. 65). The carrying out of creation was born out of an intra-divine conversation and deliberation among the Trinity.
When God created humanity in His image, He wove something of Himself into every person. However, humanity in the image of God applies not only on an individual level but also, and perhaps more importantly, to humanity as a whole (Kilner, 2015). The nature and character of God were intended all along to be expressed through the lives of individual people. In addition, God’s purpose involved humanity, as a whole, reflecting the Trinitarian nature of the Creator as they follow their Leader, pursing the aim He would set before them.
Humanity’s Purpose and Responsibility
From the beginning, God established creation with a purpose in view, specifically, to bring glory to Himself and to allow people to enjoy His good creation (Grudem, 1994). This would be accomplished in a number of ways, including through a specific two-fold purpose-connection and reflection (Kilner, 2015). God made people to live in connection, or relationship, with Himself. In turn, with this relationship serving as a foundation, people were called to reflect God’s nature and character to the surrounding world.
To Know God
Humanity fulfilling its purpose begins with living in relationship with God. First, connection with God requires similarity between the parties (Kilner, 2015). For instance, a man knows his wife closely according to their similarities. If they spoke a different language, this dissimilarity would hinder healthy and intimate connection; however, when they share a common language, they can know one another far more closely. In another instance, two men can become friends if one, the other, or both are willing to do the work, but a man cannot connect in the same way with his dog. This is because, even though there are differences between people from different cultural backgrounds, including language differences, there are still more differences between humans and animals. Kilner (2015) states that “God intends people ultimately to become the ‘likeness’ of God, where the special connection with God and the reflection involved entail similarity” (p. 59). Humans, having been created in God’s image, are similar to God in that they are spiritual creatures who possess moral, intellectual, and emotional capacities (Grudem, 1994). Further, all people have volitional capacities and are responsible, based on an understanding of right and wrong, to choose the right and are accountable for the choices they make (Grudem, 1994).
God’s leadership, from the beginning, was essentially founded upon relationship (Doukhan, 2014). The breathing of life into humanity reveals a particular intimacy. Further, that God formed humanity from the ground with His hands reveals a legitimately personal touch as He created people—again indicating a special closeness with them (Doukhan, 2014). Having created humanity as social creatures, and in need of relational connection, God recognized that it was not good for man to be alone (Gen. 2:18); thus, He created woman, corresponding to man, to meet the immediate relational need and to partner with the man in carrying out the command to multiply and rule over creation (Gen. 1:28).
God not only created humanity as male and female to live in relationship with one another, but God, Himself, further chose to relate to people by communicating with them (Doukhan, 2014). Leadership necessarily involves communication. If God was to lead those made in His image, it required that He share of Himself with them—of His person, as well as His desires and demands. Further, as man knew God, he was then to reflect God’s relational nature through knowing, communicating with, and leading his wife. Together, then, both man and woman were to exercise authority and influence over all creation.
Relationships are an important reality within any leadership context. Yukl, Gardner, and Uppal (2020), with their definition of leadership, point to the importance of shared objectives. This sharing is tied necessarily to relationship—whether personal, professional, or otherwise—depending on the type of organization. Within an organization, “relationships [between leaders and followers] are formed on the basis of personal compatibility and subordinate competence and experience” (Yukl, Gardner, & Uppal, 2020, p. 256). This relationship between leader and follower reflects the nature of God’s relationship with humanity and is to be carried out in ways representative of the Creator’s nature and character. Without relationship, this is impossible. However, with a healthy relationship between leader and follower, God’s purposes can be achieved through a leader’s influencing those being led. Patterson (2017) argues that, in light of this reality, all leadership is necessarily relational. However, the relational element is an oft missing component, particularly in organizational contexts. He concludes that Christian leadership is an issue of stewarding first the relationship between the leader and God and then the relationship between the leader and followers (Patterson, 2017).
To Reflect God
Given the two-fold purpose of connection and reflection (Kilner, 2015), from their knowing God, humans are then called to reflect the nature of God to their neighbors and throughout the world. Serving as God’s representatives through the ways they live is outlined in the first blessing God pronounced upon newly created humanity. “God blessed them, and God said to them” (Gen. 1:28, CSB):
- “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth.” Humanity reflects God through producing children who are, in turn, raised to know and reflect Him. God is Creator, He is creative, and through procreative and generative acts, people reflect the nature of God Himself.
