grace fellowship’s teaching position on...

1 Results of a study on the biblical role of elders by the elders of Grace Fellowship (1/29/13) rev 6/8/13

Grace Fellowship’s Teaching Position on Elders

Elder’s moral character and spiritual qualifications:

1 Timothy 3:2 –

must be above reproach (+Titus 1:6) (free from anything offensive)

the husband of one wife (+Titus 1:6) (if married, a faithful, monogamous

marriage, but being married is not required – I Cor. 7)

temperate (sober –minded)

prudent (self-controlled, exercising good judgment)

respectable (good behavior)

hospitable (+Titus 1:8)

able to teach

1 Timothy 3:3 –

not addicted to wine (+Titus 1:7)

not pugnacious (not violent, +Titus 1:7)

gentle

peaceable

free from the love of money

1 Timothy 3:4-5 –

He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children

under control with all dignity

1 Timothy 3:6 –

not a new convert

1 Timothy 3:7 –

must have a good reputation with those outside the church

Titus 1:6 –

having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion (probably

means “faithful children” – i.e. children who are dutiful – for the opposite of

these children are children who are accused of dissipation or rebellion [not

unbelief])

Titus 1:7 –

For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward (a steward is a

household manager who has responsibility over the master’s servants, property,

and finances)

not self-willed (doesn’t want his own way)

not quick-tempered

not fond of sordid gain,


Titus 1:8 –

loving what is good

sensible (same word as “prudent” in I Tim. 3:2 above)

just (upright)

devout (firmly committed to God)

self-controlled

Titus 1:9 –

holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching

Elders are recognized from among those in the church and are appointed to

their office:

Acts 14:23 When they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with

fasting, they commended them to the Lord

1 Timothy 3:1 It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a

fine work he desires to do (desire is necessary)

Titus 1:5 appoint elders in every city as I directed you (elder leadership is an apostolic

directive)

Elders are to shepherd God’s flock:

1 Peter 5:2 shepherd the flock of God among you (to shepherd means to pastor; (elders

have a pastoral role)

1. Protect the flock from false teachers

Acts 20:28 "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has

made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own

blood. 29 "I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not

sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse

things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 "Therefore be on the alert . . . (elders

have a divine commission to shepherd God’s flock – those whom He had purchased

with His own blood. . . a good shepherd is always alert to danger)

Titus 1:9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he

will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.


2. Feed the flock through teaching

I Thessalonians 5:12 have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction,

1 Timothy 3:2 he is to be “able to teach”

1 Timothy 5:17-18 those who work hard at preaching and teaching.

Titus 1:9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will

be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.

Elders are to Lead the church:

Provide oversight, clarify beliefs, set goals, make decisions, give direction, correct error, affect change,

and settle disputes

a. oversee the church’s activity

Acts 15:22 Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to

choose men from among them to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas- (the close

connection to the apostles showed the significance of the elders’ position)

I Thessalonians 5:12 have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction

b. oversee the church’s spiritual well-being

I Thessalonians 5:12 have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction,

Hebrews 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as

those who will give an account.

1 Peter 5:2 shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight (oversight is

supervision and management)

c. settle disputes / Investigate issues /Provide counsel

Acts 15:2-6 - And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the

brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to

Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. . . Acts 15:6 - The apostles

and the elders came together to look into this matter. (they settled doctrinal issues)

d. set policy

Acts 16:4 Now while they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the decrees

which had been decided upon by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem, for

them to observe.


e. represent the church

Acts 11:29 -30 -- And in the proportion that any of the disciples had means, each of them

determined to send a contribution for the relief of the brethren living in Judea. 30 And

this they did, sending it in charge of Barnabas and Saul to the elders. (receive and

administer money)

Acts 15:23 and they sent this letter by them, "The apostles and the brethren who are elders,

to the brethren in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia who are from the Gentiles, greetings.

Acts 20:17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church.

Acts 21:18-19 And the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were

present. 19 After he had greeted them, he began to relate one by one the things which

God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.

Elders are to Care for God’s people:

1. Care for physical needs

Acts 11:29 -30 -- 29 And in the proportion that any of the disciples had means, each of them

determined to send a contribution for the relief of the brethren living in Judea. 30 And

this they did, sending it in charge of Barnabas and Saul to the elders.

James 5:14 Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they

are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord;

2. Care for spiritual needs

Hebrews 13:17 -- Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as

those who will give an account.

The mindset of the Elders

1. In relation to inward motives

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 - 12 But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who

diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you

instruction, 13 and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. (not

spiritually lazy)

1 Timothy 5:17 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor,

especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.

I Peter 5:2 –

not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; (willfully, not being

pressured into the position)


not for sordid gain (not for self-seeking reasons, like power or prestige or financial profit.

This would apply especially to those who make a living in the ministry. Eldership is not

merely as a means of making a living)

with eagerness (serving with inward delight)

I Peter 5:5 You younger men, likewise, be subject to your elders; and all of you, clothe yourselves

with humility toward one another, for God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to

the humble

2. In relation to people

I Peter 5:3 –

nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge (though they are to rule, they

aren’t to be heavy handed in their authority)

proving to be examples to the flock (Instead of domineering lords, they themselves must

be models their people can follow. As spiritual shepherds they must lead, not drive. –

Hiebert)

The elders are to be respected and submitted to by the church:

Acts 20:28 ". . . the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (elders have been given their position by

God; also Romans 13:1 – “. . .there is no authority except from God, and those which

exist are established by God)

Elders are directly accountable to God – Hebrews 13:17 -- Obey your leaders and

submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 - 12 But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who

diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you

instruction, 13 and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work.

1 Timothy 5:17 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor,

especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says,

"YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING," and "The laborer is worthy

of his wages." (those who preached and taught were paid – I Cor. 9:7; Gal. 6:6)

1 Timothy 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or

three witnesses.

Hebrews 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as

those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this

would be unprofitable for you.

I Peter 5:5 You younger men, likewise, be subject to your elders

I Corinthians 16:15 (elders?) - Now I urge you, brethren (you know the household of Stephanas,

that they were the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves for

ministry to the saints), 16 that you also be in subjection to such men and to everyone

who helps in the work and labors.


The terms elders, overseers (bishops), and pastors all refer to the same people

and are used interchangeably:

Acts 20:28 "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has

made you overseers, to shepherd (to pastor) the church of God which He purchased

with His own blood. (the overseers are to pastor the church)

Titus 1:5-7 5 . . . . appoint elders in every city as I directed you, 6 namely, if any man is above

reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of

dissipation or rebellion. 7 For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward . . .

(as the elders’ qualifications are being listed, Paul switches to the word “overseer” using

the words interchangeably)

1 Timothy 3:1 It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a

fine work he desires to do. . . . (Paul then gives the qualifications of an overseer in the

verses that follow. Two responsibilities that distinguish them from deacons is their role

in teaching and governing. These same two responsibilities are mentioned again in I

Timothy 5:17 but in reference to elders. It is likely that they are the same people being

spoken of. )

1 Peter 5:1-2 Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the

sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, 2 shepherd

(pastor) the flock of God among you, exercising oversight (overseeing) not under

compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but

with eagerness; (the elders are to pastor and oversee)

There are to be a plurality of elders:

Notice the plural “elders” in the following verses - I Tim 5:17; James 5:14; Acts 13:1; 14:23; 15:35; 20:17,

28; Titus 1:5; I Cor. 16:15-16; I Thess. 4:12-13

Elder’s reward:

1 Peter 5:4 when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.


For Further Study:

Women elders?

1. The following is adapted from Biblical Eldership by Alexander Strauch

The biblical pattern of male leadership continued throughout the New Testament era. Regarding the

marriage relationship, Paul could not have stated more pointedly the divine order of the husband-wife

relationship. In complete agreement with Peter’s instruction on the wife’s marital submission, Paul

teaches that the husband is empowered and commanded to lead in the marriage relationship and that

the wife is instructed to submit “as to the Lord.” The following texts speak for themselves:

• “Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord” (Eph 5:22).

• “But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything”

(Eph 5:24).

• “For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church” (Eph 5:23).

• “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord” (Col 3:18).

• “But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine...that they [older women]

may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure,

workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be

dishonored” (Ti 2:1, 4-5).

Just as Paul teaches male headship in the family, he teaches male headship in the local church (1Ti 2:8-

3:7). Because the family is the basic social unit and the man is the established family authority, we

should expect that men would become the elders of the larger church family. Consider Paul’s

instructions in 1 Timothy 2:12: “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man.”

In the same way that every individual family is governed by certain standards of conduct, so the local

church family is governed by certain principles of conduct and social arrangement. The letter of 1

Timothy specifically addresses the issue of proper order and behavior of men, women, and elders in the

local church family. To his representative in Ephesus, Paul writes, “I am writing these things to you,

hoping to come to you before long; but in case I am delayed, I write so that you may know how one

ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and

support of the truth” (1Ti 3:14-15; italics added).

A major aspect of the church’s social arrangement concerns the behavior of women in the

congregation. In the church in Ephesus, as a result of false teaching that may have challenged the

validity of traditional gender roles, Christian women were acting contrary to acceptable Christian

behavior. In order to counter improper female conduct in the church, Paul restates Christian principles

of women’s conduct: “Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not

allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was


first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite

deceived, fell into transgression” (1Ti 2:11-14).

First Timothy 2:11-14 should settle the question of women elders. Paul prohibits women from doing

two things: (1) teaching the men of the church; and (2) exercising authority over the men.

Note that immediately following his instruction in 1 Timothy 2:11-15, that prohibits women from

teaching and leading men, Paul describes the qualifications for those who oversee the local church (1Ti

3:1-7). Significantly, the qualifications assume a male subject. Thus the overseer is to be “the husband of

one wife” and “one who manages his own household well” (1Ti 3:2b, 4a). Paul gives no suggestion of

women elders in this passage.

2. The following is adapted from

Men and Women in Ministry: Should Women Serve as Elders in the Local Church

Sam Storms

Nov 6, 2006

Series: Complementarianism

The immediate problem we face in trying to answer this question is the fact that few churches or

denominations today seek to reproduce the New Testament pattern for local church government. I

realize that many will object to this and argue that the NT doesn’t present us with an explicit

ecclesiology. I happen to disagree. I believe the NT portrays for us a consistent pattern of governance by

a plurality of Elders. However, it is important to realize that even if this is not the case we can still

determine whether or not women should be appointed to positions of senior governmental authority.

. . .

The English word “elder” is the translation of the Greek presbuteros, from which we get “Presbyter” and

“Presbyterian”. Our English word “bishop” comes from the Greek episkopos, from which we get the

word “Episcopal” and “Episcopalian”. Earlier I said that “Elder” and “Bishop” are interchangeable in the

New Testament. What I mean is that they are two different words that describe the same office or

authoritative function. “Elder” focuses on the dignity and gravity of the person who serves while “Bishop”

focuses on the practical function of the office (literally, one who exercises oversight).

Why do I believe they are interchangeable? There are four passages that justify my conclusion.

First, according to Acts 20:17 Paul called for the elders of the church to come to him. But later in v. 28,

in referring to these same elders, he says that God has made them overseers (ESV) or bishops in the

church.

Second, Paul left Titus in Crete to appoint elders in every town (Titus 1:5). When Paul then turns to list

the qualifications for this office he says, “For an overseer (i.e., bishop or episkopon) . . . must be above

approach,” etc. Clearly these two terms refer to the same office.


Third, “in 1 Timothy 3:1 Paul says, ‘If any one aspires to the office of bishop/overseer, he desires a noble

task.’ Then he gives the qualifications for the overseer/bishop in verses 2-7. Unlike the deacons, the

overseer must be ‘able to teach’ (v. 2), and in v. 5 he is said to be one whose management of his own

household fits him to care for God's church. These two functions are ascribed to elders in the fifth

chapter of this same book (1 Timothy 5:17) – teaching and governing. So it is very likely that in Paul's

mind the bishops/overseers of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 are the same as the elders of 5:17” (John Piper).

Fourth, 1 Timothy 3:1-13 clearly indicates that there are two primary offices in the NT: Elder and Deacon.

Yet in Philippians 1:1 Paul directs his epistle “to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi , with the

overseers (episkopoi) and deacons.” Since Paul’s practice was to appoint elders in every church (Acts

14:23) it seems reasonable that the overseers/bishops in Phil. 1:1 is a reference to the elders in that city.

The Greek word (poimen) translated "pastor" is used only once in the NT in Ephesians 4:11. The related

verb form (poimaino) has the meaning "to shepherd” or “to feed" with the idea of nurturing and

sustaining the flock of God. When I put together Ephesians 4:11, 1 Timothy 3:2, Titus 1:9, Acts 20:28,

and 1 Peter 5:1-2, it would appear reasonable to conclude that all elders exercised pastoral

responsibilities. Whether or not one might function in a pastoral capacity without holding the office of

elder is another matter. I tend to think the answer is yes, but that need not detain us here (it would

obviously depend entirely on how and over whom such a “pastoral” ministry would be exercised).

It would also appear that whereas all elders are to be able to teach, not all teachers are elders. Although

being “able to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:9) is clearly a requirement for all elders, it is entirely

conceivable that one may be gifted to teach but not qualify for the office of elder (or perhaps they do

qualify but have not yet been appointed to that position).

My conclusion is that the local church is to be governed by a plurality of individuals who are described in

the New Testament as elders, insofar as they hold an office of great dignity and importance (perhaps

even with an allusion to age or at least spiritual maturity), or bishops, insofar as they exercise oversight

of the body of Christ, or pastors, insofar as they spiritually feed, care for, and exercise guardianship over

the flock of God.

