Qualifications of Deacons

The term “deacon” refers to “one who executes the commands of another… a servant, attendant, minister” (Thayer).  Elders, also called Bishops or overseers, oversee the local church; Deacons are their special helpers to whom they delegate certain tasks.

Let us in this study, divide the qualifications into four groupings: (1) implied qualifications; (2) positive qualifications; (3) negative qualifications; (4) family qualifications.

Implied

  1. A deacon is to be a man and not a woman.   He’s to be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy      3:12).
  2. He is to be well-known by the congregation (1     Timothy 3:10).
  3. Age is not as much of a factor as it is with elders.  Yes, he is to be married and have children (1 Timothy 3:12).  This implies a certain amount of age.  However, it is not required that his children be “faithful children” (cf. Titus 1:6).  His children may or may not be old enough to have obeyed the gospel.

Positive

  1. He must be “grave” KJV, “reverent” NKJV, “of     dignity” NASB (1 Timothy 3:8).  This word means “serious… honorable… ‘grave’ and ‘gravity’ fail to cover the full meaning… the word we want is one in which the sense of gravity and dignity is combined… The word points to seriousness of purpose and to self-respect in conduct” (Vine’s).  In other words, he should be one that presents himself in such a way that all can see that he is conscientious, and serious about his duties and responsibilities especially in the   area of Christianity.
  2. He is to be “proved” KJV, “tested” NKJV/NASB and found “blameless” KJV,  “beyond reproach” NASB (1 Timothy 3:10). He should be someone who is well-known and   trusted by the congregation.  He should be known to meet the qualifications.
  3. “Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure   conscience” (1 Timothy 3:9).  He should be a man striving to live by the Book.  He should examine himself and be able to say with a pure conscience that this is the case.

Negative

  1. He is not to be “double-tongued” (1 Timothy 3:8).    What does it mean to be doubled-tongued?  It means to be deceitful, “saying one thing in one place and another in a different context” (J.J. Turner, Deacons Wake Up).  He is to be “truthful, not talking two ways to suit the company he is in” (David Lipscomb, Commentary   on 1 Timothy).
  2. He is not to be “given to much wine” KJV, “addicted to much wine” NASB (1 Timothy 3:8).  Now this shouldn’t be taken to mean that he can be given to wine but not “much wine”, any more than he can be greedy for lucre but not “filthy lucre” (1 Timothy 3:8), or that one can run to riot as long as it is not “excess of riot” (1 Peter 4:4), or that it is okay to be wicked so long as one does not “overflow” with wickedness (James 1:21 NKJV).  Clearly, this is teaching that one is not to be a winebibber.
  3. He is not to be “greedy of filthy lucre” KJV, “greedy for money” NKJV, “fond of sordid gain” NASB (1 Timothy 3:8).  Some will do just about anything for money, even dishonest things.  Such a one should not be considered.

Family

  1. He is to be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:12).   This eliminates bachelors, widowers,  polygamists, and those in unbiblical marriages.
  2. He is to have children (1 Timothy 3:12).  I do not believe that this necessitates a plurality of children (see: Genesis 21:7; Leviticus 25:40-41; 1 Timothy 5:4; Luke 14:26).  Each should be convinced in their own mind.
  3. He is to rule his children and his house well (1 Timothy 3:12).  He is one who had demonstrated the     fact that he has Biblically tried to manage his family.  He has instructed his family (Ephesians 6:4) and sought to restrain his children (cf. 1 Sam. 3).
  4. His wife is to be of a certain character (1 Timothy 3:11).  (A) She is to be “grave” KJV, “reverent” NKJV, “dignified” NASB [see: positive point 1].    (B) She is not to be a “slanderer” KJV, “malicious gossip” NASB.  “The reference is to those who find fault with the demeanor and conduct of others and spread their innuendos and criticisms in the church” (Vine’s); “In the LXX it is used of hostile speech, especially slander… In the New Testament the main stress is on the malicious nature of the speech” (Kittle’s).  She is not to be one who stirs up problems and agitates with her speech.  (C) She is to be “sober” KJV, “temperate” NKJV/NASB.  The word literally refers to an abstainer from intoxicants.  Figuratively it is used of one who is clear thinking and possesses self-control.  (D) She is to be “faithful in all things”.  This indicates that she is to be trustworthy.  She is someone who can be depended on, trusted, and even confided.
Posted in Church Organization, Elders and Deacons, Word Study | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Father’s Expectations

President Warren G. Harding was dead.  He died at 7:35 p.m. on August 2, 1923.  He was in San Francisco, California, having just completed a visit to the territory of Alaska, the first visit by a president.  The cause of death was probably congestive heart failure, which was aggravated by pneumonia (due to Mrs. Harding’s wishes, no autopsy was performed).

Vice President Calvin Coolidge was in Plymouth Notch, Vermont, visiting his boyhood home.  His father, Calvin Coolidge, Sr., served as a local Justice of the Peace there.  Coolidge was sworn in at 2:45 a.m. on August 3, 1923 as President of the United States of America.  His own father swore him in by the light of a kerosene lamp.

Calvin Coolidge, Jr., President Coolidge’s son, was fifteen years old at the time.  He was working a summer job on a western Massachusetts tobacco farm.  “The farmer told him that his father had been inaugurated in the dead of the night.  The boy took the report without comment, then asked, “Which shed do you want me to work today?’  Amazed, the farmer said that if his father had been named President of the United States, he surely wouldn’t be working twelve-hour days in a tobacco field.  ‘You would if your father were my father!’ responded young Calvin” (William J. Bennett, America: The Last Best Hope, vol. 2, p. 69).

Parents, your expectations mean a lot.  What do you expect from your children?

1.  Do you expect them to know the Bible?  I am talking about really knowing it, being able to teach others, being able to defend truth.

2.  Do you expect them to exhibit a Christian character?  Do you demand such?  Would you fellowship them if they ceased such and refused to repent?

3.  Do you expect them to do their best in whatever they do?  This includes: school, work, sports, church responsibilities such as teaching, being prepared for Bible study, etc?

4.  Do you expect them to be faithful in attendance?  Do you let them miss for work, school, friends, etc?  How is your example?

