Sunday, August 5, 2010 am
STUDY OF ELDERS (8)
Qualifications (5)
Leadership Qualities
The qualities we will discuss today are the most controversial in
dealing with being an elder.
These are qualities that call for judgment and leave some room for
interpretation. I personally
believe that God has left SOME room for judgment in these qualities, so
that as a congregation we will together study them and DISCUSS them and
come to a conclusion that will unite us.
NOTE: This will ONLY work if we come to the table with an open
mind.
They are qualities that,
depending on the congregation, can keep one from serving even though he
could serve in another.
These are qualities that have divided churches.
These are qualities that have been abused and taken to both
extremes. Some view them as
suggestions if one is married while others are so strict in their
interpretations to prohibit virtually everyone from serving.
In presenting this lesson, I KNOW some do not agree with my
conclusions, so my primary goal will be to simply present what the texts
says and notice some of the different ways these qualities are
interpreted. Some are
obviously false, but others require consideration and judgment.
Some things to keep in mind: 1) Remember what we have said about
respect for authority. This
includes not binding where God has not bound.
2) Consider the “qualifying
statements” in these qualities.
More than any other, the qualifiers help explain HOW the
qualification demonstrates an elders ability.
3) Remember that we have noted that an elder is not perfect, but
the standards of qualities required are HIGH.
That is why I believe that when we consider a qualification with
varying interpretations we need to notice the extremes and set our
standard somewhere “right of center”, but not so extreme that it is
impossible to obtain; 4) Consider the qualities in light of the job he
is expected to do. In other
words, ask if his condition demonstrates ability or failure to shepherd
the flock; 5) Consider how the congregation will respond to these
qualities. Will it divide
the church? Why does one
oppose a certain quality (i.e. is it because appointing elders would
take away his power?)? Will
we give in to the demands of unreasonable members (i.e. selfish persons
who will hold a congregation hostage until they get their way)?
Concerning proven leadership, an elder should be:
I.
The husband of one wife –
1 Tim. 3:2, Titus 1:6
a.
One
wife is emphatic.
Written in such a way so as to say, one wife – no more and no
less. The word for “wife”
can also have reference to a woman.
In reality, this is saying an elder is to be “a one woman man.”
That he MUST be married is implied in the frequent use of the word
indicating a “husband” (though it can also mean simply a man – context
determines meaning) AND his having a household and children.
Without marriage, such descriptions would be unstable,
uncommitted and immoral.
Furthermore, in Titus 1:6-7 it reads, “If
a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful
children…For a bishop must be blameless…”
NOTE that blameless is mentioned twice.
The first time is exclusive to his family relationships.
b.
Questions about this:
Does it mean only one wife for all time, or one scriptural wife?
(I.e. one scriptural wife at a time).
I believe it to mean that
one be in a scriptural marriage.
God had provided reasons for one to marry again (the death of
one’s spouse – Rom. 7:1-3; an unfaithful spouse – Matt. 19:9, etc.).
There is no reason why being the husband of one wife would be
nullified if scriptural dictates for marriage are followed.
c.
Other
thoughts:
There are numerous questions of debate even in this.
Some are worthy of consideration, others ought to be rejected
outright.
i.
Some say
that marriage is not necessary, but if one is married, he should possess
these qualities in his marriage AND he should not be a polygamist.
Respect for authority will not permit this.
ii.
What if
his wife dies? Is He still qualified?
Some believe that an elder can serve even after his wife has
died.
iii.
If he
remarries, how does it affect his qualities as a leader in the house?
Has he proven himself qualified with his present wife
(controlling his house, believing children are his, etc.)
II.
Rules his own house well
– 1 Timothy 3:4
a.
1 Tim. 3:4
– One who rules his own house well.
This is a general statement that is not exclusive to his
children. It would include
his wife and others in his home (perhaps servants or parents, etc.).
He demonstrates his ability to lead by his control in the home.
Everything the Bible says about the husband/father comes into
consideration in this – love, firmness, compassion, being the head, etc.
b.
The term
“rules” is a word that
means, to be over or to preside. (WS Dictionary);
“to stand before” (Vine’s).