But why do I believe that this ruling or governmental office is restricted to men? I would appeal to three

arguments in defense of a male eldership.

First, I appeal to the NT two-fold description of the function of elders. (1) They are those who govern or

rule the church (1 Timothy 3:4-5; 5:17; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2; 1 Thessalonians 5:12; Hebrews 13:17). (2)

They are those who are primarily responsible for teaching the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11 [assuming

the words “pastor” and “teacher” refer to one function or office of “pastor-teacher”; the best

grammatical analysis would indicate this is true]; 1 Timothy 3:2; 5:17; Titus 1:9). Since I have determined

from 1 Timothy 2:11-15 that Paul restricted teaching and exercising authority to men, it follows that the

office of Elder or Bishop is restricted to men.

Second, I would appeal to the qualifications for the office of Elder that are found in 1 Timothy 3 and

Titus 1. An Elder must be “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:2 and Titus 1:6; need I say more?). For the


meaning of this phrase, see my article 1 Timothy 3:2,12 and “The Husband of One Wife”

(www.SamStorms.com, in Deciphering Difficult Texts under Biblical Studies[ ---- copied below]). Note

also that an elder “must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive,

for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?”

(1 Tim. 3:4-5).

Third, there is no reference anywhere in the New Testament to a female elder. You may wish to object

by pointing out that this is an argument from silence. Yes, it is. But it is a deafening silence, especially

when taken in conjunction with the two previous points. The bottom line is that we simply have no

biblical precedent for female elders or anything in the text that describes their nature, function, and

qualifications that would lead us to believe that this could ever be a possibility.

I agree that women can serve as deacons (1 Timothy 3:8-13; Romans 16:1-2; although this is disputed by

others), that they can assist and support, as “co-workers”, someone such as the apostle Paul (Phil. 4:2-3),

that they can evangelize, and that they can possess and exercise in biblically appropriate ways every

spiritual gift (except that of “apostle,” although I’m not persuaded “apostleship” is a spiritual gift). I

suggested in Part Two of this series that women can serve and minister in virtually every capacity aside

from what I have called “senior governmental authority”.

If a church is governed by a plurality of Elders the application of the preceding principles seems clear

enough. However, if you are in a church or denomination that is governed by a single Senior Pastor or by

a Bishop, you will need to determine if others who serve in official and governmental capacities,

whether a Board of Directors or Deacons or some such equivalent group, are exercising that authority

which the NT would appear to restrict to males.

Egalitarian Objections

[egalitarian refers to those within the evangelical world who say that there are no differences in roles

based on gender alone]

(1) Some egalitarians have argued that since Euodia and Syntyche (Phil. 4:2-3) were “co-workers” with

Paul, women were in positions of leadership and should thus be considered as viable candidates for the

office of Elder. But the Greek word sunergos (“co-worker” or “fellow-worker”) is used of numerous

individuals (e.g., Romans 16:9; Phil. 2:25; Col. 4:10-11; Philemon 24; etc.), as well as anyone who

supports traveling missionaries (3 John 8). But this in no way implies that such people exercised ruling

authority in the local church. Whereas all Elders would certainly qualify as “co-workers,” not all “co-

workers” would qualify as Elders. Their “work” in support of the gospel, whether as those who provide

financial aid, or those who evangelize, or those who intercede in prayer, or those who serve in any

number of capacities, does not in and of itself indicate they were invested with governmental authority

or were even qualified to serve in such a capacity (cf. Romans 16:1-2).

(2) Contrary to what some egalitarians have suggested, the reference to “older women” in Titus 2:3

does not support the notion of female Elders. Paul concluded his discussion of church offices in 1:5-9. In

chapter two he focuses on a variety of individuals classified according to their age: “older men” (v. 2),

http://www.samstorms.com/


“older women” (v. 3), “young women” (v. 4), and “younger men” (v. 6). Furthermore, the word in v. 2

translated “older men” (presbutes) is different from that used of the church office (presbuteros).

Likewise, the word in v. 3 translated “older women” (presbutis) specifies age, as is evident from the

contrast with the “young women” whom they are to teach (cf. 1 Timothy 5:1-2 for a similar emphasis).

(3) Hebrews 11:2 uses the plural of presbuteros and applies it to such women of the OT as Sarah, the

mother of Moses, Rahab, and others. But clearly the author of Hebrews is using the word to refer to “a

person who lived long ago,” i.e., “ancestor” or “ancient” (it is translated “people of old” in the ESV).

There is not the slightest indication that the author is thinking of ecclesiastical office in the NT, nor

would any reader have thought that people like Abel and Enoch and Noah (vv. 4-7) were the equivalent

of those who served in senior governmental authority in the NT church. One must always be careful not

“to import one meaning of a word into a context where a different meaning is the one the author clearly

meant” (Grudem, 253).

(4) The epistle of 2 John is addressed to “the elect lady and her children” (v. 1). Some have seen here a

reference to a woman who exercised authority in the body of Christ. However, it is far more likely that

"elect lady and her children" is a metaphorical way of saying "the church and its members" (cf. v. 13; see

also 2 Cor. 11:2 and Eph. 5:22-32 where the church is portrayed as a “bride” betrothed to Christ; note

also how Peter refers to the church in 1 Peter 5:13 – “She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen,

sends you greetings, and so does Mark, my son”).

(5) An appeal has also been made to 1 Timothy 5:3-16 where Paul discusses how “widows” should be

treated. But simply being an “elderly” person, in this case over the age of 60, does not make one an

“Elder” with ecclesiastical authority! Besides, the word presbuteros doesn’t even occur in this passage.

Contrary to the claims of some, the qualifications for “widows” and “elders” are not the same (see

Grudem, 256-57) and the “widows” were not remunerated for ministry but were supported because

they had no believing relatives on whom they could rely for financial assistance.

(6) Finally, what about those women in whose homes churches would meet, such as Mary (Acts 12:12),

Lydia (Acts 16:15), Prisca (Romans 16:5), Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11), and Nympha (Col. 4:15)? Does this imply

that they exercised spiritual authority over the congregation in their midst? Of course not. Hosting a

church in one’s home does not justify ignoring the qualifications for elders (1 Timothy 3; Titus 1). Are we

actually to believe that Lydia , a new convert, was appointed as a local church Elder simply because she

opened her home to Paul and his associates?

3. The following is from THE VALUABLE MINISTRIES OF WOMEN IN THE CONTEXT OF MALE

LEADERSHIP: A SURVEY OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT EXAMPLES AND TEACHING by Thomas R.

Schreiner

Evidence is also adduced that women could function as elders. The letter of 2 John is addressed to “the

chosen lady,” and it is claimed that this does not refer to the church as a whole because the chosen lady

is distinguished from her children (2 John 1, 4). The “chosen lady” refers to a woman who had authority


over her children. Such authority is similar to the office of elder. Moreover, some suggest that Paul

speaks of women elders in Titus 2:3. Although this is obscured by translations that render presbytidas by

“older women,” it is clear that this word is a feminine rendering of the term presbyteros (elder) that

Paul uses in Titus 1:5 to refer to church office.

Some have argued for women elders, as we have seen above, from the “chosen lady” in 2 John and

Paul’s reference to women who teach in Titus 2:3ff. The “chosen lady” in 2 John is almost certainly not

an individual woman but a reference to the church.16 (1) John uses the second person plural in verses 6,

8, 10, and 12. The plural demonstrates that he is not writing to one person only; he is writing to an

entire church. (2) Second John is much more general and less specific than 3 John. Third John was clearly

written to an individual, Gaius, but the lack of specificity in 2 John suggests that a community is being

addressed rather than an individual. (3) The description of the church as a “lady” accords well with the

rest of Scripture. Paul and John both portray the church as Christ’s bride (Ephesians 5:22-33; Revelation

19:7). The new Jerusalem is described as a bride (Revelation 21:2). In the Old Testament, Israel is often

portrayed as a woman (Isaiah 54:1; Jeremiah 6:23; 31:21; Lamentations 4:3, 22). (4) The distinction

between the “lady” and “her children” in 2 John does not suggest that she is distinct from her children.

The “lady” is the church as a whole; the “children” are simply the individual members of the church.

Those who find a reference to women elders in Titus 2:3 are clearly mistaken. Paul uses the word

presbytidas here, which means “older women.” The usual word for “elders” who served in church office

in the Bible is related but different: presbyteros (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2, 4, 6, 22ff.; 16:4; 20:17; 21:18; 1

Timothy 5:17, 19; Titus 1:5; James 5:14; 1 Peter 5:1, 5). Now, someone might say that Paul uses this

different word because in Titus 2:3 he is referring to women elders. The problem with this is that the

usual word for “elders,” presbyteros, could easily have been made feminine (presbytera) if Paul wanted

to refer to women elders. Paul did not use a feminine form of the word presbyteros here; he used a

distinct word that never refers to elders.

Titus 2:2 demonstrates clearly that Paul was not speaking of women elders in Titus 2:3. In verse 2,

Paul addresses the “older men.” Now it is clear that Paul is not referring to elders here who hold a

church office of authority, for he does not use the word that indicates such an office, presbyteros.

Instead, Paul uses a word that always refers to “older men,” presbytas (cf. Luke 1:18; Philemon 9). Paul

could have used the word for elders that conveys church office in Titus 2:2, but instead he used a

distinct word that refers to older men. He uses the related word that refers to older women in Titus 2:3.

Thus, there is no doubt that Paul is speaking of older women in Titus 2:3, not of women elders.


Elders’ Qualifications?

1. On Elder’s by John Piper

4. Other Names for Elders

4.1. Bishop/Overseer

The English term "bishop" means overseer and is sometimes used to translate the Greek word episcopos which means "one who over (epi) sees (scopos)."

There are at least four reasons to consider this term (bishop/overseer) as equivalent to elder in the New Testament church:

4.1.1. Compare Titus 1:5 with 1:7 where bishop/overseer and elder are apparently interchangeable terms. Paul begins by saying that Titus should appoint elders (presbuterous) in every town (v. 5). Then he gives some qualifications that they must meet (v. 6), and continues without a break in v. 7 by saying, "For a bishop (episkopon), as God's steward must be blameless." Virtually all commentators agree that the same office is in view in these two terms: "elder" describing the man with reference to his dignity and standing (older); "bishop" describing the man with reference to his function and duty (oversight).

4.1.2. In Acts 20:17 Paul calls the "elders" to come down from Ephesus. ("And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church.") Then he says to them in verse 28 that God has made them "guardians" (="overseers/bishops"; episkopous) among the flock. ("Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you guardians, to feed the church of the Lord.") So the "elders" are the "bishops/overseers" in Ephesus.

4.1.3. In 1 Timothy 3:1 Paul says, "If any one aspires to the office of bishop/overseer, he desires a noble task." Then he gives the qualifications for the overseer/bishop in verses 2-7. Unlike the deacons, the overseer must be "able to teach" (v. 2), and in v. 5 he is said to be one whose management of his own household fits him to care for God's church. These two functions are ascribed to elders in the fifth chapter of this same book (1 Timothy 5:17)—teaching and governing. So it is very likely that in Paul's mind the bishops/overseers of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 are the same as the elders of 5:17.

4.1.4. In Philippians 1:1 Paul writes, "To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons." These then seem to be the two offices of the church just as in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 the qualifications only for these two are given. But Paul appointed "elders" in all the churches (Acts 14:23), and so it is very likely that the elders of the church at Philippi were the bishops/overseers referred to in Philippians 1:1.

We conclude that the office of bishop/overseer is the same as the office of elder in the New Testament. It is listed beside the office of deacon (Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-13) in such a way as to show that these two were the main offices by which the ongoing life of the church was to be managed.

4.2. Pastor

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Titus%201.5

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Acts%2020.17

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Timothy%203.1


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Timothy%203.1-7

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Philippians%201.1







The term "pastor" (poimen) occurs in the New Testament only once (Eph. 4:11). But there is a verb (poimainein "to shepherd, or feed") closely related to the noun "pastor" which helps us discover how the role of pastor was related to the role of elder and bishop.

4.2.1. Ephesians 4:11 treats pastors and teachers as one group and thus suggests that the chief role of the pastor is feeding the flock through teaching, a role clearly assigned to bishops/overseers in 1 Timothy 3:2 and to elders in Titus 1:9. This suggests that the pastor is another name for elder and overseer.

4.2.2. In Acts 20:28 the elders of Ephesus are encouraged in their "pastoral," that is, shepherding task, thus showing that Paul saw the elders as the shepherds or pastors.

4.2.3. In 1 Peter 5:1-2 the elders are told to "tend the flock of God" that is in their charge. In other words, Peter saw the elders essentially as pastors or shepherds.

4.3. Conclusion

The New Testament only refers to the office of pastor one time (Ephesians 4:11). It is a functional description of the role of elder stressing the care and feeding of the church as God's flock, just as "bishop/overseer" is a functional description of the role of elder stressing the governing or oversight of the church. We may conclude therefore that "pastor" and "elder" and "bishop/overseer" refer in the New Testament to the same office. This office stands alongside "deacon" in Phil. 1:1 and 1 Tim. 3:1-13 in such a way as to show that the two abiding officers instituted by the New Testament are elder and deacon. We will treat the function of these two offices in turn.

5. The Function of Elders

The responsibilities of elders are summed up under two heads: governing and teaching.

5.1. Governing

1 Timothy 5:17

Let the elders who rule (proestotes) well be considered worthy of double honor. . .

1 Timothy 3:4-5

He must manage (proistamenon) his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage (prostenai)his own household, how can he care for God's church?

Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2

The duty of elders to "oversee" or "supervise" the flock implies a governing function.