5.  Do you expect them to truly worship?  Merely sitting in the pew, and playing with the babies is not worship.

6.  Do you expect them to work and become taxpayers and not tax-takers?

“Train up a child in the way he should go…” (Prov. 22:6)

Posted in Family, History, Work | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Father’s Advice on Marriage

Mike Reagan was to be wed on June 13, 1971. Ronald Reagan wrote this letter to him in regards to the wedding:

Dear Mike: …

You’ve heard all the jokes that have been rousted around by all the ‘unhappy marrieds’ and cynics. Now in case no one has suggested it, there is another viewpoint. You have entered into the most meaningful relationship there is in all human life. It can be whatever you decide to make it.

Some men feel their masculinity can only be proven if they play out in their own life all the locker room stories, smugly confident that what a wife doesn’t know won’t hurt her. The truth is, somehow, way down inside, without her ever finding lipstick on the collar or catching a man in the flimsy excuse of where he was till three A.M., a wife does know, and with that knowing some of the magic of their relationship disappears. There are more men griping about marriage who kicked the whole thing away themselves than there can ever be wives deserving of blame. There is an old law of physics that you get out of a thing as much as you put into it. The man who puts into the marriage only half of what he owns will get that out. Sure, there will be moments when you will see someone or think back on an earlier time and you will be challenged to see if you can still make the grade, but let me tell you how really great is the challenge of proving your masculinity and charm with one woman for the rest of your life. Any man can find a twerp here and there who will go along with cheating, and it doesn’t take all that much manhood. It does take quite a man to remain attractive and to be loved by a woman who has heard him snore, seen him unshaven, tended him while he was sick, and washed his dirty underwear. Do that and keep her still feeling a warm glow and you will know some very beautiful music. If you truly love a girl, you shouldn’t ever want her to feel, when she sees you greet a secretary or a girl you both know, that humiliation of wondering if she was someone who caused you to be late coming home, nor should you want any other woman to be able to meet your wife and know she was smiling behind her eyes as she looked at her, the woman you love, remembering this was the woman you rejected even momentarily for her favors.

Mike, you know better than many what an unhappy home is and what it can do to others. Now you have a chance to make it come out the way it should. There is no greater happiness for a man than approaching a door at the end of a day knowing someone on the other side of that door is waiting for the sound of his footsteps.

Love Dad.

P.S. You’ll never get in trouble if you say ‘I love you’ at least once a day” (Michael Reagan, On the Outside Looking In, p. 152-154).

Posted in Family, History, Marriage | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What Would You Do? (Part 2)

The year was 1848. Abraham Lincoln’s stepbrother, John Johnston, who had a history of financial problems, requested Abe’s help in a financial matter.

Abe responded by letter (Dec. 24). Here is an excerpt. “Your request for eighty dollars, I do not think it best to comply with now. At various times when I have helped you a little … in a very short time I find you in the same difficulty again. Now this can only happen by some defect in your character. What the defect is, I think I know … I doubt whether since I saw you, you have done a good whole day’s work … This habit of uselessly wasting time, is the whole difficulty, and it is vastly important to you, and still more to your children, that you break this habit … What I propose is that you should work ‘tooth and nail’ for someone who will give you money for it … I now promise you that for every dollar you will, between this and the first of next May … I will give you one other dollar … But if I should now clear you out, next year you will be just as deep in as ever. You say that you would almost give your place in heaven for $70 or $80. Then you value your place in heaven very cheaply … You have always been kind to me, and I do not now mean to be unkind to you. On the contrary, if you will follow my advice, you will find it worth more than eighty times eighty dollars to you. Affectionately your brother”  (www.quotablelincoln.com/LincolnLetters.html ).

Application

1.  Would you tell the young man to work? “A little sheep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep – so shall your poverty come upon you like a prowler. And your need like an armed man” (Prov. 6:10-11). “Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise, which having no captain, overseer or ruler, provides her supplies in the summer, and gathers her food in the harvest” (Prov. 6:6-8). “Aspire to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business, and to work with your own hands” (1 Thes. 4:11).

2.  Would you give the young man money? “If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat” (2 Thes. 3:10).

Posted in History, Work | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What Would You Do? (Part 1)

Grover Cleveland holds several firsts in Presidential history. (1) He was the first Democrat elected to the office of President after the Civil War. In fact, he was the only Democrat elected to the Presidency between the years 1860–1912. (2) He was (and is) the first President to serve two non-consecutive terms. His first term was 1885-1889. His second term was 1893-1897. Thus, Cleveland is the only President counted twice in the numbering of the Presidents. (3) He was the first President to be married in the White House. John Tyler was the first to get married while in office (it was a second marriage for this widower). However, Cleveland was the first and only President to be married in the White House. It was a first marriage for this bachelor. His bride Frances Folsom (daughter of his previous law partner)   became the youngest-ever First Lady (She was twenty-one. He was forty-nine). (4) Esther Cleveland, their child, was the first child of a President to be born in the White House (though, not the first child born in the White House. This honor goes to James Madison Randolph, son of Martha Jefferson Randolph, who was the daughter of Thomas Jefferson).

Our lesson concerns Grover Cleveland and his 1884 run for the White House. A scandal threatened his run. Republicans discovered that Cleveland had fathered an illegitimate child (Oscar Folsom Cleveland) by Maria Crofts Halpin in 1874, while Cleveland was a lawyer in Buffalo, N.Y. Cleveland did not marry Halpin, but did provide child support. Halpin was soon committed to an asylum for alcoholism. Cleveland paid for the child’s keep in an orphanage. Halpin sobered up and Cleveland gave her money to start a business in Niagara Falls. The child was not restored to her. Instead, the child was adopted by a childless couple. The Republicans now chanted, “Ma! Ma! Where’s my pa?”

When the scandal surfaced, “A local Buffalo editor suggested Cleveland name his late law partner, John Folsom as the child’s real father … ‘is this man crazy,’ asked an exasperated Cleveland, ‘is he fool enough to support for a moment  … that I would permit my dead friend’s memory to suffer for my sake?’ Cleveland refused to any such thing. He immediately admitted to fathering the child. Memorably, he instructed his campaign aids to ‘tell the truth’” (William J. Bennet, America: The Last Best Hope, Vol. 1, p. 442).