- “Subdue it” (the earth). Humanity reflects God through exercising dominion over the earth, including raising crops, building roads, and more. This authority does not belong ultimately to people but is representative of God’s authority, and when people rule in ways that reflect the nature and character of the Creator, He is honored.
This passage, known by some as the “cultural mandate” (Pearcey, 2004, p. 46), communicates God’s calling upon humanity to multiply those bearing God’s image so that, throughout the generations, the earth would be filled with those reflecting the nature and character of God. As people multiplied and spread out, over time they would discover more and more about the truths woven by God into creation, for all truth is God’s truth, and “wherever and however truth is discovered, its author is God” (Entwistle, 2004, p. 16). Through the cultural mandate, God communicated that people are free to use the resources of the earth for their benefit. However, use does not allow for abuse. God’s call implied great responsibility, precluding the use of earth’s resources in ways that are harmful, wasteful, or careless, and requiring that they are used instead in ways that reflect the nature of the Creator.
Per the previous definitions of leadership, organizational leaders must direct those under their authority toward shared objectives, influencing thinking, behavior, and actions through a dynamic relational process (Yukl, Gardner, & Uppal, 2020; Northouse, 2016; Grey, 2005, as cited in Hanna, 2006). However, they must also be aware of the surrounding environment in which the organization exists (Morgan, 2006). People exist within an immediate social ecology, “a defined group of people with whom we regularly engage and interact” (Lowe & Lowe, 2018, p. 15). Upon forming humanity in His image, God placed the newly created humans in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 2:15), literally a “well-watered place”—a veritable “paradise,” which means “walled garden.” The ecology of the garden provided the perfect environment for humanity’s flourishing—for their knowing God and living out His call to reflect Him. Just as God formed the garden, a leader is responsible for creating an environment where followers will flourish and for further teaching them to tend to the environment in ways that allow for its perpetual growth and improvement, as well as group members’ flourishing.
Beyond the internal walled-garden ecology exist various levels of broader ecologies. Lowe and Lowe (2018) point out that, from creation, there existed a personal ecology within the garden, but there was also a broader human (or social) ecology—an earth ecology—and a cosmic ecology. In this same spirit, organizations function not only according to an inside-the-walls ecology but also within the context of a larger surrounding environment (Morgan, 2006). Whether or not leaders are expressly aware, organization members never exist solely as part of a single organization. For instance, church members belong not only to the church but also to their families and jobs as fathers, mothers, and workers; to their cities, states, and nations as citizens; and much more. As members come and go, they introduce into an organization’s ecology dynamics from all the other ecologies in which they participate. If a leader is to lead well and in ways that help the organization thrive, s/he must necessarily operate with the internal in view but also with a continual awareness of surrounding and interrelated ecologies.
God and Humanity’s Authority
Part of the first blessing was God’s command to “subdue it” (Gen. 1:28, CSB)—namely, the earth. The language of subduing might be interpreted as the earth’s being characterized by an unruly or savage nature. However, this is not the case; this verse, instead, “speaks of a productive ordering of the earth and its inhabitants to yield its riches and accomplish God’s purposes” (MacArthur, 1997, p. 17). “Subdue” in this instance refers not to the forcible exercising of power over a defiant subject but to humanity demonstrating authority over the very good creation entrusted to them by God. When God spoke, creation, as it came from nothing into existence, was wholly subject to His authority. God’s call for humanity to exercise dominion over creation reflects God’s own nature and character.
Additionally, God called humanity to “rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every creature that crawls on the earth” (Gen. 1:28, CSB). To “rule” emphasizes the idea of royalty. “Just as kings set up statues of themselves throughout the border of their land to show their sovereign domain, so God established his representatives on earth” (Ross, 1997, p. 114). God, the King of creation, created the earth with the form and structure He desired and then filled it with all kinds of life. He placed humans on earth to rule over every created sphere, living and unliving. The kingly rule was God’s “giving them an universal and unlimited dominion” (Gill, n.d.) over the created order, and they were to exercise this authority in ways that reflect God’s kingly rule.
