Sunday, June 6, 2010 am
This is a controversial study.
Churches have divided, preachers have been fired, and brethren
have not behaved properly in the consideration and appointment of elders
in a congregation. That is
why we must reverently and prayerfully consider these qualities that
MUST be present in an elder as he serves.
a.
What it
means to be qualified – when
we speak of being qualified we mean one who is both eligible and able to
do the work. In practical
terms this means he is competent, proficient, capable and suitable to do
the work AND he meets the specified criteria that God has outlined in
His word for this office.
As we examine the qualities, we will see that EACH ONE has a purpose and
lends to one’s ability to serve in this office.
They make him capable to do the work required.
b.
Different approaches – when it
comes to appoint elders every conceivable approach has been tried.
There are some who object to elders today
citing that we do not have the same circumstances as the first century
(direct Holy Spirit involvement, etc.). To take such a view would set
aside the relevance of scripture for us today.
Some treat the qualifications as
suggestions (not binding) and appoint whoever you want to.
Some contend that being blameless is the only required
qualification and that the rest are exemplary if they apply or optional.
This leads to the appointment of whoever they want regardless of
the qualifications. Such is
usually the product of LIBERAL scriptural interpretation.
In other words they approach this subject like everything else in
scripture. As relative. 1
Tim 3:2 says, “A bishop MUST be…”
Some demand perfection in all requirements.
IF such is demanded you will never have elders (which is what
some want).
Some see the qualifications as something you grow into.
They appoint “the best we have” with the hopes that they will
grow into what they need to be.
How
should we approach the appointment of elders?
We need to respect God’s word and weigh
what He has said. Humbly consider the qualities described and seek to
appoint men who possess them and are capable of fulfilling the role for
the congregation.
c.
2
passages outline the necessary qualities that qualify one to serve as an
elder
i.
1
Tim. 3:1-7 – contains
16-18 qualities (some can be combined) that encompass his character,
abilities, relationships, influence and desire
ii.
Titus 1:5-9 – contains 15
qualities that encompass his character, abilities, relationships and
spirituality.
iii.
The two
lists compared:
1.
There are
7 qualities which are almost identical;
3 which are very similar (i.e. temperate, not quick tempered; able to
teach, holding fast the faithful word; children in submission, faithful
children)
8 qualities unique to 1 Timothy 3 and 5 qualities which are unique to
Titus 1.
2.
Why the
differences? Written to
different preachers in different areas (Timothy in Ephesus and Titus on
Crete). While the objective
was the same in both places (appoint elders) perhaps there were
different levels of understanding.
The qualities mentioned in Titus would find the right men for the
churches on Crete, while the qualities mentioned in Timothy would find
the right men for the church in Ephesus.
When put side by side, if one were to use EITHER list independent
of the other (or combine both of them) they would find and appoint the
same persons (i.e. you are not going to find someone as described in 1
Timothy 3 who is not also holy and just and a lover of what is good
which are mentioned only in Titus, AND you are not going to find someone
described in Titus who is quarrelsome and covetous or a novice or of a
bad reputation with the community which are found only in 1 Timothy).
In a sense, the comparison could be similar to why there are 4 gospels.
The same message written to 4 different audiences from 4
different approaches. But
they achieve the same goal – Jesus is our Savior.
But we have the benefit of two lists, let us therefore consider
both as we examine the qualities of these men.
3.
ALL the
qualifications are necessary – both lists begin with being blameless.
That should one of the “qualifiers” as we examine the various
qualities of an elder.
d.
Respect
for authority a must – 1 Cor.
4:6, 2 Tim. 2:15 – “rightly dividing the word of truth”
i.
As we
examine this subject, we must consider everything the Bible says about
their work and qualities, the immediate context of their qualities, as
well as respecting God’s silence.
Let us NOT bind where God has not bound NOR loose where God
has not loosed in these matters.
ii.
Some
qualities are non-negotiable and either there or not.
A husband of one wife, thus a MAN! Having believing children,
etc.
But realize that some of these qualifications are relative to some
degree and require some good judgment.
“These are attainable to a
degree that is sufficient for a man to be known for their
possession, while still allowing room for growth.” (Gary Henry)
Quite honestly in some of these qualities we don’t want to accept
this!
iii.
As we
examine the various traits of an elder we’re sometimes given
explanations. Do NOT ignore
those.
For example: What does “not
a novice” mean? How much
knowledge and ability qualifies as “not a novice”?
We do know that 1 Tim. 3:6
qualifies it by saying “Lest being puffed up with pride he fall…”
This tells us one must be experienced enough to know true
humility and the dangers of pride (cf. 1 Cor. 10:12).
“Apt to teach” – to what degree
does this apply? Titus 1:9
says he must be able to hold fast the faithful word and with it be able
to exhort and convict those who contradict.
What about the children of elders – we find several qualifiers – Titus
1:6 notes that they must be faithful which is qualified with, “not
accused of dissipation or insubordination”; 1 Tim. 3:4 says that his
children must be in submission with all reverence.
Vs. 5 gives the reason.
Let us consider the reason of vs. 5 as we examine that
qualification. Should such
be primary in consideration (i.e. if a man knows how to rule his house
he proves himself)? I think so!
e.
When we
set a standard for who we consider it should be HIGH, but not impossible
to attain. In other words, as
we realize the seriousness and greatness of this job we must be sober in
our considerations, BUT DON’T EXPECT PERFECTION!
Also some of the traits require judgment in determining what it means.
For example does the term, “believing children” have to mean more
than one or can it mean “one or more”?
I am convinced that VALID arguments can be made to justify either
position in this.
The same is true concerning aspects of being “faithful children”.
The question is, HOW dogmatic are we going to be?
Will our interpretation be grounds for fellowship?
f.
Considering their work as we consider them.
It is possible for one to possess all the qualities mentioned and
still not be suitable for the job.
One can possess these things and not have good common sense.
The texts mention nothing about love for the brethren – it is possible
for one to have all of these attributes and to not care enough about his
brethren or be willing to sacrifice enough.
NOTE: While love is not mentioned, it is implied in the
description of a pastor (shepherd).
But my point is that the qualities are MORE THAN A CHECKLIST!
Let us honestly ask: Am I willing to be shepherded by this person?
(NOTE: I mention honesty – because we cannot let personal biases
and grudges hinder a qualified man from serving.)
Understand the importance of our
attitudes in considering these things.
g.
One final
point: Most of these qualities are to present and developed in EVERY
Christian. But elders must
have them present with a level of maturity.
And thus we begin our study of the qualities necessary to
consider in qualifying one to serve as an elder and for one to continue
serving in that capacity. In
our next lesson we will begin examine the various qualities individually
and ask how they apply to the work of the office.
The lesson is yours.