“When Democrats brought him evidence that Mrs. Blaine (his opponent’s wife B.H.) had been pregnant before the Blaine’s marriage, Cleveland grabbed the papers, ripped them up, and threw them in the fire. ‘The other site can have the monopoly on all dirt in this campaign’ he told them’” (ibid.).

Application

1.  Do we have the determination to be honest? “Therefore, putting away lying, ‘Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor’” (Eph. 4:25).

2.  Do we abide by “The Golden Rule?” “Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do       also to them, for this is the law and the prophets” (Mt. 7:12).

Posted in History, Honesty, Tongue | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Qualifications of Elders

They’re called by three different terms.  These terms are descriptive of the nature and work of those men.  (1) Elders/Presbyters (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2; 15:4; 15:6; 15:22; 15:23; 16:4; 20:17; 21:18; 1 Timothy 4:14; 5:17; 5:19; Titus 1:5; James 5:14; 1 Peter 5:1; 5:5), these are men of experience.  They are not youngsters in the faith.  They have some years on them.  (2) Bishops/Episkapois/Overseers/ (Acts 20:28 cf. Hebrews 13:7, 17, 24; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1; 3:2; Titus 1:7), this speaks to their work and authority.  They are to oversee the local church.  (3) Shepherds/Pastors (Acts 20:28 NKJV/NASB; Ephesian 4:11; 1 Peter 5:2 NKJV/NASB), this speaks of the care and concern they are to have for the flock, and the involvement they’re to have with the flock (church).

These terms are used to refer to one in the same position.  A Bishop and an Elder are one in the same (Titus 1:5 cf 1:7; Acts 20:17 cf. 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1 cf. 5:2).  A Shepherd and an Elder are one in the same (Acts 20:17 cf. 20:28 NKJV/NASB; 1 Peter 5:1  cf. 5:2 NKJV/NASB).

There is to a plurality of these men serving together in the eldership/presbytery (term used in 1 Tim. 4:14), if there is an eldership in a local congregation – and every congregation that is mature, having qualified men should have such.  The plurality is seen in the following passages: Acts 11:30; 14:23; 20:17, 28; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 4:14; Titus 1:5; Hebrews 13:7, 17, 24; 1 Peter 5:1.

Let us, in this study, divide the qualifications into four groupings: (1) implied qualifications; (2) positive qualifications; (3) negative qualifications; (4) family qualifications.

Implied Qualifications

  1. An elder is to be a man and not a woman.  He is to be “the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6).
  2. He is to be well-known by the congregation.  A congregation must know the man well to be able to say that he meets the required qualifications.
  3. He should desire the work (1 Timothy 3:1; 1 Peter 5:2a).  Caution: He shouldn’t desire the work for the wrong reasons, but noble reasons.
  4. There are some age implications.  His children are to be “faithful children” (Titus 1:6).  This seems to imply some age.  According to my research the term “elder” was never used in the ancient world to refer to one under forty years of age (see Edward C. Wharton, The Church of Christ, page 76).  Though, the term may have nothing to do with longevity of physical age.  It may have to do with the fact that he is of experience in the faith and not a “novice” (1 Timothy 3:6).  Clearly, the one being described is not a 19-year-old (like Mormon elders).