God exercised His authority generally over all creation, including over humanity, through speaking, and, as Hughes (2004) states, people were from the beginning created to hear God’s word and to live by it. The first words spoken by God to people demonstrate authority, as He commanded them to be fruitfully procreative and to rule over the earth (Gen. 1:28). Similarly, in Genesis 2:16–17, God “commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree of the garden, but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for on the day you eat from it, you will certainly die” (CSB). Again, this demonstrated the authority God possessed over man. That God communicates with humanity at all indicates His (and their) relational nature. The spirit in which He communicates indicates authority.
Patterson (2016) states that God’s purpose for all people, and not just a select few, is to lead others in reflecting Him. Leadership involves influence, and all people are to intentionally seek to exercise influence in others’ lives, specifically through speaking the truth to others (Eph. 4:15, 25; Acts 1:8). This person-to-person communication necessarily requires relationship. Further, it is to be carried out with an authority reflecting that of God Himself. It is important, however, to understand that the authority represented in human speech does not rest in the one speaking. Rather, the authority expressed through people’s words is a stewarded authority, entrusted to the speaker by God and representative of His authority (Patterson, 2017).
Leadership Within the Family
When God, on the sixth day of creation, formed humanity in His own image, “He created him in the image of God; He created them male and female” (Gen. 1:27, CSB). Whereas individual human persons certainly do bear the image of God (Kilner, 2015), humanity as a whole—as male and female—is a perhaps fuller expression of the image of God (Ross, 1997). The moment God created man and woman, He established the foundations of the family as the institution through which He would accomplish His purposes on the earth. The man was to provide a pattern of forsaking all others, as expressed in leaving his father and mother and being bound in covenant relationship with his wife (Gen. 2:24). Further, the two would become one flesh, revealing the most intimate parts of themselves—relationally, emotionally, intellectually, physically, spiritually, and otherwise—with no reason for shame. From creation, man and woman were equal in value before God, but they were different—and complementary—in significant ways (MacArthur, 2008). As they fulfilled the call to live as a married couple, bearing children and multiplying God’s image-bearers, there would necessarily be an exercising of authority stewarded according to God’s desires in order for the family organization to function according to God’s design.
Of course, there is no direct parallel between the family and other organizations. However, there are certainly leadership principles that can be extracted and applied elsewhere. First, God intended for humanity as a whole, and not sole individuals, to accomplish His purposes (Kilner, 2015). In a similar spirit, organizational leadership requires a leader to equip and guide members to perform not only their sole responsibilities but to also work in cooperation with others within the organization in pursing collective goals (Yukl, Gardner, & Uppal, 2020). This type of unified effort requires a leader to possess a clear vision, and, further, to communicate it clearly and in ways that an organization’s members understand, both intellectually and practically.
A second principle to be extracted from God’s instituting the family is members’ complementary roles (MacArthur, 2008). Within the family, males and females were created with legitimate differences, and through each member bringing their unique and complementary abilities to the relationship, God’s purposes are carried out. In a similar way, all organizations consist of members with various capacities, giftings, passions, and skills (Northouse, 2016). A leader is responsible for providing direction that facilitates members’ working together to achieve a desired result—not despite their differences but because of their differences. In fact, organizational objectives, much like God’s purpose for the family, would never be achieved without the unique characteristics of each member.
Finally, as families were created to experience relationship, trust, and intimacy, the same is true, at least to some degree, in any organization. God called humanity to live in relationship with Himself and to follow His commands (Kilner, 2015). For this to be a reality, they had to trust the word of their Creator and commit to following Him. In much the same spirit, healthy organizational functioning depends upon leaders’ being trustworthy; it depends on members communicating in ways that lead to group members’ trusting their word. Members are willing to commit—and commitment is required for organizational effectiveness—only inasmuch as they trust that their leaders are pursuing not only the good of the organization and themselves but the good of every individual belonging to the organization (Hanna, 2006).
Jesus: The Express Image of God
As stated earlier, the first words of Scripture point to God as leader (Doukhan, 2018). Patterson (2016) argues not only that “the biblical foundations of leadership are laid from the first verses of Genesis” (p. 78) but, further, that Scriptural perspectives on leadership conclude only with “Revelation’s declaration of Jesus’ leading God’s people as the eternal King” (p. 78), “the ruler of the kings of the earth” (Rev.1:5, CSB). As the King who conquered sin and death, Jesus perfectly fulfills the three previously mentioned roles of an organizational leader. While mankind has failed to experience the corporate identity that God intended for His people, Jesus has made unity a reality among the people of God. Further, whereas many organizations are characterized by competition, jealousy, and strife, Jesus brings together people with various giftings and connects them meaningfully as a body with no division (1 Cor. 12:12–13)—even to the point of “giving greater honor to the less honorable” parts (1 Cor. 12:24, CSB). According to the giftings of the Spirit, the individual differences of those who belong to the family of God are unified so that their differences are perfectly complementary for the accomplishing of God’s purposes in creation. Finally, Jesus, the Word of God made flesh (John 1:1), spoke and lived in ways that were altogether trustworthy. Those who commit to following after Him will be formed into the image of Christ (Rom. 8:29; 1 Cor. 15:49; 2 Cor. 3:18).