1 Thessalonians 5:12

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Eph.%204.11

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Ephesians%204.11





http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Peter%205.1-2


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Phil.%201.1

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Tim.%203.1-13




http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Peter%205.2

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Thessalonians%205.12


But we beseech you, brethren, to respect those who labor among you and are over you (proistamenous)in the Lord and admonish you. . .

(No reference to "elders" but the function of the leaders is governing and the natural assumption is that the leaders are elders that Paul had appointed according to Acts 14:23.)

Hebrews 13:17

Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account.

Obedience and submission implies a role of leadership and governance. Again, the reference is probably to the elders, though the leaders are not described.

5.2. Teaching

Ephesians 4:11

Pastors and teachers are pictured as one office, so that the pastor (whom we have identified as an elder) has the responsibility of teaching.

1 Timothy 3:2

The overseer must be "able to teach." And we have seen that the overseer and elder are the same office. This qualification is not included in the list of qualifications for deacons.

1 Timothy 5:17

Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.

Note that all have to be able to teach; but only some "labor," that is, they devote more time and energy to it, perhaps earning their living by it. Each elder is vested with the right to teach and exercise authority in the church and so must have the qualifications for it.

Titus 1:9

He must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it.

Note: Not all elders need to be able to do public preaching. The requirement is not for a preaching gift, but for a solid grasp of doctrine and ability to spot and correct errors and explain Biblical truth plainly.

5.3. Conclusion


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Hebrews%2013.17






The function of elders may be summed up under two heads: teaching and governing. They are the doctrinal guardians of the flock and the overseers of the life of the church responsible to God for the feeding and care and ministry of the people.

We have seen from Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:1-13 that deacons served alongside the elders. These two are mentioned together in a way that suggests their unique official and ongoing role in the churches. We turn now to examine the role of "deacon."

. . .

8. Conclusion

We have seen that God has ordained the existence of officers in the church, some of whom are charged under Christ with the leadership of the church (1 Tim. 5:17; 1 Thess. 5:12; Heb. 13:7,17; Acts 20:28). These leaders are called of God but recognized and confirmed by the congregation, and are responsible under God to the congregation. Thus the congregation has a relationship to its leaders both of commission and submission. They affirm God's call and gifts in a person's life and commission that person into the role of Biblical leadership. But they also voluntarily support and submit to those leaders (Heb. 13:17).

There do not appear to be explicit rules in the New Testament regarding which decisions the whole congregation shall vote on as a body. This would therefore be worked out in a congregationally approved agreement reflecting the need for free and efficient leadership on the one hand and accountability to the congregation on the other.

We have also concluded that the leaders of the church be people who are spiritually mature and exemplary, gifted for the ministry given to them, and have a sense of divine urging, and are in harmony with the duly established leadership of the church (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9; Rom. 12:6-8; Acts 20:28; Phil. 2:2).

The New Testament assumes the existence of two offices for the ongoing life of the church: Deacons and Elders (Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1-13).

From our study it would seem that the deacon office exists to assist the leadership of the church by relieving the elders of distractions and pressures that would divert them from the ministry of the word and prayer and the general, visionary oversight of the church.

Thus it appears that deacons would care for the building and grounds; supply the communion and baptismal needs, as well as all other food and fellowship materials; administer a fund for the manifold material needs of the people and be ready to step in during crises of all kinds; handle the greeting and welcoming ministries; and provide practical assistance in job-hunting, housing matters, legal-aid, child-care, etc. In general, they would be ready to assist the elders of the church in any "service" that would support and promote the ministry of the word.

The function of elders may be summed up under two heads: Teaching and Governing. They are the doctrinal guardians of the flock and the overseers of the life of the church responsible to God for the



http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Tim.%205.17

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Thess.%205.12

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Heb.%2013.7

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Heb%2013.17


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Heb.%2013.17


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Titus%201.5-9

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Rom.%2012.6-8







feeding and care and ministry of the people. Both offices take their cue from the Lord: "Let the leader be as one who serves" (Luke 22:26).

With regard to the time-honored office of "pastor," the New Testament only refers to the office by this name one time (Ephesians 4:11). The term appears to be a functional description of the role of "elder," stressing the care and feeding of the church as God's flock, just as "bishop" or "overseer" is a functional description of the role of elder, stressing the governing or oversight of the church.

This would imply that what we usually call "the pastor" of the church is properly one of several elders. Together they are charged with the teaching and oversight of the church. Within the council (probably a better word than "board") of elders, differing roles will be performed so that very likely one will be the "preaching elder" while not excluding others from that responsibility. The governance on the council of elders would be established by the elders themselves and this order would then determine how they made their presentations to the congregation.

Appendix

Biblical Qualifications for Church Officers

Qualifications of Elders (1 Timothy 3:1-7)

3:1 "The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task."

Aspiration (oregetai/ epithumei)

At least one way for a man to attain the role of elder/bishop was to aspire to it. In fact, since it is the duty of elders to do their work with gladness and not under constraint or for love of money (1 Peter 5:1-3), this should be thought of as one of the elders' qualifications. This need not exclude the possibility that a man may be sought out and urged to become an elder. But no pressure should be used that would result in an unwilling, half-hearted service.

3:2 "Therefore it is necessary for the bishop to be irreproachable."

Irreproachability (anepilempton)

Elsewhere in the New Testament the word is used only in 5:7 (where widows are to be without reproach by putting their hope in God and not living luxuriously or sumptuously or self-indulgently) and 6:14 (where Timothy is to keep the commandment irreproachable till Jesus comes).

The word seems to be a general word for living in a way that gives no cause for others to think badly of the church or the faith or the Lord. This tells us nothing about the sort of thing that would bring reproach on the church or the Lord. But, coming at the head of the list, it puts a tremendous emphasis on what a person's reputation is. The focus here is not a person's relationship to the Lord but how others see him. It seems therefore right from the outset that the public nature of the office is in view with its peculiar demands.

3:2 ". . . one woman's husband. . ."

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Luke%2022.26






One Woman's Husband (mias gunaikas andras)

The word order emphasizes the word "one". So it is not likely that Paul meant to say that the bishops have to be married. There are words for married he could have used. The word order would probably have put "husband" in the prominent place if that were his intention. Moreover, Paul was not married (1 Corinthians 9:5; 7:7) and he thought singleness was an excellent way to be freer for ministry (1 Cor. 7:32).

In verse 4 Paul gets to the issue of how well a man manages his household. So the point here is probably not the man's competence as a husband. The point probably, coming right after irreproachable, is one of notoriety. What is this man's reputation with regard to whether he has had one wife or not. It appears that the public standard will be high.

Does this standard mean that an elder/bishop

1. may not be a polygamist? 2. may not remarry after death of his first spouse? 3. may not be remarried after a divorce?

The main argument against #1 is the use of the parallel phrase in 1 Timothy 5:9 in reference to widows whom the church was enrolling in a welfare and service order. She must be "one man's wife" (henos andros gune). Since polyandry (a woman having several husbands at once) was simply not a practice, this very probably means that the woman had not divorced and remarried.

Moreover the phrase in 5:9 surely did not mean that the widow was excluded from the order if she had remarried when her first husband died. For in 5:14 the younger widows were encouraged to remarry, and it is unlikely that, having said this, Paul would then later exclude them from the widows' order because they had followed his advice.

So #2 is not likely either, especially in view of Paul's complete endorsement of remarrying after the death of a spouse (Romans 7:3; 1 Cor. 7:39).

Therefore, the most likely meaning for the standard of "one woman's husband" is that the eldership should be composed of men who have never been remarried after divorce.

. . .

Someone may ask why a man can have been a drunkard or a murderer and yet be forgiven and cleansed and become an elder, but be excluded from the eldership because of remarriage. Paul does not answer this question, but our sense is this: The standards for official public leadership are such that the eldership should symbolize as closely as possible the ideal of personal, family, and community life.

A helpful analogy might be that in the Old Testament priests were not allowed to serve in the tabernacle if they had a handicap (Lev. 21:16-24). This would seem unfair if we only thought in terms of individual rights. But if we think also from the standpoint of the image of God being portrayed and the corporate significance of symbolic standards, we can perhaps see the value in the limitation.

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Corinthians%209.5



http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Cor.%207.32


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Romans%207.3

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Cor.%207.39

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Lev.%2021.16-24


Paul's aim in restricting the eldership and deaconate to those who have not been remarried after divorce seems to be that the elders and deacons be "above reproach" not only in that they are presently free from any reputation of willful or persistent sin, but also that their marriage and home life be symbolic standards for what God wills.

3:2 ". . .temperate. . ."

Temperate (nephalion)

This word is used two other times in the New Testament—in 3:11 of the women (wives of?) deacons; and in Titus 2:2 about older men in general.

It is odd that it is used here even though in verse 3 the bishops must not be addicted to wine (me paroinon). Perhaps here the point is more general—namely, that his temperance extends over other things besides wine. Or perhaps the repetition comes because in verse 3f there begins a list of things which the bishop is NOT supposed to be, and Paul felt obliged to include the problem of wine in the negative list as well as the positive.

The standard here is one of self-control and mastery of his appetites. Wine would surely not be the only drink or food that a person can misuse.

3:2 ". . . sensible . . ."

Sensible, prudent, reasonable (sophrona)

The word is used only here and Titus 1:8 of bishops, and 2:2 of older men, and 2:5 of younger women.

It is related to sophroneo which means to be of a sound mind —like the demoniac after he was healed (Mk. 5:15). The basic idea seems to be having good judgment, which implies seeing things as they really are, knowing yourself well, and understanding people and how they respond. We might say "being in touch with your feelings" or being in touch with reality so that there are no great gaps between what you see in yourself and what others do.

3:2 ". . . dignified . . ."

Respectable, honorable (kosmios)

The idea seems to be one of not offending against propriety. A person who comports himself in situations so as not to step on toes unnecessarily.

3:2 ". . . hospitable . . ."

Hospitable (philoxenon)

One who loves strangers, that is who is given to being kind to newcomers and makes them feel at home. A person whose home is open for ministry and who does not shrink back from having guests. Not a secretive person.



http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Mk.%205.15


3:2 ". . . an apt teacher. . ."

Skilled in teaching (didaktikon)

This need not mean that the person is real good in front of a group, since not all elders devote all their time to formal teaching or preaching (1 Tim. 5:17). Rather as Titus 1:9 says, "He must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it."

In other words he must know Biblical doctrine well and be able to explain it to people. He must be astute enough theologically that he can spot serious error and show a person why it is wrong and harmful.

3:3 ". . . no drunkard. . ."

Not addicted to wine (me paroinon)

The general qualification here would be like the one above under temperance, namely, self-control. Not addicted to anything harmful or debilitating or worldly. Freedom from enslavements should be so highly prized that no bondage is yielded to.

3:3 ". . . not violent. . ."

Not pugnacious or belligerent (me plekten)

The point here is that the temper should be under control. He must not be given to quarreling or fighting. There should be a conciliatory bent. His feelings should not be worn on the sleeve. He should not carry resentments or be hyper-critical.

3:3 ". . . but gentle. . ."

Gentle (epieke)

This is the opposite of pugnacious or belligerent. He should not be harsh or mean-spirited. He should be inclined to tenderness and resort to toughness only when the circumstances commend this form of love. His words should not be acid or divisive but helpful and encouraging.

3:3 ". . . not quarrelsome. . ."

Peacable (amachon)

This seems almost identical with "not pugnacious or belligerent." In fact the last three seem to go together as a unit that stress peacemaking rather than factiousness or troublemaking. This would have great implications about the way he uses his tongue.

3:3 ". . . not loving money. . ."




Not a lover of money (aphilarguron)

He should be putting the kingdom first in all he does. His lifestyle should not reflect a love of luxury. He should be generous giver. He should not be anxious about his financial future. He should not be so money-oriented that ministry decisions revolve around this issue.

3:4-5 "He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church?"

Leader of a well-ordered household (kalos proistamenon)

The home is a proving ground for ministry. He should have submissive children. This does not mean perfect, but it does mean well-disciplined, so that they do not blatantly and regularly disregard the instructions of their parents. The children should revere the father (meta pases semnotetos). He should be a loving and responsible spiritual leader in the home. His wife should be respected and tenderly loved. Their relationship should be openly admirable.

3:6 "He must not be a recent convert, or he may be puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil."

A mature believer, not a new convert (me neophuton)

The condemnation of the devil seems to be the condemnation that the devil is under because of his being puffed up. So the new believer, given too much responsibility too soon, may easily swell with pride. The implication is that part of Christian seasoning is a humbling process and a growing protection against pride. We should see evidences in his life that humility is a fixed virtue and not easily overturned.

3:7 "moreover he must be well thought of by outsiders, or he may fall into reproach and the snare of the devil."

This is similar to "irreproachability" in verse 2. Only here it is made explicit that the outside unbelieving world is in view. This doesn't mean the world sets the standards, since Jesus himself was rejected by some. What it seems to mean is that a Christian leader should at least meet the standards of the world for decency and respectability, for the standards of the church should be higher.

The snare of the devil is referred to in 2 Tim. 2:26. It seems to involve deception and sin since to be rescued from it is to repent and come to a knowledge of the truth.

How does not being well thought of by outsiders cause you to fall into reproach and the snare of the devil?

Could it be that the reproaches of the world would cause a person to try to hide his faults in the church and thus fall into lying or duplicity?

Qualifications of Elders (Continued from Titus 1:5-9)

1:6 "If any man is blameless. . ."




Blamelessness (anegkletos)

This is virtually the same as "irreproachable." The idea is that no ongoing blame attaches to a man. If he does wrong he makes it right.

1:6 ". . .the husband of one wife. . ."