Subjection means for one
to be in submission. The
text specifically mentions his children being in submission, but ruling
the house would also indicate his wife is in submission (cf. Eph.
5:22-24, Col. 3:18, etc.)
c.
Vs. 5
qualifies this noting:”For if a
man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of
the church of God?”
NOTE: The church is a family and requires similar leadership skills.
That is why an elder must prove himself BLAMELESS in these
matters.
d.
Other
thoughts: Some dismiss these
qualities on similar basis to that of the need for a wife.
They reason that if demonstrates himself a competent leader in
anything, he demonstrates he is qualified to lead.
But this sets aside God’s authority as well.
The texts deal too much with family relationships to flippantly
dismiss them.
III.
Believing children – 1 Tim. 3:4-5, Titus 1:6
a.
This is
perhaps the most controversial quality of all in both lists.
Unless all involved have a proper attitude, it will cause
problems unless you have two or more men with perfect family situations.
This is an example of the importance of your convictions but also
considering what others believe with an open mind.
The wording in these passages concerning this quality leaves room
for personal judgment within a congregation and as individuals. There
are certain aspects of the conduct of children that could be
legitimately argued more than one way (for example: how many children
must an elder have). Thus we
need to honestly ask ourselves how much we are willing to consider what
a brother who differs with us in these matters thinks (i.e. is
convicted). In other words,
while we might prefer things a certain way, we ought to HONESTLY weigh
the validity of arguments made by one who disagrees with us in this
matter.
There is so much to consider about respect to God’s word in these
matters. The grave danger is
the one who flippantly dismisses what God says plainly because of
matters that require our judgment.
I do not want to be misunderstood as calling for compromise, but
simply consideration of matters where God has left us with the
RESPONSIBILITY to make sound judgments that we do so with an open mind
and in consideration of one another as brethren.
NOTE: In these matters I have personal convictions, which I will do my
best to keep to a minimum in this study.
Having said that let us notice WHAT God has said.
b.
FIRST, let
it be noted that the conduct of children is a subcategory of “one who
rules his own house well.”
c.
1
Tim. 3:4 - “Having his
children in submission with all reverence”
“Keeping his children under control with all dignity”-NASU;
“having his children in subjection with all gravity”-KJV, ASV.
i.
The word
“submission” here is a
military term meaning, “to rank under” (Vine’s).
Zodihates defines it as, “Subordination, subjection, submission,
obedience.” (WS Dictionary of the NT) Clearly the point is one who
listens to and obeys his parents (cf. Eph. 6:1-3, Col. 3:20).
This implies a child must be of a suitable age to understand and
obey his parents. When told
to do something, he responds.
ii.
“With
all reverence” (dignity, gravity) would indicate an
understanding of respect which points toward a child of sufficient
maturity as to understand WHY he/she obeys.
This is one who understands love and obedience.
He knows the SERIOUSNESS of obedience to his parents.
This would be a child who would obey his parents even though he
doesn’t want to or doesn’t like what he is being told to do.
And it demonstrates a proper attitude in obedience.
d.
Titus 1:6, “having
faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination.”
“Having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or
rebellion.”- NASU; “having faithful children not accused or riot or
unruly”-KJV; “having children that believe, who are not accused of riot
or unruly”-ASV.
i.
Faithful (believing) –
defined as, 1. Passive “faithful, to be trusted, reliable”; 2. Active,
signifying “believing, trusting, relying.” It is a derivative of the
Greek word from which we get our terms believe and faith.
The specific term is used 67 times in the New Testament, most of
them being faithful.
The challenge in the word is that it simply means one who is proven
trustworthy (cf. Luke 16:10, “he that is faithful…”; 1 Tim. 3:1, “This
is a faithful saying…”), BUT the word can also be descriptive of one who
is a believer (i.e. a Christian) (cf. 1 Tim. 4:3 – “of them which
believe and know the truth”; 1 Tim. 4:12, “Be an example to the
believers…”; John 20:27, “Do not be unbelieving, but believing”).
So does this term mean one who is
a Christian or one who, similar to the language of 1 Timothy 3, is
faithfully in submission to his parents.