Positive Qualifications

  1. He’s to be “apt to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:9; cf. Ephesians 4:11 – The terms “pastors” and “teachers” grammatically are referring to the same position).  The NKJV/NASB uses the wording “able to teach”.  This original word means “skilled in teaching” (Vine’s), “skillful in teaching” (Thayer).  He is to “be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers” (Titus 1:9).  This word “apt to teach” is the same word used of preachers (2 Timothy 2:24).  In my estimation this is one of, if not the most overlooked qualifications.  Rex Turner Sr., “He must be qualified to teach – not lacking in natural ability and/or Bible understanding” (Robert R. Taylor, Jr., The Elder and His Work, page 120).  Elders were never intended to be mere board of directors.  They are to be teachers.  We have followed denominations in turning over far too much of the work to the preacher.
  2. He’s to be “of good behavior” KJV, “orderly” ASV, “respectable” NASB (1 Timothy 3:2).  This word is defined to mean “well arranged, a well-ordered life” (Thayer).  L.R. Wilson has said, “A man who is sloven, careless and haphazard in his work has no business trying to direct the work of the Lord we dare say this qualification has been overlooked more than any other.  Some churches have very little system or order in their work.  There is very little planning, coordination or sense of direction in their efforts” (The Elder and His Work, p. 113).  Men should be considered who are wise, well-ordered and disciplined in their lives, prioritizing things properly and planning for the future.
  3. He’s to be “a lover of good men” KJV, “…good things” ASV (Titus 1:8).  The literal reading is “a lover of good”.  The negative form of this word appears in 2 Timothy 3:3.  L.R. Wilson, “An elder should be a lover of good deeds, good things, good people, good in general” (ibid, p. 131).  Rex Turner Sr., “He must be a lover of good men – not an admirer of, nor a participant with, evil men” (ibid).  He should delight in that which is morally good (cf. Phil. 4:8).
  4. He is to be “given to hospitality” (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:8).  This is a qualification it seems difficult to fulfill without having his wife possessing the same quality.  Guy Woods has said, “One given to hospitality enjoys having people in his home and rejoices in the fellowship of kindred souls.  He is pleased to share his good things with others” (ibid, p. 129).  An elder should know the flock.  He should be in their homes and they should be in his.  He should socialize and entertain.  He should show kindness to others and even unto strangers.  Robert Taylor Jr., “Hospitality is love for strangers set to benevolent action” (ibid, p. 127).  Garland Elkins, “This means that an elder must be ready and willing to entertain strangers, care for the homeless and poor, and to enjoy the privilege of assisting others.  This means that he enjoys having people in his home, and he enjoys the fellowship of others” (Gospel Journal, Feb. 2008, p. 6).
  5. He “must have a good report (good reputation NASB/ good testimony NKJV) of them which are without” (1 Timothy 3:7).  Much damage is done when men with poor reputations in the town, men known to be dishonest or unethical are appointed to this position and work.  It is true that the world will not always speak well of the true Christian standing for truth (cf. Luke 6:26; John 15:19; 1 Peter 4:4).  However, if most think the man immoral and/or dishonest how can the church have a positive influence when it chooses such a one to lead?
  6. He’s to be “patient” KJV “gentle” ASV (1 Timothy 3:3).  This word is defined to mean “equitable, fair, mild, gentle” (Thayer). “It expresses that considerateness that looks humanely and reasonably at the facts of a case” (Vine’s).  It is used in contrast with being quarrelsome NKJV, or a brawler KJV (1 Timothy 3:3).  He should be one who can be talked to and reasoned with, one who will listen patiently and fairly.  Rex Turner Sr. said, “He must be patient, not fretful complaining or murmuring even in the face of provocation” (The Elder and His Work, p. 114).  David Lipscomb said, “Not bitter and impatient but kind in manners even to the froward and unpleasant” (ibid).
  7. He’s to be “just” (Titus 1:8).  This word is defined to mean “upright, righteous, virtuous… in a narrower sense, rendering to each his due; and that in a judicial sense passing just judgment on others” (Thayer).  Elders need to be impartial and unprejudiced in handling issues and problems in the church.  L.R. Wilson said, “an elder must deal fairly… with all people.  He cannot be selfish, clannish or bias in his thinking, or in his dealings” (ibid, p. 116).  He shouldn’t have one standard for his family and friends and another for all else.  He shouldn’t mold God’s word to justify those he wants, and to condemn others.
  8. He is to be “holy” KJV, “devout” NASB (Titus 1:8).  There are different original words translated into English by the word “holy.”  This words means, “undefiled by sin, free from wickedness… pure, pious” (Thayer).  We’re not looking for one who has never sinned, nor are we looking for one who will never sin again.  However, he should be one whose pattern of life is to shun sinful things and strive to live righteously.  This is one who walks in the light maintaining fellowship with God.
  9. He’s to be “temperate” KJV, “self-controlled” ASV/NASB/NKJV (Titus 1:8).  Noel Merideth said that an elder is to “control his tongue, his eyes, and his hands.  In self-control he holds his desires and appetites in restraints” (ibid, p. 115).  An elder must first have a good rule over himself before he tries to rule others (cf. Acts 20:28).
  10. He’s to be “vigilant” KJV, “temperate” NASB/NKJV (1 Timothy 3:2).  The source or root word means to be sober, to abstain from intoxicants; metaphorically it is used of being alert and clear thinking, possessing self-control.  He is to be “sober” KJV, “sober-minded” ASV/NKJV, “sensible NASB (Titus 1:8).  The original word means to be “of sound mind” (Vine’s).  Another word also appears in 1 Timothy 3:2 rendered “sober” KJV, “sober-minded” NKJV, “prudent” NASB.  This expresses much the same idea as the aforementioned word.  Senility, irrationality, insanity are clear violations of this qualification.  It is so important to be alert and clear thinking religiously and morally speaking (cf. 1 Peter 5:8).
  11. He is to be “blameless” KJV, “above reproach” NASB (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6).  This does not mean that the man has never sinned.  It does mean that he is not of questionable character.  Rex Turner Sr. has said an elder “must be blameless – not one against whom evil reports continue to circulate” (ibid, p. 110).

Negative Qualifications

  1. He’s to be “not self-willed” (Titus 1:7).  The original word literally means “self-pleasing”.  Thayer defines this word to mean “self-pleasing, self-willed, arrogant.”  Vines says, “denotes one who dominated by self-interest, and inconsiderate of others, arrogantly assert his own will… one so far over-valuing any determination at which he has himself arrived that he will not be removed from it.”  L.R. Wilson has commented, “Here is another qualification that is often ignored.  Some of the most self-willed men in the world are trying to serve as elders” (Robert Taylor, Jr., The Elder and His Work, p. 98).  Diotrophes comes to mind as an example of what an elder is not to be.  Noel Meredith has written, “The elder is not to be self-willed, that is, he must not always have his way, he is willing to listen to the views of others” (ibid, p.99).  He should be considerate of others (Philippians 2:4).  He should determine not to do his own will but ultimately the Father’s (Matthew 26:39).
  2. He’s to be “not soon angry” KJV, not quick-tempered NKJV/NASB (Titus 1:7).  This word is defined to mean “prone to anger, irascible” (Thayer).  There is a time and place for anger.  It is justified at times.  However, an elder must be reasonable, and long-suffering.  Robert Taylor, Jr. has written, “The eldership is a place for cool and calm minds – not for hot heads who possess a fiery and uncontrollable temper” (ibid, p. 101).  He should be “swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath” (James 1:19-20).
  3. He’s not to be “a brawler” KJV, “contentious” ASV, “quarrelsome” NKJV (1 Timothy 3:3).  The original wording means literally “not fighting” (Vine’s).  David Lipscomb well said, “This does not mean that one is not to stand and contend for the truth, (Commentary on 1st & 2nd Timothy, Titus, p. 166).
  4. He’s to be “no striker” KJV, “not violent” NKJV, “not pugnacious” NASB (1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 1:7).  Thayer says of this word, “bruiser, ready with a blow, a pugnacious, contentious, quarrelsome person.”  There are those who want to settle differences with their fists, or worse.  I recall a number of years ago a news report out of Ft. Worth.  In a deacons meeting in a certain Baptist church things got heated.  One deacon went to his car and got a gun and shot some of the other deacons.  This isn’t the type of man you want.
    5. He’s “not a novice” KJV/NKJV, “not a new convert” NASB (1 Timothy 3:6).  The literal rendering is “not newly planted.”  One may be highly educated in worldly matters, or a business success, but unless he is a knowledgeable, seasoned Christian he is not prepared to serve as an elder.  Another thing to keep in mind is that what is done in the business world, or political world – is not necessarily what the church is to do.  Many elders and members fail to grasp this point.
    6.  He’s to be “not given to wine” KJV/NKV, “not addicted to wine” NASB (1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 1:7).  “The Greek mee-para-oinon… lit. not at, by, near or with wine.  This looks considerably like total abstinence (William Patton, Bible Wines, p. 92).  W.D. Jeffcoat suggested that the words, “probably carry their literal signification, ’not near wine’ and even forbid the presence of an elder at drinking parties” (W.D. Jeffcoat, The Bible and ’Social’ Drinking, pp. 72-73).   The ASV took the language figurative instead of literal rendering it “no brawler” with the marginal rendering “not quarrelsome over wine”.  Vine’s indicates a possible secondary meaning “of the effects of wine-bibbling viz., abusive brawling.”  Good hermeneutics is to go with the literal meaning unless there is an over-riding reason not to do so.  I see no reason in this context to translate this as the ASV did.
    7. He’s to be “not covetous” KJV,/NKJV,  “free from the love of money” NASB,”not a lover of money” ESV (1 Timothy 3:3).The original word, philarguros, means “loving money.” He is to be “”not given to filthy lucre” KJV, “not greedy of filthy lucre” ASV, “not greedy for money” NKJV, “not found of sordid gain” NASB, not “greedy for gain” ESV (Titus 1:7). There is divided opinons as to whether “filthy” refers to baseness or dishonest. Some people have a weakness for money. Judas betrayed Jesus for silver. Wayne Jackson commented “An elder cannot have a ‘money’ weakness that might cause him to be easily bribed in church conflicts. He must not be someone who could be tempted to dip his hand into the church treasury” (Jackson, Before I Die, p. 89). Denny Petrillo commented “Since elders oversee the spending of the church treasury, they must not love money to the extent that it cannot be spent..” (Petrillo, Commentary on 1,2 Timothy and Titus, p.38).