(see above, One woman's husband)

1:6 ". . .and his children believers not open to the charge of being profligate or insubordinate."

Honest and orderly children (pista, me in kategoria asotias e anupotakta)

The meaning is probably the same as 1 Tim. 3:4-5 and the well-ordered house. There the children are to be en hupotage meta pases semnotatetos, "in subjection with all reverence."

Here the focus is not just on the relationship of the children to the father but on their behavior in general. They are not to be guilty of the accusation of "wild living" or uncontrolled behavior. And they are not to be "insubordinate".

Does pista mean believing (with RSV) or "faithful" in the sense of honest and trustworthy? In favor of the latter would be the use of the word in 1 Tim. 3:11 where women (deaconesses or wives of deacons) are to be pistas en pasin, faithful in all things. Other places in the pastorals where the word seems to have this meaning are 1 Tim. 1:12, 15; 3:1; 4:9; 2 Tim. 2:11; 2:13; Tit. 1:9; 3:8.

So the idea seems to be children who are well bred, orderly, generally obedient, responsible, and reliable.

1:7 ". . .blameless. . ."

See above on Tit. 1:6, Blamelessness

1:7 ". . . not arrogant. . ."

Humility (me authade)

This is the assumption behind his not being a new believer, lest he be puffed up. He should be lowly in his demeanor, speaking much of himself or his achievements. He should count others better than himself and be quick to serve. He should sincerely give God the credit and honor for any accomplishments.

1:7 ". . .not quick-tempered. . ."

See above on 1 Tim. 3:3

1:7 ". . .not a drunkard. . ."




http://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Tim%201.15





http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Tit.%201.9

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Tit%203.8

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Tit.%201.6




1:7 ". . .not violent. . ."


1:7 ". . .not greedy for gain. . ."


1:8 ". . .hospitable. . ."


1:8 ". . . a lover of goodness. . ."

Lover of goodness (philagothon) He should love to see good done and love to be involved in doing good. This is more than doing good. This is a bent and love to see it done. A kind of expansive person.

1:8 ". . . master of himself. . ."


1:8 ". . . upright. . ."

Justice (dikaion) He should care about whether people are treated fairly and should want to see justice in the world at all levels.

1:8 ". . . holy. . ."

Devout, holy (hosion) He should be a person of devotion to Christ with a life of prayer and meditation. He should love worship and have a deep personal relationship with the Lord.

1:8 ". . . self-controlled. . ."

Self-controlled (egkrate) The focus here is especially on sexual self-control. He should not be in the grip of lust. He should not toy with pornography. He should be utterly faithful to his wife.

1:9 "He must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it."


Here the stress is laid on the doctrinal proficiency of the elders.

1. First is stressed his firm hold on the truth. This refers to the subjective relation he bears to the truth: is it loved (2 Thess. 2:10)? Is the person solid and unshakable in his grasp of the truth? Has the truth







http://biblia.com/bible/esv/2%20Thess.%202.10


taken hold of him? The opposite would be a person who is never quite sure of where he stands, or a person who thinks that doctrinal definition is generally unimportant, or a person who has his learning mainly second hand from books and teachers and not from the Bible itself, so that his hold is weak.

2. Second is stressed the nature of the word he holds—it is sure and accords with the (apostolic) teaching. This would mean a good grasp of Biblical truth, especially the doctrine of the apostles. The Bible must be the foundation of doctrinal knowledge, not other books, though they are very helpful and inspirational.

3. Third is stressed the positive role of teaching this healthy doctrine to others. A person who says, I know what it means but I can't explain it so others can understand it would probably not make a suitable elder. The church is in great need of being led by men who not only know but can explain Biblical doctrine. They are responsible for the spread of the truth in the church and from the church.

4. Finally is stressed the negative role of confuting doctrinal error. So the elders must be fairly incisive observers of the thought-world of the day. They need to be able to spot the encroachments of secular principles and assumptions. And they need to be able to correct opponents and straying saints (2 Tim 2: 24-26; James 5:19-20).

General comments.

These lists in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 are not intended to be exhaustive. We can tell that from the fact that they are not the same. Titus mentions piety (hosion) and justice (dikaion) and sexual self-control (egkrate), but 1 Timothy does not mention these in particular. On the other hand 1 Timothy mentions that the elder must not be a new convert (neophuton), and that he must be respectable (kosmion) which Titus does not mention specifically.

Neither mentions specifically prayer. Neither forbids the elders explicitly from being robbers or liars or gossips etc. The point is that the lists are not exhaustive. Paul takes numerous virtues for granted and gives these as examples. There may be other expectations implied in the ones listed. We should follow these and let them be the guide for what others we assume.

©2013 Desiring God Foundation. Used by Permission.

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in its entirety or in unaltered excerpts, as long as you do not charge a fee. For Internet posting, please use only unaltered excerpts (not the content in its entirety) and provide a hyperlink to this page. Any exceptions to the above must be approved by Desiring God.

Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: By John Piper. ©2013 Desiring God Foundation. Website: desiringGod.org

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/2%20Tim%202.%2024-26

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/2%20Tim%202.%2024-26

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/James%205.19-20



http://www.desiringgod.org/


1 Timothy 3:2, 12 “Husband of One wife”

Sam Storms

Nov 3, 2006

What does Paul mean when he requires that Elders and Deacons be "the husband of one wife" (1 Tim.

3:2,12)? Does he mean that a divorced man cannot be an Elder, a Deacon, a Pastor? Many who agree

that divorce and remarriage are permissible on grounds of adultery or desertion insist that such

individuals are, nevertheless, barred from ecclesiastical office. Here are the various ways of interpreting

this text.

(1) Some Roman Catholic scholars suggest that the "wife" refers to the RC Church to which the elder,

or in their case "priest", should reckon himself married. This interpretation was evidently thought up to

enforce celibacy among the priesthood. After all, if one is "married" to the Church he can't be married to

another woman: he must be the husband of one wife! Needless to say, there isn't the slightest support

in Scripture for this view. We should also remember that Peter, allegedly the first "pope", was married!

(2) Another view is that Paul's purpose is to insist that only married men be elders. In other words,

the phrase "husband of one wife" prohibits single men from being elders or deacons. I have four

objections.

· First, Paul does not say "husband of a wife" but "husband of one wife," and the word "one" is quite

emphatic in the Greek text. Paul's point is that the elder must have nothing to do with any woman other

than his wife.

· Second, if single men cannot be elders then Paul himself (not to mention Jesus) would be excluded.

But a comparison of 1 Tim. 4:14 with 2 Tim. 1:6 seems to indicate that Paul was an elder.

· Third, please observe that the same Greek phrase that is translated "husband of one wife" is used in

1 Tim. 5:9 of widows. To be put on the list for special aid, a widow must have been the "wife of one

husband." Obviously, the same thing is in view in both passages. But what possible sense could it make

to insist that a widow have been at one time married and not single? By definition that is precisely what

a widow is, a woman once married!

· Finally, in view of Paul's statements in 1 Cor. 7 about the benefits and advantages of the single life

when it comes to ministry, it seems unlikely that here he would exclude single men from eldership. Why

would he exclude those men who, according to his own words, have more potential for effective,

undistracted service than anyone else?

(3) Some say that the phrase means "husband of one wife at a time." Thus, it is a prohibition of

polygamy. I have three objections to this view.

· First, no Christian, whether an elder or not, would ever have been allowed to practice polygamy. On

the other hand, it is possible that Paul wanted to exclude from the eldership any man who had been a


polygamist before his conversion. That may be, but it must be remembered that as far as the NT

evidence is concerned, no one ever entered the church while still a polygamist. Thus, it is hardly to be

expected that a special prohibition was needed to exclude them from the eldership in particular since

there were none in the membership of the church in general.

· Once again, 1 Timothy 5:9 weighs heavily against this view. That is to say, if "husband of one wife"

means an elder cannot have multiple wives then "wife of one husband" means an enrolled widow

cannot have had multiple husbands! But polyandry, or the practice of a woman having multiple

husbands simultaneously, was unheard of in the ancient world.

· Finally, it is important to remember that 1 Timothy was written to the church in Ephesus, a principal

city in Asia. Whereas polygamy was officially legal in Palestinian Judaism, it was against Roman law and

was strenuously resisted in Greek-speaking Asia. Thus, as Keener notes, "the fact that polygamy was

practiced neither by the Jewish people in Asia nor by the Greeks there suggests that Paul would have

had little reason to address this in his letter as a rule for church leaders there" (And Marries Another, 88).

(4) Another view is that "husband of one wife" means "husband of one wife in a lifetime." Paul would

thus be prohibiting a man from serving as an elder if he had married a second time after his first wife

died. Note well: this view is talking about remarriage after the death of one's spouse, not remarriage

after divorce. This view suggests that a second marriage might possibly be a sign of weakness or might

become a cause for reproach. I have several problems with this interpretation.

· First, it conflicts with the rest of Scripture on the subject of marriage. Nowhere in the Bible is

remarriage after the death of one's spouse depicted as forbidden or morally questionable in the

slightest degree. Read especially Romans 7:1-3. To cast a shadow of doubt over a second marriage is to

impugn what Scripture everywhere affirms and approves, and is a reflection of a spirit of asceticism that

is contrary to the Word of God. Granted, Paul does recommend the single state in 1 Cor. 7:25-40, but

only because of what he calls the "present distress," that is, the persecution and oppression the church

was then suffering. Also, those to whom he recommends celibacy are in many cases people who have

never been married once. His reason is that the single person is less encumbered and thus may serve

the Lord more effectively. He also says in the same text that if one does marry, either for the first or

second time, he or she does not sin in any way (cf. Heb. 13:4). Thus, the single state may be more

expedient, but it is certainly not more moral than being married (cf. 1 Tim. 4:1-3).

· This view suggests that a second marriage might be taken as a sign of weakness. But then could not

the same thing be said of a first marriage (cf. 1 Cor. 7:1-7). In other words, if you want to question the

will-power of a man for getting married a second time you must also question his will-power for getting

married the first time.

· Finally, whatever "husband of one wife" implies for elders it also implies for widows (1 Tim. 5:9).

Therefore, in this view Paul would be saying that if a widow is to be counted worthy of enrollment and

the support of the church she can only have been married once in her life. But look at 1 Tim. 5:14. There

Paul encourages (dare I say "commands") younger widows to remarry. Would Paul advise young widows

to marry again if such was questionable or would automatically disqualify them from the possibility of


special aid in their later years? Can you imagine a widow, whom Paul encouraged to remarry, being in

need after the death of her second husband only to be told that because she heeded the advice of the

apostle she is disqualified? I hardly think so.

(5) Many contend that Paul means to say a divorced man cannot be an elder (or deacon), regardless

of whether he remarries after the divorce or remains single. There are two crucial objections to this view.

· First, if "husband of one wife" means "never divorced" it is surely a strange way of saying so. And

why would not a divorced man who remained single be qualified? It could not be said of him that he is

the "husband of two wives."

· Second, if divorce is permissible on grounds of adultery or desertion (and I have argued that it is),

the marriage bond is dissolved. The individual is free to remarry. In such a case I see no reason why this

man would not be the "husband of one wife." His first marriage has been biblically terminated and the

woman to whom he was married is no longer his wife.

We should note, however, that a divorced man may be disqualified on other grounds, such as the

inability to manage his house well (1 Tim. 3:4). Or the circumstances surrounding his divorce may

indicate that he is no longer "above reproach" (1 Tim. 3:2) and does not "have a good reputation with

those outside the church" (1 Tim. 3:7). However, these criteria do not relate directly to the issue of

divorce. A married man may well fail in these respects. My conclusion is that if a man is the innocent

party in a divorce (whether or not he remarries) he is not necessarily disqualified from the eldership.

(6) The view that I endorse is as follows. To be the "husband of one wife" or the "wife of one

husband" simply means that one is faithful and devoted and loyal to his or her spouse. It is surprising

to me that there is no other qualification relating to one's sexual morality. I find it likely, therefore, that

"husband of one wife" is speaking to that very point. If a man is to be an elder he must be neither

flirtatious nor adulterous. He must be a man who is diligent to maintain sexual fidelity to one woman,

the one to whom he is married. He must be, quite literally, a "one-woman man." Sexual promiscuity was

rampant in the ancient world (as it is in ours), and this qualification is designed to address that problem.

An elder must be a man of unquestioned morality and fidelity. This view not only makes excellent sense

in itself, it also adequately explains 1 Tim. 5:9. If a widow is to be counted worthy of special support she

must be one who was faithful and devoted to her husband. She has to have been a "one-man woman,"

even as an elder must be a "one-woman man."

The one objection to this view is "husband of one wife" is not the most natural way of describing marital

fidelity. Why didn't Paul just say, "not an adulterer"? But "not an adulterer," says Keener, "would have

been too obvious a statement to include in Paul's list of moral qualifications, somewhat akin to 'not a

murderer.' 'A faithful and loyal spouse who is a good current marital partner,' however, would fit the list

quite well, matching the emphasis on ruling the children properly (3:4-5; Titus 1:6) and the concern

about false teachers who were ruining whole 'households' (Titus 1:11) and forbidding marriage (1 Tim.

4:1-3)" (95).


Unbelief in an Elder's Children

1. February 1, 2007 | by Justin Taylor | Scripture: Titus 1:6 | Topic: Biblical Eldership

1 Timothy 3:4-5

He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone

does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?

Titus 1:6

. . . above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge

of debauchery or insubordination.

May a man have children who are unbelievers and yet be appointed or continue as an elder? First

Timothy 3:4-5 and Titus 1:6 provoke the question.