Whereas humanity failed, through their disobedience, in living out God’s purpose for their lives, Jesus is the express image of God in human form (Col. 1:15). He fulfilled that which God intended all along for all humanity (Kilner, 2015). Through the ways He led, Jesus was “pressing His followers into a leadership community similar to what we observe in Genesis 1” (Patterson, 2017, p. 84). Jesus was present at creation, working within the context of the Trinity to carry out God’s creative purposes. In His incarnation, those same principles were modeled in ways people can see and emulate. Christians are, by definition, Jesus’ disciples—they are His followers. At the same time, disciples are not exclusively followers, and “the making of leaders is a primary objective in God’s plan, as opposed to designating a few leaders and a mass of compliant followers. ‘Leading’ the people of this planet to the person of Jesus Christ is a call to all who believe” (Patterson, 2016, p. 81). In fact, leading is a necessary part of God’s mission for His people to declare the good news of Jesus to the world. Christian organizational leaders today would do well to consider the ways Jesus expressed leadership principles of creation in the ways He led—and continues to lead.
Jeffrey K. Belcher, MA, is the founding pastor of Church of the Harbor in Baltimore, MD, where he and his family relocated in 2014. The church has three locations and largely serves the city’s marginalized.
References
Bowers, J. (2016). The creativity behind creation: The Trinity in Genesis 1:1-2:3 and group creativity. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 10(2), pp. 24–36.
Doukhan, J. (2014). The creation narrative. In S. Bell (Ed.), Servants and friends: A biblicaltheology of leadership (pp. 31–47). Andrews University Press.
Doukhan, J. (2018). Leadership in the creation narrative. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 12(1), 28–40.
Entwistle, D. (2004). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity. Wipf & Stock.
Gill, J. (n.d.). John Gill’s exposition of the entire Bible. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/1-28.htm
Grudem, W. (1994). Systematic theology. IVP.
Hanna, M. (2006). What is “Christian” about Christian leadership. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 1(1), 21–31.
Hasel, G. F. (1975). The meaning of ‘Let us’ in Gn 1:26. Andrews University Seminary Studies, 13(1), 65–66. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1307&context=auss
Hughes, K. (2004). Genesis: Beginning and blessing. Crossway.
Johnson, M. (2021, May 24). Within-couple associations between communication and relationship satisfaction over time. Sage Journals. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211016920
Kilner, J. (2015). Dignity and destiny. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
Klingbeil, G. (2015). The Genesis creation account and its reverberations in the Old Testament. Andrews University Press.
Lowe, S., & Lowe, M. (2018). Ecologies of faith in a digital age. InterVarsity Press.
MacArthur, J. (1997). The MacArthur study Bible. W Publishing.
MacArthur, J. (2008). Genesis 1–11: Creation, sin, and the nature of God. Nelson Books.
Mathews, K. (1996). Genesis 1–11: 26. B&H Publishing.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Sage.
Muller, G. (2021). What is a process? Systems Architecting: A Business Perspective. https://www.gaudisite.nl/WhatIsAProcessPaper.pdf
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage Publishers.
Patterson, S. (2016). Biblical foundations of Christian leadership—Part 1. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 10(2), 78–89.
Patterson, S. (2017). Biblical foundations of Christian leadership—Part 2. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 11(1), 80–94.
Pearcey, N. (2004). Total truth. Crossway Books.
Ross, A. (1997). Creation and blessing: A guide to the study and exposition of Genesis. Baker Academic.
Shaw, P. (2006). Vulnerable authority: A theological approach to leadership and teamwork. Christian Education Journal, 3(1), 119–133.
Yukl, G., Gardner, W., & Uppal, N. (2020). Leadership in organizations. Pearson.