Family Qualifications

1.  He’s to be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6).  This obviously eliminates bachelors.  It also eliminates unmarried widowers (cf. 1 Timothy 5:9).  It eliminates polygamists.  It eliminates those in unbiblical marriages.

2.  He’s to have children (1 Timothy 3:4; Titus 1:6).  I do not believe that this necessitates a plurality of children (see: Genesis 21:7; Leviticus 25:40-41; 1 Timothy 5:4; Luke 14:26).  Each should be convinced in his own mind.

3.  He is to be one who “ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity” KJV, “rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence” NKJV, “Manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity” (1 Timothy 3:4).  One can tell much about a man and his management abilities, and spiritual guidance by looking at his family.  If he can’t manage his home, how is he going to manage the church (1 Timothy 3:5)?

4.  His children are to be of a certain character (A) They are to be “not accused of riot or unruly” KJV, “not accused of dissipation or insubordination” NKJV, “not accused of dissipation or rebellion” NASB (Titus 1:6).  The word “riot” is related to the word  “riotous living” mentioned in connection with the prodigal son (Luke 15:13).  The word refers to “prodigality, a wastefulness” (Vine’s).  The word “unruly” means “disobedient, unruly” (Thayer).  In other words, an elder’s children should not be “wild”.   They should not bring reproach on the church.  (B) They are to be “faithful children” KJV/NKJV, “children who believe” NASB (Titus 1:6).  There is much dispute over the meaning of the term “faithful”.  Perhaps, most believe that the term means that they are believers, Christians, faithful Christians (See usage: John 20:27; 20:31 cf. Romans 6:1-4 notice when newness of life begins; Acts 2:41-44; 10:45; 16:1; 16:15; 16:30-34; Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:2; 1 Timothy 4:10; 4:12; 5:16 6:2; 2 Timothy 2:2; Revelation 2:13; 17:14).  Others believe that the term refers to being dependable or trustworthy (Matthew 25:21; Luke 16:10-11; Titus 3:8; Hebrews 2:17; 3:2; 3:5; 1 John 1:9; Revelation 21:5).  Those who hold this position usually consider the statement parallel with the words “not accused of riot or unruly” (Titus 1:6) and the words “having his children in subjection” (1 Timothy 3:4).  It seems to me the far safer course is to understand this to be saying that the man is to have children who are not just dependable children, but faithful Christians.  Denny Petrillo remarked, “How could a man, who is not even able to convert his own children, be one who leads the church to godliness?”

The question is sometimes asked, “Does this include grown children?” or “Does this include after the children leave home?”  My personal view is that it does.  Consider the following points: (1) Eli was responsible for his children even after they were grown (1 Samuel 2-4).  (2) It is true that a child is not forever under the household of their parents (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:7).  However, does all responsibility of a parent totally cease?  (3) It is sometimes argued, “You can’t make them be faithful after they leave the home.”  True, but you can’t make them be faithful before they leave the home either, unless you reduce faithfulness to mere attendance.  (4) An emotional argument is sometimes raised “God had children that went astray (Amos 1:2)” Such is true, but I don’t know what this proves.  Jesus didn’t have an earthly wife; Could He be an Elder on earth?  Remember also He was of the wrong tribe to meet the qualifications to be an earthly priest. (5) The present tense “must be”(1 Timothy 3:2) seems to suggest a continuous state just as “blameless” and “apt to teach” are also so jointed with the words “must be”.

A thing to keep in mind is that even though a man may not be qualified due to his wife or children`s choices, does not necessarily mean that he is not a faithful Christian. His wife may die and thereby make him unqualified to serve, and yet he may still be a faithful member.

It is beyond dispute that the domestic qualifications are the most heatedly argued over, and the most controversial.  Let each be persuaded in his mind.

5.  His wife is to be of a certain character (1 Timothy 3:11).  Note: These characteristics will be covered in the “Qualifications of Deacons.”  Marion Fox has set forth a principle worth considering.  He has written, “The Lord set forth certain qualifications for the wives of deacons (1 Timothy 3:11).  Since the work of Elders is greater than the work of deacons, the qualifications of the wives of Elders must be at least equal to the qualifications of the wives of deacons.  In addition, if the wife of a preacher must be a believer (1 Corinthians 9:5) and the work of an Elder is greater than the work of the preacher, it is evident that an elder’s wife must be a believer.  If the lesser is required to have these qualifications, then the greater is also required to have these qualifications” (The Work of the Holy Spirit, Vol. 1 – 2003 edition, p. 596).  It is true that this lesser to greater argument is made time and again in the Scriptures.  The technical term for this is “A fortiori principle.”