There are two primary interpretations. Douglas Wilson summarizes the first view quite succinctly: "if a

man’s children fall away from the faith (either doctrinally or morally), he is at that point disqualified

from formal ministry in the church."1 Alexander Strauch suggests the second interpretive option: "The

contrast is made not between believing and unbelieving children, but between obedient, respectful

children and lawless, uncontrolled children." What is at stake, Strauch suggests, is "the children’s

behavior, not their eternal state."2

Faithful Leadership in the Church and Home

Paul’s basic logic, especially in 1 Timothy 3, is fairly clear. The rhetorical question in the second half of

verse 5 ("for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s

church?") logically grounds his insistence on an ordered home in verse 4 ("He must manage his own

household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive"). Because "The house of a believer

ought to be like a little church,"3 the result is that "he who cannot obtain from his children any

reverence or subjection . . . will hardly be able to restrain the people by the bridle of discipline."4

This means that how an elder, or potential elder, manages and orders his household are of utmost

importance in determining his qualification for office. John Stott carefully summarizes the matter: "The

married pastor is called to leadership in two families, his and God’s, and the former is to be the training

ground of the latter."5 (Cf. Matthew 25:14-30—he who is faithful over a little will be faithful over

much.6)

The above analysis is rather uncontroversial among exegetes. Disagreements arise, however, when we

probe more deeply into the nature of this well-ordered home.

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/date-index/2007

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/author-index/justin-taylor

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/scripture-index/titus

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/topic-index/biblical-eldership



http://biblia.com/bible/esv/First%20Timothy%203.4-5

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/First%20Timothy%203.4-5


http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/unbelief-in-an-elders-children#ftn1





http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Matthew%2025.14-30



Must an Elder's Children Be Believers?

The most controversial question surrounding these verses is whether Paul is saying that an elder’s

children have to be believers, or only that they must be faithful, submissive, and obedient.

The term pistas can mean either "believing" or "faithful" in the Pastoral Epistles (for the former with a

noun, cf. 1 Timothy 6:2; for the latter with a noun, cf. 2 Timothy 2:2). Therefore, word studies alone

cannot resolve the question.

However, I want to suggest that resolution to this question can be found in comparing the parallel

between Titus 1:6 and 1 Timothy 3:4. We can be reasonably certain that tekna echonta en hypotagē

("having children in control / submission / obedience"; 1 Timothy 3:4) is virtually synonymous with tekna

echōn pista ("having faithful / believing children"; Titus 1:6).7 In other words, to have pista children

means to have children hypotagē. This would mean that the final part of Titus 1:6 ("not open to the

charge of debauchery or insubordination") is a description of what pista means.

With that in mind, here are four further reasons that incline me to believe that Paul is referring to the

submission and obedience of an elder’s children, and not to their salvation.

1) The grounding question of 1 Timothy 3:5 explicitly connects the elder’s qualifications with his

managerial skills in verse 4.

Generally obedient behavior does not require miraculous intervention; even a good lab technician can

make a rat follow a certain path if enough planning and forethought is invested. Salvific faith, however,

cannot be produced as a result of good housekeeping. While a godly home is often conducive to belief,

it does not produce it.

If we insist that a child’s salvation is fundamentally connected to the managerial skills of the father, we

have inadvertently assigned an unbiblical role to human action.

This is clearly the case with an application drawn by Stott: "An extension of the same principle may be

that presbyter-bishops can hardly be expected to win strangers to Christ if they have failed to win those

who are most exposed to their influence, their own children."8 What would this mean? If you are a good

manager at your home, then unbelievers can be "expected" to come to the Lord through your ministry?

2) Even the best pastoral managers have unbelievers within their church or under their sphere of

influence (cf. Galatians 1:6!).

The logical consequent of this would mean that one can manage the larger household (his church) well,

even though not everyone in it is a believer. If this is so, then it seems that one can manage the smaller

household (his family) well, even though not all within it believe.

3) Insisting that having believing children is a prerequisite to eldership leads to some uncomfortable

questions.











What do we make of an elder who has a number of believing children—but one who is not? If most of

his children are believers, is he not a good manager of his household? Or, does the one unbelieving child

call into question his overall managerial ability? If it does, then why did any of his children turn out to be

believers?

Wilson writes: ". . . a man might decide (and, I think, should decide) to step down if one of his six

children denies the faith. But if another pastor in his presbytery in the same situation does not decide to

do so, and his other five children are saintly, only a crank would express his disagreement through a big

church fight."9 Yet this seems inconsistent; for if Paul truly teaches that unbelieving children

automatically disqualify a man for eldership, then the purity of the elder board is worth fighting over.

4) All of the requirements for eldership that are listed in this passage (being married once, being

temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, a good teacher, not a drunkard, not a lover of money,

and not a recent convert) are actions of personal responsibility. We would expect the requirement

regarding his children to be in the same category.

Requiring that his children have genuine saving faith is to require personal responsibility for the

salvation of another, something I don't see taught in Scripture.

Conclusion

I believe, therefore, that 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 are referring to the general submission and behavior of

the elder’s children. God has so designed the universe that the parental role of disciplinarian, model,

authority, and servant-leader generally has a profound effect upon the behavior of the children. Paul

does not spell out what this looks like in every case, nor does he spell out all of the specifics of what will

disqualify an elder. The general case, however, is clear:

What must not characterize the children of an elder is immorality and undisciplined rebelliousness, if

the children are still at home and under his authority.10 Paul is not asking any more of the elder and his

children than is expected of every Christian father and his children. However, only if a man exercises

such proper control over his children may he be an elder.11

May God give the pastors and elders of our churches grace and wisdom in faithfully leading both their

churches and their homes.12

Notes

1 Douglas Wilson, "The Pastor’s Kid" in Credenda/Agenda, vol. 2, no. 3.

2 Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership: An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical Church Leadership, revised &

expanded (Littleton, Col.: Lewis & Roth Publishers, 1995), 229.

3 John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, translated from Latin

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 83 no. 1.





http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/unbelief-in-an-elders-children#ftn_ref1


http://www.amazon.com/Biblical-Eldership-Urgent-Restore-Leadership/dp/0936083115/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242165837&sr=1-2


http://www.amazon.com/Commentaries-Epistles-Timothy-Titus-Philemon/dp/B0026WNSMW/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242165922&sr=1-3


4 Ibid., 293.

5 John Stott, Guard the Truth: The Message of 1 Timothy and Titus, The Bible Speaks Today (Downer’s

Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 98.

6 William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, WCB (Dallas: Word, 2000), 180.

7 As Andreas Köstenberger writes, "In the larger context of the teaching of the Pastoral Epistles, it would

be unusual if the author had two separate standards, a more lenient one in 1 Timothy 3:4 (obedient)

and a more stringent one in Titus 1:6 (believing). This creates a presumption of reading pistos in Titus

1:6 as conveying the sense 'faithful' or 'obedient' in keeping with the requirement stated in 1 Timothy

3:4." See "Children of Elders: What Are the Requirements?", along with his treatments in 1–2 Timothy,

Titus, in the Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 12 (rev. ed.; Zondervan, 2007), pp. 606-7, and ch. 12 in

God, Marriage, and Family (Crossway, 2004).

8 Stott, Guard the Truth, 176.

9 Douglas Wilson, "The Pastor’s Kid, Again" in Credenda/Agenda, vol. 2, no. 5.

10 See George W. Knight III, Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992),

161, for his argument that Paul is referring to tekna ("children") who are under authority and not yet of

age.

11 Ibid., 290.

12 I wish to thank Ray Van Neste, Tom Schreiner, and Andreas Köstenberger for offering helpful feedback

on an earlier draft of this paper.


By John Piper. ©2012 Desiring God Foundation. Website: desiringGod.org

Children of Elders: What Are the Requirements?

Posted By Andreas Köstenberger On April 19, 2006 @ 12:13 pm In Blog |

In 1 Timothy 3:4, it is stipulated that an overseer’s children must “obey him with proper respect.” In

Titus 1:6, the bar appears to be raised higher when it says that “[a]n elder must be . . . a man whose

children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient” (NIV). The question, then,

is this: Is it sufficient for an elder’s children to be generally obedient, whether or not they are born-again

believers, or must they, as the NIV and many other translations have it, “believe,” that is, be Christians?

If the latter, this would seem to rule out quite a few otherwise qualified candidates for church

leadership.



http://www.amazon.com/Guard-Truth-Message-Timothy-Speaks/dp/0830819924/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242165988&sr=1-1


http://www.amazon.com/Word-Biblical-Commentary-Pastoral-Epistles/dp/0849902452/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242166023&sr=1-1








http://www.biblicalfoundations.org/?p=36

http://www.amazon.com/Ephesians-Philemon-Expositors-Bible-Commentary/dp/0310235030/ref=sr_1_17?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242166131&sr=1-17

http://www.amazon.com/Ephesians-Philemon-Expositors-Bible-Commentary/dp/0310235030/ref=sr_1_17?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242166131&sr=1-17

http://www.amazon.com/God-Marriage-Family-Rebuilding-Foundation/dp/1581345801/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242166053&sr=1-1




http://www.amazon.com/Pastoral-Epistles-Commentary-International-Testament/dp/0802823955/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242166336&sr=1-1





The answer to the question hinges largely on the meaning of the Greek word pistos, which can mean

either “faithful” or “believing.” While “believing” is the more common meaning of the two, there are

instances in the Pastoral Epistles where pistos means “faithful” (cf. 1 Tim. 3:11; 2 Tim. 2:2, 13; see also

the possible inclusion with Titus 1:9: “trustworthy message”). As always, therefore, context must be the

determining factor. The context of Titus 1:6, in turn, includes both the larger context of the teaching of

the Pastorals and the immediately following phrase “not open to the charge of being wild and

disobedient.”

(1) In the larger context of the teaching of the Pastoral Epistles, it would be unusual if the author had

two separate standards, a more lenient one in 1 Timothy 3:4 (obedient) and a more stringent one in

Titus 1:6 (believing). This creates a presumption of reading pistos in Titus 1:6 as conveying the sense

“faithful” or “obedient” in keeping with the requirement stated in 1 Timothy 3:4. This would also create

a contrast between the mention of “not open to the charge of being . . . disobedient” later in Titus 1:6.

(2) What does the meaning of the words “wild” and “disobedient” in the immediately following context

contribute to a better understanding of the word pistos in Titus 1:6? Interestingly, the two other New

Testament instances of “wild” in Ephesians 5:18 and 1 Peter 4:4 relate to orgies of drunkenness, and the

two other instances of “disobedient” refer to outright rebellion (Titus 1:10; 1 Tim. 1:9). This suggests

that what is in view is not occasional disobedience but deep-seated rebellion against parental authority.

The conclusion to be drawn from the above evidence is that, most likely, the word pistos in Titus 1:6 is

to be understood as conveying the sense “faithful” or “obedient” but not “believing” in the sense that

only men whose children are born-again believers are eligible to serve in positions of church leadership.

Anyone chosen as an elder in the church, which entails the exercise of authority in the congregation

(e.g., 1 Thess. 5:12; 1 Tim. 3:4; 5:17; Heb. 13:17), must properly exercise authority at home, with his

children responding in obedient and submission.

For further details on the subject, see my commentary, 1–2 Timothy, Titus, in the Expositor’s Bible

Commentary [1], Vol. 12 (rev. ed.; Zondervan). See also Chapter 12 in God, Marriage, and Family [2] (2d

ed,; Crossway, 2010).

Christian Elders in the New Testament

November 1, 1976 | by John Piper | Topic: Biblical Eldership

1. The Background of the Term “Elder” in Judaism

1.1 Almost all early societies or religious communities were guided in some way by elders, that is, by the

older, experienced wise men of the group. According to Genesis 50:7 there were “elders of Egypt” and

according to Numbers 22:7 there were elders of Moab and Midian. So there is nothing unique or

unusual about having elders in positions of authority.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0310235030/qid=1141065323/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/002-2300965-0692053?n=283155

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0310235030/qid=1141065323/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/002-2300965-0692053?n=283155

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1581345801/qid=1139324165/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-9963619-7996664?s=books&v=glance&n=283155


http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/author-index/john-piper


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Genesis%2050.7

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Numbers%2022.7


1.2 The early church was born on Jewish soil, its first members and leaders were Jewish, its Lord was

Jewish, and it saw itself as the fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures and as the true Jewish people of God.

Therefore it is understandable that the church, as it emerged from Judaism, would in some ways pattern

its life and structure on the life and structure of God’s people in the Old Testament of which they were

now the true posterity.

The “elders of Israel” are referred to in the Old Testament from the beginnings of the nation in Egypt

(Exodus 12:21) down to the period of the rebuilding of the temple after the Babylonian exile (Ezra 6:7).

In Ezekiel 7:26 they are grouped together with prophets and priests, each group having its special

concern: “They seek a vision from the prophet, but the law perishes from the priest and counsel from

the elders.” In Leviticus 4:15 the elders have a representative function in certain worship practices. In

Numbers 11:16 they are described as officers over the people.

In general, then, we can say that, while through the long history of Israel the role of the elder no doubt

changed, they were the older men of the community who, because of their wisdom in counsel and the

natural honor due to them (Leviticus 19:32), became the official administrators or leaders of the

community.

In the Judaism of Jesus’ day the elders of Israel were still dominant. The most frequent use of the word

“elder” in the New Testament refers to the Jewish elders who opposed Jesus during his lifetime. Within

the gospels and Acts “elders” are most often viewed as forming a closely knit group with the “chief

priests.” Again and again we read of “the chief priests and elders of the people” (Matthew 21:23; 26:3,

47; 27:1, etc.). The term elder was probably very broad and would include members of the scribes as

well as the Pharisees and Sadducees (cf. “traditions of the elders” Matthew 15:2; Acts 22:6).