The safe course is to consider it as one who is a Christian (believer),
for he is also faithful. AND
it demonstrates the ability of the father (elder) to teach his family
about Jesus to the point of obeying Him,
ii.
Children – the term is
plural (also 1 Tim. 3:4).
But the challenge with this term is its usage throughout scripture.
It is common to use the term children (plural) to refer to anyone
who has one or more. For
example consider: 1 Tim. 5:4, “If any widow has children…”; 5:10, “If
she has brought up children…”; Mark 7:29, “who has left house…or
children or lands…”; Col. 3:21, “Fathers, do not provoke your children
to wrath…”, etc.). That
leads to debate about how many children one must have in order to serve
as an elder. Must he have a
plurality? Valid arguments
can be made both ways.
iii.
Not
accused of dissipation or insubordination”
– obviously, the children of an elder
cannot be rebellious. Such
would demonstrate a failure of a father to control his children.
Then see the qualifier of 1 Tim. 3:5.
iv.
Putting
together all the scriptures say about this quality it is clear that an
elder must have demonstrated his ability to lead through the success of
his family relationships. If
he cannot provoke his family to obey God (and him), how will he
influence the church?
e.
Other
thoughts: There are so many
variables concerning this.
Some believe you don’t have to have children, but if you do they must be
behaved – NONSENSE!
There is debate over the number of children an elder must have (one or a
plurality – the plurality is the safe course).
What about children who are adopted?
Do they count? – To me, it is clear from the texts that the
qualities have nothing to do with the virility of the elder.
It is about his ability to lead.
Do all children have to be faithful and remain faithful? Does it apply
to children who are still in the home (which some believe) or does it
still/only apply after they leave the home?
What if one or more children become unfaithful later in life,
after leaving home? Are they still subject to him?
What if one’s child dies after he is appointed an elder?
What if an elder adopts a child or his wife conceives AFTER he is
appointed? All of these
questions have been presented and been the cause of serious disputes.
My advice: Our standards should be HIGH, but not impossible to obtain.
These questions need to be answered in light of how they affect
his ability to lead.
IV.
Able to teach
– 1 Tim. 3:2
a.
Vine’s
describes the word as, “To instruct or train.”
2 Timothy 2:24, same expression.
b.
The text
clearly expresses one’s ability to teach others.
This would imply some degree of public aptitude in this.
But it doesn’t say he has to be a gospel preacher.
He needs to be sufficient in knowledge to with maturity understand God’s
word and be able to explain it to others.
One author also observed he needs a disposition to teach – in other
words, he will take advantage of opportunities to teach others.
He loves God’s word and shares it with others (brethren and the
lost).
c.
Titus 1:9
gives a qualifier of this: “Holding
fast the faithful word as he has been taught that he may be able, by
sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.”
NOTE what the elder must be able to do concerning his teaching ability:
i.
Hold fast
the faithful word he has been taught – he has sufficient ability and
grounding that he is not easily tossed to and fro (cf. Eph. 4:14) and he
is no longer a babe, but a teacher as described in Hebrews 5:12-14.
ii.
He
understands “sound doctrine” – he can tell the difference between the
true and false.
iii.
He is able
to exhort – which means to give instructions or stimulate one’s faith.
He knows how to encourage the flock (cf. he is a Shepherd)
iv.
He is able
to convict those who contradict – he can identify and refute error.
Notice Titus 1:10-11, “For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers,
especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped, who
subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the
sake of dishonest gain.”
In context, the elders, at the very least are at the forefront of
confronting such individuals.
And thus we can see the qualifications necessary to appoint one
as an elder and for one to serve as an elder.
In summary, an elder is one who has matured in the faith and his
life clearly demonstrates both a knowledge and application of Christ in
him. He leads by example and
instructs out of love. Let
us respect our elders.
“Obey
those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your
souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not
with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.”
Hebrews 13:17
I commend this series to you!
For now, this will bring to conclusion our study of elders (in
the near future we will address deacons and wives of these leaders).
May we prayerfully consider these things and uphold our shepherds
as they seek to be all that God would have them to be and all that we
need them to be.