Relative v. Absolute

Robert Taylor Jr. has written, “Students of sacred scriptures have divided them into various categories.  There are ‘relative qualifications’ i.e., areas in which there is current possession but even greater growth CAN and SHOULD occur and ‘absolute requirements,’ i.e., a man who is married, is a father and is not a novice.  A man is either married or he is not married at the time of tentative appointment; he is either a father or not a father at the time he is considered for the eldership; he is either a novice or not a novice at the time he may be considered for the Eldership” (The Elder and His Work, p. 87). There needs to be great care and much wisdom in accessing ‘relative qualifications’. These are not as black and white as the ‘absolute qualifications’.

Most of the qualifications are simply characteristics all Christians should possess; while others are unique (eg. A man does not have to be married to go to heaven, nor does he have to have children.  A man’s family may not meet the desired qualification, and it is possible that such is no fault of his own). Those qualifications which are not unique, but characteristics that all Christians should possess, we each should be working to develop and even improve in these things.

Posted in Church Organization, Elders and Deacons, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Role of Women (part 2)

The role of women has greatly increased over the years in the western world.  In the year 1900, only the country of New Zealand granted suffrage to women.  By 1914, seven countries were on board (New Zealand, Australia, Iceland, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark).  In 1918,  Great Britain could be included in the list.  In the USA, the territory of Wyoming granted the vote to women in 1869.  Utah soon after followed in 1870.  The Nineteenth Amendment was passed in 1920.  We should have no problem with this.

World War II took women out of the house and into the factories and business world in record numbers.  Women are now police officers, fire fighters, paramedics, politicians, physicians, lawyers, executives, accountants, etc…  They are in nearly any and every field of work one wishes to look.  Again, we should have no problem with the concept of a woman working outside of the home (Proverbs 31:13-14, 16, 18-19, 24; Acts 16:14-ff; Acts 18:1-3).  However, a woman still has a duty to be a “homemaker” (Tit. 2:5 NKJV) and a helper of her husband (Genesis 2:18; Proverbs 31:11-12, 15, 21, 23, 27; 1 Corinthians 11:8-9).

The religious landscape in America is changing.  (1) In 1972 (Cincinnati, OH) Sally Preisand was made the first female Rabbi.  (2) In 1974 (Philadelphia, PA) eleven women received their ‘holy orders’ in the Episcopal church.  (3) In 1987 (Memphis, TN) Nancy Sehested was named ‘Pastor’ of the Prescott Memorial Baptist church.  (4) The 1990’s saw the Bering Drive church of Christ in Houston, TX and the Cahaba Valley church of Christ in Birmingham, AL using women to wait on the Lord’s table, leading prayers, publicly reading scriptures and the like during the Sunday morning worship assembly.  (5) I remember, as a college student, visiting the college class at Oak Hills (San Antonio, TX) in the mid ‘80’s.  A woman was leading the class back then!

There are a number of ways in which some attempt to justify such increase of women’s role in the church.

1.  Deborah

What do we know about Deborah?  We know that she was a married woman (Judges 4:4).  We know that she was a judge in Israel (Judges 4:4).  We know that God raised her up to this position (Judges 2:16, 18; Acts 13:20).

This is not a religious role.  Many women have served as national leaders (Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, and others).  This has no bearing on the subject of New Testament roles in the church.

She was a prophetess (Judges 4:4).  This places her in the company of Miriam (Exodus 15:20), Anna (Luke 2:36) and others.  This in no way justifies increased women’s roles in the church.  This is an Old Testament passage.  Moreover, being a prophetess does not indicate how this gift was utilized.

2.  Huldah

She is a prophetess who spoke before five men (2 Kings 22:13-15; 2 Chronicles 34:20-23).  But notice, this is a private setting, not a public assembly.  Moreover, this is an Old Testament passage and therefore has no bearing on the role of women in the New Testament church.

3.  New Testament Prophetesses

Clearly there were inspired women in the first century church of Christ (Acts 2:18; 21:9; 1 Corinthians 11:5).  It is clear that women taught (Acts 18:26; Titus 2:3-4).

Three questions are in order: (1) When did they do so?  (2) Where did they do so?  (3) To whom did they do so?  The previous bulletin might be helpful in answering these points.  There is no evidence that they stood in the church worship assembly and used their gifts with God’s approval.  There is much to indicate that God does not want this occurring (1 Timothy 2; 1 Corinthians 14).

4.  Galatians 3:28

Things must be kept in context.  The book of Galatians is largely a defense of Paul’s apostleship and teaching (Galatians 1:1, 6-9, 11-12; 3:1-5).  This may have been needed due to the fact that he wasn’t one of the twelve.  However, the real controversy concerned his work among the gentiles (Galatians 2 cf. Acts 15).  In chapter 2, Paul addresses two questions: (1) Was it necessary for the gentiles to be circumcised, and keep the Old Testament law (Galatians 2:7-9 cf. Acts 15:23-24)?  (2) Should full fellowship be extended to gentile Christians (Galatians 2:11-14)?  Galatians 3:28 fits within this context.

Galatians 3:28 does not teach: (1) The slave-master relationship had ended.  It was in fact still recognized by God (1 Corinthians 7:20-24; Ephesians 6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-4:1).  (2) The husband-wife relationship had ceased.  It was still in place (Ephesians 5:23-33; Colossians 3:18-19; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:1-7).  (3) Nationalistic distinctions no longer existed (Acts 18:6; 21:11; 21:39).  (4) There was no religious difference in the roles of men and women in the church (1 Corinthians 14; 1 Timothy 2).

Instead, Galatians 3:28 is teaching that all can equally stand as children of God.  This is taught elsewhere as well (Acts 10:34-35; Romans 1:16; 1 Peter 3:7).

5.  Philippians 4:2-3

The argument is made that since these women are said to labor with Paul in the Gospel such means that they were preachers; Moreover, not only preachers but preachers like Paul, over men.

In response: (1) One does not have to be personally preaching to be a fellow-laborer (3 John 5-8 cf. 2 John 9-11).  (2) One can be a fellow-laborer and still not equal in authority (1 Corinthians 3:9).  (3) Assuming they did preach, there still are the restrictions of 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2.  However, nothing indicates they were preachers.