Therefore it is evident that the Judaism out of which the early church emerged was one in which elders

played a distinctive and well-known leadership role. This familiar role in Jewish society was no doubt

where the early church got the title “elder.” But just what the character and function of the early

Christian elder was can only be determined by studying the New Testament texts. It would be wrong to

assume that the Jewish concept was taken over with no modifications, because the church is not simply

a carbon copy of Judaism or of Old Testament Israel.

It is worth noting in passing that the office of priest, so prominent in the Old Testament, is not taken

over by the early church. Prophets and elders (cf. Ezekiel 7:26) have their counterparts in the church and

these titles are used. But there is no official counterpart to the priest, for, as the New Testament teaches,

the whole church is a “holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5), or a “royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9). We who are in

Christ have all “been made priests to his God” (Revelation 1:6). Each individual has access to the holy of

holies, God’s throne of grace, because of the once-for-all atoning death of Christ. No officer in the

church has the function of mediating between the believer and God.

2. Christian Elders in the Church at Jerusalem

2.1 The elders of the early Jerusalem church appear in three situations in the Book of Acts. The first

reference is in Acts 11:30. The disciples of Antioch had decided to send relief funds to the church in

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Exodus%2012.21

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Ezra%206.7

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Ezekiel%207.26

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Leviticus%204.15

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Numbers%2011.16

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Leviticus%2019.32

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Matthew%2021.23






http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Ezekiel%207.26



http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Revelation%201.6



Jerusalem “and they did so, sending the elders by the hand of Paul and Barnabas.” No mention is made

of deacons or apostles here. The elders are apparently the older men responsible for the general

welfare of the church. We know nothing about how they became elders, and we can only surmise that

the reason they were elders at all is because of the pattern already set in Judaism.

2.2 The second situation where we meet the elders is at the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15. They are

mentioned five times—verses 2, 4, 6, 22 and 23. Some Jewish Christians had gone to Antioch preaching

that you had to be circumcised in order to be saved (15:1). Paul and Barnabas debated with them until

“Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and

the elders about this question” (15:2).

It is noteworthy that while funds were sent only to the elders (11:30) a doctrinal issue was sent to the

apostles as well as the elders. The authority of the apostles was recognized, but even this authority is

not wielded without an effort to persuade and unify through a council meeting.

When Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem “they were welcomed by the church, and the apostles and

the elders” (15:4). Here we see three groups—the church as a whole, the twelve apostles, and the body

of elders. The issue of circumcision surfaced soon enough (15:5) and the result was that, according to

verse 6 “the apostles and the elders gathered together to consider this matter.”

In the debate which follows, Peter, then Barnabas and Paul, then James spoke in favor of not requiring

circumcision. Apparently the discussion, at least initially, was confined to the apostles and elders. It is

probable that members of the congregation were present, in view of the reference to the “multitude”

(KJV, πληθος) in verse 12, and in view of the fact that when all was said and done verse 21 says, “Then it

seemed good to the apostles and the elders with the whole church” to send a letter to the gentile

churches about their decision.

Verse 28 adds that it also seemed good to the Holy Spirit that circumcision not be required. When the

letter was delivered, for example in Acts 16:4, Luke comments that the decision about circumcision had

been reached by the apostles and elders. This confirms 15:6 which says that “the apostles and elders

were gathered together to consider the matter.”

So the picture in chapter 15 is that the elders, along with the apostles, have the responsibility under the

guidance of the Holy Spirit to make decisions regarding ethical (15:29) and doctrinal matters. We may

assume that these significant decisions were laid before the whole church where they were approved

(15:22).

In seeking guidelines from this incident for today’s church we would have to keep in mind that the office

of apostle, being linked to the witnessing of his resurrection, was an unrepeatable office. The

irreplaceable function of the apostles remains for us now in the apostolic word which we have in the

New Testament. Thus the leadership of the church using only the Jerusalem model would be a group of

elders under the Holy Spirit in humble conversation with the apostolic word, the New Testament.



2.3 The third situation in Acts where the elders appear is Paul’s final visit to Jerusalem (21:18). Paul goes

in to James (the Lord’s brother) and with all the elders present he lays before them what God has been

doing among the gentiles through his ministry. Then the elders urged Paul not to give offense to the

Jewish Christians; he accepted their advice and purified himself and entered the temple.

Here the function of the elders is to receive the distinguished apostle and hear his report. They take

pains to see that there is a good rapport between Paul and the whole church. It is interesting to note

that James, who was not an apostle, (James the apostle was killed in 44 A.D., Acts 12:1-3) is mentioned

separately, apparently as a chief leader. This could be due simply to his unique status as the Lord’s

brother, or it could suggest that from the early days as the apostles dispersed and died off a central

figure emerged among the body of elders who was recognized as the main leader or administrator.

2.4 In conclusion, we know nothing about how the elders of Jerusalem were chosen unless we equate

the seven of Acts 6:3 with the elders. But there is no good reason to do that. We may assume they

emerged naturally in the community because they were taken for granted in Jewish society. They were

apparently responsible for the general welfare of the church (11:30); and with the apostles under the

guidance of the Holy Spirit (15:28) they made decisions respecting the doctrine and morals of the church

(15:6; 16:4). These decisions then met the approval of the whole church (15:22).

3. The Elders in the Churches of Paul

3.1 The term “elder” as a title for a church leader occurs in the Pauline letters only three times—1

Timothy 5:17, 19 and Titus 1:5. Obviously the title, as such, was not of great importance to Paul. It could

well be that he may not have even used the title in his work until near the end of his life when he wrote

the pastoral letters, except that they presuppose some prior acquaintance with the term.

3.2 There are two references in Acts to elders in the churches of Paul. Let’s look at these one at a time.

3.2.1 In Acts 14:21 Paul begins to head back to Antioch of Syria, retracing the steps of his first missionary

outreach to the churches of southern Galatia: Derbe, Lystra, Iconium and Antioch of Pisidia. While

visiting each of these churches which Paul had recently founded he “strengthened the souls of the

disciples and exhorted them to continue in the faith” (14:22). Then Luke tells us in 14:23 that Paul and

Barnabas “appointed elders for them in every church” and that after “praying with fasting they

committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”

Concerning the elders here we may note first that it does not say Paul called them elders. This may be

Luke’s word for a church leader to which Paul may have given no name at all except perhaps “the ruling

ones” (1 Thessalonians 5:12) or “the overseers” (Acts 20:28). But whether Paul called them elders or not,

Luke saw them filling the same function as what he knew as elders.

Secondly we may note that in each church were appointed several elders; we don’t know how many.

Third, their installation was by appointment, not election, a feature we will find true to elders

throughout the New Testament. Fourth, they must have been relatively new Christians, since the

churches had just been founded. This shows that the principle laid down in 1 Timothy 3:6 (no new

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Acts%2012.1-3











convert bishops) is not an absolute in the missionary context. Nothing at all is said here about the

function of the elders. Luke apparently assumed that in his day the office was so common that it needed

no explanation.

3.2.2 The second reference to elders in Paul’s churches in Acts comes in Acts 20:17. Paul is on his way to

Jerusalem at the end of his third missionary journey. He stops off at Miletus, just south of Ephesus, and

“calls to him the elders of the church” of Ephesus. When they come down to him, Paul gives a very

moving farewell address.

In verse 28, Paul admonishes them with these words, “Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock unto

which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers to feed the church of the Lord which he obtained with his

own blood.”

Concerning the elders here, again we note that Paul does not call them elders, but rather “overseers” (v.

28). The Greek word is επισκοπους (episkopous) which means literally overseer and is sometimes

translated “bishop.” Hence to the elders is entrusted the task of spiritual oversight. This task has

immediate relevance because the next verse warns of wolves that will come, not sparing the flock.

Hence it is obvious that for Paul the term “overseer” is virtually synonymous with “shepherd,” since the

congregation is pictured as a flock. This gives, incidentally, clear foundation for our use of the term

“pastor” and “pastoral staff,” since “pastor “means “shepherd” (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:7 and Ephesians 4:11

for Paul’s only other uses of the shepherd metaphor for church leader).

In addition, the responsibility of the elder/overseer is to “feed the church,” no doubt in the sense in

which Jesus said to Peter, “Feed my sheep,” (John 21:17). In context, the food is no doubt “the word of

grace, which is able to build you up” (20:32), or “the whole counsel of God” (20:27). The

elders/overseers are thus ministers of the word. But more than that, according to verse 35 the elders

are to imitate Paul and labor to support the weak; that is, to provide for the needs of those who because

of sickness cannot provide for themselves. This task, which is not unlike the task of the so-called

“deacons” in 6:1-3, raises the question whether the term elder in Acts may not subsume what we know

as the diaconate. It is impossible to answer this with certainty.

Finally we should note that the elders had been “set as overseers” by the Holy Spirit. This fills out the

picture somewhat when we add to it the fact that Paul appointed elders in all the churches. The

appointment no doubt occurred after the manner of Paul’s own appointment by the prophets and

teachers in Acts 13:1-3. Through prayer and fasting the Holy Spirit makes plain who shall be appointed,

and then the leaders lay hands on them and appoint them. Paul’s appointments were not capricious or

merely a reflection of his own desires.

3.2.3 From these two texts in Acts we can see that from the earliest times in the churches of Paul there

have been appointed leaders who function as overseers of the flock, to guard it, feed it, and help supply

its physical needs. Luke applies the term “elders” to these and makes plain that there were several in

each church and apparently at Ephesus a large number (cf. 20:25).




http://biblia.com/bible/esv/John%2021.17



3.3 Within the letters of Paul themselves the term “elder,” as a designation for a church leader, occurs

only three times—1 Timothy 5:17, 19 and Titus 1:5. We will look at these in reverse order. As we do we

should keep in mind the unique character of the Pastoral letters (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus): they are

the last letters Paul wrote and reflect a situation fifteen to twenty years after Paul’s first missionary

journey. Unlike all his other letters they are addressed to individual church leaders and spell out some of

their duties.

3.3.1 Paul writes to Titus (1:5-9):

This is why I left you in Crete, namely that you might set in order what was left undone and that you

might appoint elders in each city as I directed you. Only appoint someone if he is irreproachable, the

husband of one wife, and has believing children who are not open to the charge of profligacy or

rebellion. For it is necessary that an overseer be irreproachable as God's household steward, not self-

willed or quick tempered or a drunkard, or pugnacious, or greedy for gain, but rather hospitable, loving

what is good, prudent, righteous, devout, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word in accordance

with the teaching, in order that he might be able both to exhort with sound teaching and to reprove the

opponents.

We see right away that Paul here uses the term elder and overseer (or bishop) with reference to the

same persons. Verses six and seven can be paraphrased, “elders shall be irreproachable” (anengklĕtos)

for an overseer must be irreproachable (anengklĕtos).” The function of the elders is thus summed up as

oversight just as it was in Acts 20:17, 28. Also, as in Acts, the emphasis falls on the ministry of the word:

the elder/overseer should be well-grounded in doctrine (didachē, verse 9) and able to “exhort with

sound teaching and reprove the opponents” (verse 9). Beyond this nothing is said about the task of the

elders.

Verses six to eight give the requirements one should meet in order to be an elder-overseer. In his

community relations he should be irreproachable, and his marriage and family should be exemplary. His

own personal character should be one of spiritual maturity which fits him to help others.

Finally, we note again that the elders are appointed. The situation is like that in Acts 14:23 in which the

churches seem to be relatively new since there are as yet no elders in the churches. Paul has apparently

had to leave Crete (verse 5) before having a chance to appoint elders as he customarily did. So he orders

Titus to do it in his place. The fact that Paul spells out the kind of person who is to be appointed shows

that the work of the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28) in the appointment process does not rule out the human

activity of assessing a person’s spiritual character.

3.3.2 The other two places where the term “elder” occurs in Paul’s letters is 1 Timothy 5:17 and 19. In

5:3-16, Paul describes the procedures to follow in caring for widows in the church. “Real widows,” that is,

godly, older women who have no relatives to care for them, are to be supported by the church (5:3, 9,

16). They are thus to be honored.











Then in verses 17 and 18 Paul says, “Let the elders who rule well be worthy of double honor, especially

those who labor in the word and in teaching; for the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it

is treading out the grain,’ [Deuteronomy 25:4] and ‘The laborer deserves his wages’ [Luke 10:7].”

This text raises a number of questions: What does the honor consist of in verse seventeen? Verse

eighteen makes it plain that financial support is in view, at least partly: “the laborer (cf. “labor in word,”

verse 17) deserves his wages.” So the term “double honor” in verse seventeen must mean at least

double pay. But this raises the question, What is to be doubled?

When Paul says that elders who rule well are to be accorded double honor, does he mean that elders

who rules poorly are to get $5,000 a year and the elders who rule well are to get $10,000 a year? This is

doubtful, since Paul says nothing about honoring elders who rule poorly; in fact, in verse twenty he

speaks of rebuking an elder who persists in sin. There is in the context a reference to honor, however,

which may be the one that is to be doubled, namely, the honor accorded to widows (verse 3). This

honor involves both esteem (verse 2, 10ff) and financial support (verse 16). If we telescope verses 3-17

they would read: Honor the widows who are real widows, but give double honor to the elders who rule

well.

Another question is raised by the phrase, “especially those who labor in the Word and in teaching”

(verse 17). This seems to imply that there are some elders who labor in the word and teach and some

who don’t. J.N.D. Kelly suggests in his commentary that those who teach are the so-called “overseers”

or “bishops” and those who don’t are the deacons. In other words, he thinks that the term “elder”

embraces both bishops and deacons.