6.  Romans 16:7

It is argued that ‘Junia’ is a female apostle.  This is said because she was of note among the apostles.

In response: (1) No one can prove that this is a woman.  The Greek name is not ‘Junia’  (feminine) or ‘Junius’ (masculine), but ‘Junian’ which could be masculine or feminine.  (2) It does not say that this one is an apostle.  It says “of note among the apostles”.  The meaning may be that this one was well-known among the apostles.  Modern example – “he is well-known among preachers.”

7.  Romans 16:1-2

This question comes up as to whether Phebe was a deaconess in an official sense.   Some insist that she was.

Let’s remember: (1) The word servant (deacon) can be used generically or technically.  It is used of Jesus (Romans 15:8).  It is used of civil government (Romans 13:4-6).  Neither of these passages are using the term in a technical sense, that is for the office of deacon.  Paul is sometimes called a minister, a deacon (1 Corinthians 3:5; 2 Corinthians 3:6; 6:4; Colossians 1:23).  Yet, Paul wasn’t even married (1 Corinthians 7:1-9; 9:1-6; cf. 1 Timothy 3:12).  (2) We read of bishops and deacons (Philippians 1:1).  Where does one read of bishops, and deacons, and deaconesses?  Or bishops and deaconesses?  (3) While it is true they were to ‘assist’ her, the word does not necessitate that she had positional authority over them.  A form of that word is used in 2 Timothy 4:17. It is translated ‘stood’.  This is what the Lord did for Paul!

Bill Jackson wrote, “If Phoebe was given some particular function or task, as is the case with many men and women in the congregations, then she was most certainly a ‘servant’ as pertains to the assigned task.  This, however, is a far cry from assuming that she was in a particular office…” (The Current Digression II, The Second Annual Shenandoah Lectures, p, 282).  It seems to me that Phebe went to Rome on some businesses (perhaps church related).  She evidently transported this epistle.  They were to receive her.  They were to help her if she had some need while there.

What does history say?  In one sense it doesn’t really matter.  We get our authority from the Bible not from historical precedence.  However, I will summarize: (1) Early writings from ‘Christian writers’ mention bishops and deacons.  They do not mention deaconesses.  (2) Pliny the Younger, Governor of Bithynia wrote to the Emperor Trajan in about 110 A.D.  He said, “I judged it so much the more necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses…”  Whether he was using the term in a technical or generic sense is a point of dispute.  Tim Nichols writes, “The word that Pliny used in Latin for ‘deaconesses’ could just as well be translated ‘servants.’  He simply reported that he had tortured two slaves who were called ‘servants’ by themselves or someone else.  Any faithful Christian could have rightly been called a ‘servant’ (Studies in Romans, The 15th Annual Denton Lectures, p. 486).  (3) “Not until the late third century in the Syria Didascalia do we find any reference to deaconesses (in ‘Christian writings’ B.H.).  Their work consists of assisting at the baptism of women, going into the homes where believing women lived, and visiting the sick (ministering to them and bathing them).  A full-blown order of deaconesses does not appear until the fourth and fifth centuries.  Again, their responsibilities consisted of keeping the doors.” (Piloting the Strait).

8.  Culture

It is true that in many places in the Roman Empire, women had a lowly position.  This was not true everywhere.  Luke mentions, “prominent women” in Antioch Pisidia (Acts 13:50 NKJV).  Strabo (63 B.C. – 22 A.D.), the Greek geographer indicates that the women of that region were “the leaders of [religious] superstition’ being influential over their husbands” (Wayne Jackson, The Acts of the Apostles, p.162). [for additional info. on women’s role in pagan religions see “Who Said So?“ in our bulletin from Aug. 2, 2008, by Tommy J. Hicks].

Some say Paul was simply a male chauvinist.  However, the same Paul who wrote 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14, also wrote Galatians 3:28.

The truth of the matter is that the role of women in the church is not cultural.  It is grounded in creation (1 Timothy 2:8-13).

Summary

We’ve looked at the key passages.  I find no passage which supports the idea of women having the same roles as men in the church.  I do find however, many things that a woman can and even should do to the glory of God.

Posted in Textual study, Women's roles | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Role of Women (part 1)

What Women May Do?

    Let us start by stating that we do not wish to leave the impression that a woman can’t do anything.  The fact is there are many things that a woman may and even should be doing.  (1) She may teach children (2 Timothy 1:5; 3:14-15).  The influence of one godly woman should never be underestimated.  (2) She may teach other women (Titus 2:3-4).  In fact, the older women have a duty here unto the younger women.  (3) She may teach, that is explain the Bible to a man in the most private situations (Acts 18:24-27).  (4) She may teach by way of example (1 Peter 3:1-6).  In fact, she should do this (Matthew 5:16; 1 Peter 2:12).  (5) She may do good deeds unto others, as Dorcas did (Acts 9:36, 39).

1.  Women as Preachers

May a woman serve as a preacher over a mixed assembly (men and women) of God’s people?

a.  1 Timothy 2 is a key passage in answering this question

Verse 8: The word “men” is andras.  This word is not the generic word used of mankind (anthropos, 1 Timothy 2:1, 4, 5).  This word refers to males (cf. Matthew 14:21).  Men are to pray lifting up holy hands (A posture of prayer, Isaiah 1:15; Lamentations 3:41; Psalm 143:6).  The emphasis is upon holiness (Isaiah 1:15; James 4:8).

Verse 11-12.  Women, on the other hand, are to learn in silence. The term “silence”(hesuchia) does not necessarily refer to an absolute silence.  It has to do with being quiet, being tranquil (Vine’s).  It is contrasted in context with teaching and having authority over a man.

The meaning is women are not to be the public worship leaders.  She is not to be the teacher.  She is not to, in any other way, have authority over a man in the public worship.  Note: The KJV “usurp” is unfortunate.  The original word means “to govern, to exercise dominion” (Thayer).  The NKJV reads, “to have authority.”  The NASB reads “exercise authority.”

Verse 13: Many try to say that Paul’s words are merely cultural.  Such will not work.  He grounded the reason in creation.

b.  1 Corinthians 14 is another key passage.