This solution has in its favor that every time the overseer’s role is described in the pastoral epistles it

includes the ability to teach (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:9) and when the role of the deacon is described, it

does not (1 Timothy 3:8-13). The problem with this view is that, as we said, Titus 1:5-7 seems to equate

elder and bishop.

But perhaps in retrospect we should say that Titus 1:5-7 need not imply an identification of elder with

bishop, but only an overlapping of terms. That is, all bishops or overseers are elders, but not all elders

are overseers. I think we cannot be absolutely certain on this point.

In either case, it is not so much the structure of the church that is at stake as it is the titles one applies

within that structure. In the one case “elder” is a broad title applying to both overseers and deacons. In

the other case “elder” is a narrower term interchangeable with “overseer.”

Two new features about the ministry of elders emerges in 1 Timothy 5:17-22. Their work is described as

ruling. The Greek word means to stand before (proistemi). It was used by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:12,

“We beseech you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and who rule over you in the Lord

and admonish you.” Perhaps the meaning comes out best in 1 Timothy 3:4, 5 and 12, where the word is

translated “manage” (RSV) or “rule” (KJV) and refers to the function of a father in the family. Thus the

elders are to the church what a father is to his family: he leads, manages the affairs and supervises.

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Deuteronomy%2025.4

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Luke%2010.7












A second feature of the ministry of elders which we have not seen before is that they are apparently

ordained by the laying on of hands. After telling Timothy how to handle an elder who persists in sin, Paul

warns Timothy not to “be hasty in the laying on of hands” (5:22). In other words, don’t make decisions

quickly about who to ordain as an elder. (For Timothy’s own ordination by the laying on of hands see 1

Timothy 4:14; 1:18; 2 Timothy 1:6.)

3.4 We have not looked at all the texts where Paul uses the term “elder.” But since we have noticed

both from Acts 20:17, 28 and from Titus 1:5, 7 that “elder” and “bishop/overseer” are sometimes

interchangeable, we should perhaps look at two other texts where the bishop is mentioned.

3.4.1 In 1 Timothy 3:1-7 Paul gives the qualifications for one who “aspires to the office of bishop”

(episkopēs). They are similar to those listed in Titus 1:5-9. The task of teaching is again mentioned (verse

2) and the function of the overseer is summed up in verse 5 as “caring for God’s church.”

3.4.2 The second and last text where Paul refers to the bishop is Philippians 1:1, “Paul and Timothy,

servants of Christ Jesus. To all the saints in Christ who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons.” No

further mention is made of these people in the letter, nor do we even know for sure if two distinct

groups are in view here, though that would seem to be the most natural interpretation. The chief value

of this reference, historically, is to show that the technical terms of “overseer” and “deacon” are not

restricted to the Pastoral letters, which some scholars say Paul did not write.

3.5 Now we can try to summarize what we have learned about elders in the churches of Paul. Their role

can perhaps best be summed up in the phrase “overseeing” and hence the term “elder” or “overseer” or

“bishop” are sometimes used interchangeably (Titus 1:5, 7; Acts 20:17, 28). However, it is uncertain

whether the term “elder” was a more inclusive one also embracing the role of deacon as well (Acts

20:35; 1 Timothy 5:17).

This oversight of the church involves guarding the flock spiritually, like a shepherd guards his flock from

wolves (Acts 20:28), and feeding the flock. The feeding happens as the elders “labor in the Word and

teaching” (1 Timothy 5:17; 3:2, Titus 1:9; Acts 20:27, 32). But 1 Timothy 5:17 may mean that there were

ruling elders who were not involved in preaching and teaching. In addition to the spiritual ministry, the

elders were also responsible for certain physical needs of the flock (Acts 20:35).

In the New Testament elders attain their position by appointment either by Paul or Barnabas (Acts

14:23) or by Timothy (1 Timothy 5:22) or by Titus (1:5). The Holy Spirit was active in these appointments

so that it could be said that he had made them overseers (Acts 20:28). But this divine guidance did not

short circuit the normal assessment of a person’s character since according to 1 Timothy 3:2-7 and Titus

1:5-9 the elder/overseer had to have an exemplary family, a spiritually mature character, and an ability

to give sound teaching. The appointment was a kind of ordination to a sacred calling which was

performed by the laying on of hands (1 Timothy 5:22; cf. Acts 13:3).

Finally, it is apparent that each city church had several elders rather than just one. Probably at the

beginning being an elder was not a full-time job and was performed in addition to one’s vocation. But by

the time Paul wrote 1 Timothy the elders in Ephesus were to be paid for their labor.




































4. Elders in the Non-Pauline Churches

4.1 There are a number of uses of the term “elder” outside Paul which we will now discuss. In the Book

of Revelation the term occurs twelve times with reference to the twenty-four elders in heaven. There is

no agreement among biblical scholars who these people represent. 2 and 3 John begin with the

designation, “The elder to…” Apparently the author is so well known to his readers that he need not

even give his name, but only call himself “The elder.”

4.2 In James 5:13-15 we read,

Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is any cheerful? Let him sing praise. Is any among you

sick? Let him call for the elders of the church and let them pray for him, anointing him with oil in the

name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he

has committed sins, he will be forgiven.

The only thing new we learn here is a specific illustration of the kind of practical ministry the elders were

to have in the churches of the Dispersion (James 1:1).

4.3 Finally, in 1 Peter 5:1-4 the term “elder” is used.

So I exhort the elders among you as a fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ and sharer of

the glory which is about to be revealed. Tend (poimanete) the flock of God among you, overseeing not

under compulsion but willingly according to God, neither for shameful gain but eagerly, neither as

lording it over the portions assigned to you (tōn klēron) but being examples to the flock. And when the

chief shepherd is manifested you will receive the unfading crown of glory.

Here the first thing to note is that Peter calls himself an elder. This, of course, does not mean there is no

distinction between elders and apostles (see section 2). Rather, by virtue of its superior authority and

pastoral obligation, the apostolic office overlapped with that of elder. Peter refers to this elder status to

illustrate the very point he is making, namely, he does not want to “lord it over the elders” but by

example and exhortation to help them fulfill their calling. He draws attention to Christ’s suffering and

glory, which has immediate relevance for the elders who are called to take the lowly role of examples to

the flock and to await the unfading crown of glory which only Christ can give (verse 4).

The main point of these verses is to instruct the elders how to exercise their authority. Peter uses three

pairs of admonitions. The first pair (verse 2a) is ambiguous in the RSV: “not by constraint” sounds like

Peter is urging the elders not to force people to do things. But the opposite of this is that the elders are

to do things “willingly.” In view of this second half of the pair, I would translate the first half as “not

under constraint.” In other words, in verse 2a Peter is not admonishing the elders not to use force, but

not to need force for their own motivation.

Another reason for choosing this translation is that this avoids a needless repetition with verse 3a where

Peter tells them not to lord it over the flock. Therefore the first pair of admonitions calls the elders not

to act as if they were being forced to do their job, but to do it as of their own accord. In short, enjoy

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/James%205.13-15

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/James%201.1



your work, for it you don’t you cast a shadow across the wisdom and goodness of him who called you to

it.

The second pair of admonitions in verse 2b spells out a specific example of how not to be motivated by

external constraint: “neither for shameful gain but eagerly.” One way you get people to do a job they

aren’t very eager to do is to pay them. Since most people love money and the power and pleasure it can

buy, they will do things they don’t love to do in order to get money. But this is a terrible motive for an

elder, for it shows that his heart is in the wrong place, for where your treasure is there will your heart be.

Again, elders are to love their work. They are to do it eagerly. Blessed is the cheerful giver, for only the

cheerful giver is not constrained to give by some external motive. Giving itself is blessed moreso than

receiving. It was, in fact, to elders that Paul quoted Jesus’ words: “It is more blessed to give than to

receive” (Acts 20:35).

The third pair of admonitions is an echo of Jesus’ teaching in Mark 10:42-44. The same word for “lording

over” is used in Mark 10:42 and 1 Peter 5:3 (katakurieuō). The context in which Jesus warns the disciples

against lording it over their brothers is when they were thinking about who was the greatest among

them (cf. Luke 22:24-30). In other words, the evil of lording your authority over others is that it shows

you are seeking glory from men, you are trying to exalt yourself in others’ eyes and so have the worldly

pleasure of human praise.

Now here in 1 Peter 5:3, Peter warns the elders (as an elder who has seen the sufferings of Christ) that

they are not to be motivated by a love of human praise or of power. On the contrary, they are to

assume the lowly role of example just like Jesus did in Luke 22:24-30 and John 13:1-20. The glory will

then follow, and not from men but from Christ himself, and not a fading human glory but an unfading

one. Assured of this unfading glory, the elders can surely forsake all worldly motives like money and

power, and eagerly do their overseeing as humble, Christ-like examples to the flock.

That Christ himself is the proper pattern for the elder/overseer is seen clearly not only from the allusion

to his earthly teaching in 5:3, but also from 1 Peter 2:25. There Peter says, “You were straying like sheep,

but have now returned to the shepherd and overseer (episkapon) of your souls.” Christ is the “chief

shepherd” as 5:4 says, but he is also the “chief overseer” (2:25) and may we not also say, “the chief

elder”? This is the highest thing that can be said of the role of elder in the church. It is a summons from

Christ (by his Spirit) to do his work under him in his likeness and for his sake.




http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Mark%2010.42-44

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Mark%2010.42


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Luke%2022.24-30


http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Luke%2022.24-30

http://biblia.com/bible/esv/John%2013.1-20




What is the role of an elder?

January 23, 2006 | by Matt Perman | Topic: Biblical Eldership

According to the New Testament, elders are responsible for the primary leadership and oversight of a

church. The function and role of an elder is well summarized by Alexander Strauch in his book Biblical

Eldership: "Elders lead the church [1 Tim 5:17; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 5:1-2], teach and preach the Word [1

Timothy 3:2; 2 Timothy 4:2; Titus 1:9], protect the church from false teachers [Acts 20:17, 28-31], exhort

and admonish the saints in sound doctrine [1 Timothy 4:13; 2 Timothy 3:13-17; Titus 1:9], visit the sick

and pray [James 5:14; Acts 20:35], and judge doctrinal issues [Acts 15:16]. In biblical terminology, elders

shepherd, oversee, lead, and care for the local church" (16).

"Elder" and "pastor" are not two different offices. As John Piper argues in section five of the booklet

"Biblical Eldership," they are simply two different words for the same office. He gives three reasons. First,

in Acts 20:28, elders are encouraged in the "pastoral" duties of overseeing and shepherding. Second, in

1 Peter 5:1-2, elders are exhorted to "shepherd" the flock of God that is in their charge, which is the role

of a pastor. Third, in Ephesians 4:11, the one time that the word pastor occurs in the NT, pastors are

treated as one group with teachers. This suggests that the chief role of the pastor is to feed the flock

through teaching, which is a primary role of elders (Titus 1:9). Hence, the NT seems to indicate that

"pastor" is another name for "elder." An elder is a pastor, and a pastor is an elder.

Some have thought that the Bible speaks of a category of church leaders above elders/pastors, called

"overseers." However, the biblical evidence indicates that "overseer" is simply another term for elder as

well. Paul refers to the elders at Ephesus as "overseers" in his farewell sermon of Acts 20:17-35.

Likewise, "overseer" in Titus 1:7 seems to be a synonym for the term "elder" used in verse 5. Most

scholars now acknowledge this, as J.B. Lightfoot pointed out already in the 19th century: "It is a fact now

generally recognized by theologians of all shades of opinion, that the language of the New Testament

the same officer in the Church is called indifferently 'bishop [overseer]' (episkopos) and 'elder' or

'presbyter' (presbyteros)" (quoted in Strauch, 180).

John Piper summarizes the biblical use of the terms "elder," "pastor," and "overseer":

The New Testament only refers to the office of pastor one time (Ephesians 4:11). It is a functional

description of the role of elder stressing the care and feeding of the church as God's flock, just as

"bishop/overseer" is a functional description of the role of elder stressing the governing or oversight of

the church. We may conclude therefore that "pastor" and "elder" and "bishop/overseer" refer in the

New Testament to the same office. This office stands alongside "deacon" in Philippians 1:1 and 1

Timothy 3:1-13 in such a way as to show that the two abiding officers instituted by the New Testament

are elder and deacon.




http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/author-index/matt-perman

















http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Seminars/1586_Biblical_Eldership/












Do you believe a church should be governed by one elder or several?

January 23, 2006 | by Matt Perman | Topic: Biblical Eldership

We believe the New Testament teaches that there is to be a plurality of elders. This means that a church

is not to have unitary leadership where only one man has ultimate authority. Instead, a church is to have

"shared leadership." As Alexander Strauch writes, "By definition, the elder structure of government is a

collective form of leadership in which each elder shares equally the position, authority, and

responsibility of the office" (Strauch, Biblical Eldership, 39). Shared leadership has the benefits of

balancing people's weaknesses, lightening the workload, and providing accountability.

There are several lines of biblical evidence for this. In a blanket statement intended to apply to churches

generally, James assumes that there will be elders (plural) available to pray for the sick in each church

(James 5:14). The book of Acts seems to indicate that Paul's regular practice was to appoint elders to

lead the churches he planted, since after his first missionary journey we read: "And when they had

appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the

Lord in whom they had believed (Acts 14:23).

Further, Paul summoned the elders (plural) at Ephesus for his farewell exhortation (Acts 20:17-18), Paul

commanded Titus to "appoint elders in every city" (Titus 1:5), and Peter spoke of the responsibility of

shepherding the flock as belonging to elders (1 Peter 5:1-2). In all cases the references are to elders in

the plural, not singular, thereby indicating that the churches were governed by multiple elders.

Shared leadership is provided structure and efficiency through the concept of "first among equals."

Although no one elder has greater formal authority than any of the others, certain elders will emerge as

natural leaders in particular areas and thus provide helpful leadership that the other elders will generally

respect. Also, it is appropriate for the elders of a church to focus on varying tasks. For example, one may

be primarily responsible for preaching on Sunday mornings, another for overseeing small groups,

another for evangelism and outreach, and so forth.

Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership




http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/author-index/matt-perman









What Part Does Age Play In Considering a Man for Eldership?

June 8, 2009 | by John Piper | Topic: Biblical Eldership

As you consider a man for eldership, what part does his age play?

"Elder" technically means older. But how much older is older? Clearly Timothy was younger, because

Paul says, "Don't let anybody despise your youth," and he said, "Treat older men as fathers."

So here you have the leader in the church at Ephesus, Timothy, being younger than some of those to

whom he is ministering. And, in fact, his youth is causing a little bit of trouble in the church, evidently,

because he is having to give an account for it and be careful that he doesn't bring reproach upon himself.

Which opens the door to me that I better not be too specific about saying that only gray-haired people

or only people who have been Christians for 30 years can be elders.

And then there is the warning that a new convert shouldn't be an elder, because he's going to, perhaps,

get puffed up with pride before he's been a Christian very long. But that very warning seems to indicate

that eldership could be for the younger, because who knows how much time has elapsed there. You

want some time to elapse since their conversion so that a person is not a brand new believer.

But even there you have Paul doing his first missionary journey and then returning, what, 3 or 4 months

later and appointing elders in all the churches? So missiological realities have to set in if you're going to

have a church that you're not immediately there to care for as the missionary because you're traveling

around. Somehow or another you're going to have to put some people in place.

So these are all guidelines in the New Testament.

Bottom line: How do we think about age? We want some maturity. We want spiritual maturity, which

you discern in how a man relates to people. And we want some life experience under his belt, because

he is going to go—like I did last night—to stand over the bed of a man who will probably see Jesus in a

few hours. That is awesome!

You don't want a person with no sense of weightiness about them, about life. It takes some life dealing

to even be able to feel that moment, to have stood there enough and to feel that moment. You don't

want a baby believer or a person who is immature walking into certain kinds of situations.

So maturity: personally, martially, and in his faith.

And I don't mean a single person can't be an elder. So at that point you're having a trade-off. It's great to

have married elders, because you're dealing with a lot of married people. But it's not bad to have single

elders like Paul and Jesus either.





The Church’s Responsibility to the Elders

From the pulpit Ministry of Pastor Tom Ferrell

Arlington Presbyterian Church

November 9, 2003

Life Together… Elders’ Joy Hebrews 13:17 (edited version)

The importance of godly leadership in the church can hardly be overestimated for four reasons. First,

the requisite spiritual maturity and courage are not common among the saints. In Ezekiel 22:30God says,

“I searched for a man among them who should build up the wall and stand in the gap before Me for the

land, that I should not destroy it; but I found no one.” Second, the price that must be paid is a high one.

J. Oswald Sanders has said, “… true leadership, is achieved not by reducing men to one’s service but in

giving oneself in selfless service to them. And that is never done without cost. It involves drinking a

bitter cup and experiencing a painful baptism of suffering” (Spiritual Leadership, p.20). Third, the

standards that must be met are high. God has instituted positions of leadership within the New

Testament church and, by the Holy Spirit, has outlined the qualifications, the duties, and the manner

required of these men. Fourth, the prosperity of the Church hangs in the balance. Sanders says, “The

church has always prospered most when it has been blessed with strong, spiritual leaders who expected

and experienced the touch of the supernatural in their service” (Spiritual Leadership, p.25).

Of course, the vitality and health of the church depends upon how the leaders relate to the

congregation. But this prosperity does not depend upon the leaders alone. Ray Stedman suggests, that

the responsibility for making the operations of a church a joy, and not a burden, is placed on the

congregation, not on their leaders” (Hebrews, p. 157). One of the clearest verses in this regard is

Hebrews 13:17, Obey your leaders, and submit to them; for they keep watch over your souls, as those

who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for

you.

Hebrews 13 is a chapter where the leaders of the church are mentioned three times. In verse 7,

remember those who led you. In verse 17, obey your leaders. In verse 24, greet all of your leaders. I

want to point out that the Greek word for “leaders” used here is not one of those typically employed to

refer to an ecclesiastical office – pastor, elder, or bishop. The word is used 24 times in the New

Testament to refer to the civil magistrate. Rightly does the King James Version translate it all three times

in Hebrews 13 as “those which have rule over you. ”The emphasis is clearly on the God-given “authority

of their words in our lives” (Wayne Mack, Life in the Father’s House, p.54).

Now let’s look at Hebrews 13:17 in its context. To do this we go back to verse 7. Remember those who

led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their

faith. Verse 7 refers to those men now deceased who were responsible for planting this church and

nurturing it through its infancy by means of a faithful ministry of the word of God. These men faithfully

exercised gifts of preaching and teaching, evangelism and pastoral care. Like the saints in Chapter 11,

these men ran the race well. They finished the course. They lived their lives in hearty reliance upon the


promises of God in Christ. Rightly are those in this church called to imitate their faith. Verse 17,

however, clearly has reference to leaders who are alive and active in the fellowship. The idea is that the

same deference is due to them as well.

Remember those … who spoke the word of God to you. Now look at verse 9. Do not be carried away by

varied and strange teachings. It appears that this group was attracted to strange doctrine. The appeal of

the author is for them to remember the sound doctrine taught by the founders of the church and to

continue that commitment to sound doctrine as taught and upheld by the present leadership in the

church. So when he says, obey your leaders and submit to them, it is precisely the matter of doctrinal

integrity that he has in mind.

Now let’s dig into Hebrews 13:17 itself, breaking it down into its four constituent parts.

First, obey your leaders and submit to them. This command should not strike us as unusual. We ought

not chafe under it. Indeed, the principle of authority and submission is woven into the fabric of every

institution ordained by God – the family (Eph. 5:21; Col. 3:18, 20), the civil government (Rom. 13:1), and,

here, in the church. The Greek word translated “obey” (peitho) certainly includes the idea of obedience.

It does not suggest, however, unthinking acquiescence to unlawful or unbiblical demands. Neither does

it provide the basis for authoritarian churches, like some of the contemporary house-churches whose

members submit virtually every decision of their lives to the elders” (Hebrews, p. 235). The particular

form here (present, imperative, middle) means “to permit oneself to be persuaded” or “to yield to

persuasion.” So “obey” suggests a willingness to receive the teaching and counsel of the elders. But the

word also means “habitual readiness to comply.” So, in addition, “obey” suggests a compliance on the

part of the congregation with the directions of the elders. This sense is clear in James 3:3 for example.

Now if we put the bits into the horses’ mouths so that they may obey us, we direct their whole body as

well. Now the word “submit” is active and means “to yield” or “to place under.” This indicates “that we

must diligently and continually devote ourselves to the process of “placing ourselves under” our leaders”

(Mack, p.57).

Now how, practically speaking, can we do this? What does this look like? We get a little help from I

Thessalonians 5:12-13. But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor

among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, 13 and that you esteem

them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another. Three requests are made

in this verse.

First, live in peace with one another. Jay Adams says, “Only after great care and willingness to be taught

and corrected by the leadership after they explain the Word of God to him, may [a member] refuse to

submit to them. And then may he do so only if he is thoroughly convinced of their failure to base their

case upon the Scriptures. He must not refuse to submit to authority because of personal differences or

because of conflicts of any other sort. He must remember always that the authority to which he submits

is not theirs but rather is the authority of Christ” (Shepherding God’s Flock, pp.330-331).


Second, appreciate your elders. Literally this means “know” them. Of course, this includes personal

acquaintance. More importantly, however, it calls the members of the congregation to an

understanding of the function of the elders within the body and the value of godly elders to the body.

Ideally, the elder ought to take the initiative in this process of acquaintance, introducing himself to you

as a man and brother in Christ and then instructing you as to his role and the character of his work. But

if he does not, there is nothing that says you cannot take the lead in this by scheduling time with him,

getting to know him, and inquiring into the nature of his ministry.

Third, esteem them. It ought to be the natural tendency and desire of every Christian to think highly of

the elders of the church. It may be argued, how do I do this when I have reason to doubt a particular

elder’s fitness for the office? How can I think highly of someone who is charged with the oversight of my

family and yet has had little or no personal involvement with us? It seems that Paul might have

anticipated questions like these. He says we should esteem them because of their work. We value elders

not primarily or necessarily based upon their performance in a particular area but because of the very

nature of the work with which they are charged. “The motivation for submission, according to Paul, is

not our personal feelings toward leaders, but the desire to obey God by loving them, and the realization

of their position before the Lord” (Mack, p. 59).

Indeed, this same idea is expressed in the second phrase. For they keep watch over your souls, as those

who will give an account. As soon as we read these words the image of the shepherd comes to mind.

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by

night (Lu. 2:8). This, of course, emphasizes the pastoral dimension of the elders’ work especially the

vigilance that is required of them (Mk. 13:33; Lu. 21:36; Eph. 6:18). Yes, the elder is to provide care and

counsel in temporal matters. But he is primarily concerned with the eternal welfare of your souls. Each

elder must go about his labors anticipating the question he will have to answer when his labors are done.

How did the saints fare on my watch? Did they continue in the way of holiness on my watch? Did they

prosper spiritually on my watch? Were they nurtured faithfully and tenderly on my watch? It is this task

to which we are called and you as God’s people need to recognize it. . .

We recognize the tremendous burden laid upon the elders. But there is an equally weighty responsibility,

in addition to the obedience and submission already mentioned, that God places upon you, the

congregation of His people. Ray Stedman explains it. “If individuals yield voluntary submission to such

responsible leadership, it will make the leader’s work a joy and of great advantage to all. Note that the

responsibility for making the operations of a church a joy, and not a burden, is placed on the

congregation, not on their leaders” (Hebrews, p. 157).

Let them do this with joy and not with grief. The responsibility to see to it that the elders exercise their

oversight with joy rests with you, the people of God. What brings an elder joy? Wayne Mack supplies a

helpful list (see pp. 62-67). Elders rejoice as they are assured of your salvation (I Thess. 2:19-20). Elders

rejoice as you articulate a clear and sincere profession of faith. Elders rejoice as they see you walking in

obedience (III John 3-4), living a life consistent with your profession. Elders rejoice as they see you

pursuing the unity of the body (Phil. 2:1-2); as they know of your prayers for them (II Cor. 1:10-11); as


you express your love for and loyalty to them (II Cor. 7:5-7). Elders rejoice as you voluntarily seek their

counsel and direction; as you receive their reproof with gratefulness; as you believe the best about them

(I Tim. 5:19). Elders rejoice as you work alongside them in ministry (Phil. 1:3-5).

“Hebrews 13:17 says we should help our leaders to watch over our souls with joy and not with grief. The

Greek word for “grief” literally means groaning. And we cause these men to groan in disappointment;

we make their ministry difficult and unenjoyable by doing the opposite of the activities [just mentioned]”

(Mack, p. 67). Again, Wayne Mack supplies a helpful list (pp. 67-68). We grieve our elders when we are

indifferent about salvation and fail to examine ourselves regularly to see whether we are in the faith (II

Cor. 13:5). We grieve them when we sin against Christ or fail to grow in Him as we should. We grieve

them when we bite and devour on another (Gal. 5:15) and sow discord among the brethren (Prov. 6:19).

We grieve them when we make no effort to affirm our love for them or even know them personally. We

grieve them when we hesitate to seek their counsel preferring rather to seek help and guidance outside

the church (Ps. 1:1). We grieve then when we respond to their loving reproof with insults or callousness

(Prov. 9:7). We grieve them when we distrust their motives and judge them unfairly or too hastily (I Cor.

4:1-5). We grieve them by not fulfilling our basic membership pledges to give and to assume a ministry.

For this would be unprofitable for you (as a congregation). If you read this phrase literally according to

the Greek word order it would sound like Yoda: for profitless to you this would be. Do you see what God

is saying? In causing your elders grief you yourselves will be brought to grief. You’re only hurting

yourselves. To the degree that you make life difficult for your elders, you will be the losers. Don’t miss

this. Your own spiritual welfare is tied to how others in the church treat and respond to the elders. It

seems to me that a spiritually mature congregation would be well-served to police its own members in

this regard, knowing that the corporate welfare is at stake. When you see sinful behavior; when you

hear sinful conversation that you know would grieve your elders. When you see or hear these things and

remain silent know that you do so to your own spiritual hurt and to the hurt of your church.

How is such behavior unprofitable?

First, violation of the Biblical injunctions of Hebrews 13:17 constitutes high-handed disobedience in the

face of a clear and oft-repeated command. It renders one liable to the Lord’s discipline. Second, to reject

lawful, responsible, God-ordained authority in the body of Christ is to reject the authority of God. John

MacArthur points out, “Submission to these men is submission to God.” Third, we bring reproach upon

the gospel when we demonstrate ourselves to be as disagreeable and proud as those who are void of

the grace of God. Fourth, God will simply not bless a people who perpetuate an atmosphere of

contention, quarreling, and selfishness. Fifth, the advance of the gospel is halted as the church is

preoccupied with intramural affairs. The energies of the pastors and elders are diverted from teaching

and discipleship to settling squabbles, squelching rumors, answering complaints. Under such burdens

the elders groan.

grace fellowship’s teaching position on...

Documents