Verse 34: Women are to keep “silence” (sigao) and are not permitted to “speak” in the churches.  The word “silence” refers in context to complete silence in the area of public speaking (1 Corinthians 14:28, 30 ASV, 34).  The word “speak” means in context to publicly speak, addressing the assembly, leading the thoughts in the assembly (1 Corinthians 14:2, 3, 6, 9, 11, 19, 28, 29, 34, 35).  The context does not forbid a woman from singing as a part of the assembly. It doesn’t forbid her from making the good confession prior to baptism. This is not the context.

Women are to be “under obedience” KJV.  The ASV reads “in subjection.”  The NASB reads, “let them subject themselves.”  The NKJV reads, “be submissive.”

“As saith the law.” This may be a reference to the law of creation (1 Timothy 2:12-13; 1 Corinthians 11:8-9).

Verse 35: The words “at home” are suggestive much like 1 Corinthians 11:22. Marion Fox, “This (husbands – B.H.) could just as easily be translated ‘men’ and with the word ‘woman’ being used in verse 34, this should be translated ‘men’… In the first century women did not leave home and live alone, but they stayed with their father until they were either married or until the father died.  If the father died, they moved in with one of their brothers or another male relative” (The Role of Women, Vol. 2, page 107).  The point is things can be discussed back at home, but a woman is not to be speaking up in the assembly.

2.  Women Translators

The Bible says that a woman is to be in silence in the assembly (1 Corinthians 14:34).  In context this has to do with tongue speaking (1 Corinthians 14:27-28 cf. 14:34), prophesying (1 Corinthians 14:29-30 ASV, cf. 14:34), and even asking questions (1 Corinthians 14:34-35). This has to do with publicly addressing the assembly.

Moreover, the word “interpreter” (1 Corinthians 14:28) is masculine gender.  Where does one draw the conclusion that such is permitted? However, in fairness let us point out that the masculine would be the default gender and could be used inclusively. However, what evidence is there that it is? Women are to be in silence. Notice three groups are mentioned in context:(1) Tongue speakers (14:27); (2) Prophets (14:29); and (3) Women (14:34). The first two may speak with qualifications. Otherwise, they are to be silent. However, women are simply told to keep silent. There is no qualifier which allows them to publicly speak in the assemble.

3.  Bible Class

May a woman ask questions?  She may not do so in the worship assembly.  Such is the context of 1 Corinthians 14:32 (Notice 1 Corinthians 14:23 cf. 1 Corinthians 11:20; Acts 20:7).  Bible class is not the worship assembly.  A woman’s asking something does not seem limited strictly to the home (John 4:10, 19-20, 25; Romans 16:2, etc.).  Yes, I believe that she may ask questions in Bible class.  One should not violate one’s conscience in this area or any area (Romans 14:23).

 If the Bible class is not the worship assembly, then may a woman teach a mixed adult class (Christian men and women)?   It is acknowledged that a woman may teach, explain the Bible to a man in the most private of setting (Acts 18:24-28).  However, the pattern seems clear to me: Whenever God’s people came together the men took the lead (e.g. Acts 21:8-12.  Nothing suggests this to be the public worship assembly of the first day of the week).  Even if the aforementioned passage did occur on a first day worship assembly, I fail to find one instance in all of scripture of a woman leading a public assembly of God’s people.  [Caution: I would also point out that it is possible to teach and dominate a class through comments and questions.  It seems to me that a woman should be very cautious in this area even in Bible class settings].

4.  Women elders/deacons

An elder is to be “the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6).  So, also, is the deacon to be “the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:12).  I don’t see how a woman can meet this qualification biblically.

Some have thought that “wives” of 1 Timothy 3:11 could be rendered “women”.  It is true that the original word can be rendered either way, “wives” or “women” depending on the context.  It is also true that the possessive pronoun “their” is not in the original.

However, consider the following points: (1) There are three obvious possibilities: (a) This refers to the wives of deacons.  However, if this refers to exclusively the wives of deacons but not elders one wonders why there isn’t qualifications listed for the elder’s wife.  (b) This refers to the wives of both elders and deacons.  Marion Fox says, “The Lord set forth certain qualifications for the wives of deacons (1 Timothy 3:11), since the work of elders is greater than the work of deacons, the qualifications of the wives of elders must be at least equal to the qualifications of deacons.  In addition, if the wife of a preacher must be a believer (1 Corinthians 9:5) and the work of an elder is greater than the work of a preacher, it is evident that an elder’s wife must be a believer.  If the lessor is required to have these qualifications, then the greater is required to have these qualifications” (The Work of The Holy Spirit, Vol. 1 – 2003 edition, p. 596) …  (c) This refers to deaconesses.  Since there are three options it seems unwise to insist that this must refer to deaconesses.  (2) There seems to be reason to conclude that this is not speaking of deaconesses.  (a) These words find themselves in the middle of the qualifications for deacons.  If he is speaking of deaconesses, doesn’t it seem strange he would talk of deacons’ qualifications, go to deaconesses, and then go back to deacons?  (b) If this is talking of an office why the qualifications so brief in comparison with that of deacons?  (c) I read about Bishops and deacons together (Philippians 1:1).  Where is a clear passage which mentions a deaconess in a passage connected with Bishops or deacons?

Posted in Bible Study, Church Organization, Elders and Deacons, Preachers, Textual study, Women's roles | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Acts of Worship – Miscellaneous Things

Order of Worship

Is there a set order of worship?  Some have thought that they have found an order of worship.  Some have turned to Acts 2:42.  They say the order specified is: (1) apostle’s doctrine.  That is preaching and teaching is to come first.  (2) fellowship.  That is, singing and giving is to come next.  How they decide which one of these two comes first, don’t ask me.  (3)  breaking of bread.  That is the next thing to take place is the Lord’s Supper.  (4) prayer.  The last act of worship in a worship service is to be prayer.  However, the text does not say that things were done in this certain order.  It only says that they did these things steadfastly.

Others have appealed to the night Jesus instituted the Lord’s supper (Matthew 26; Mark 14; Luke 22; John 13-17).  It is said that the order is: (1) Lord’s Supper (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:19-20).  (2) Preaching/teaching (Luke 22:24-38; John 13:16).  (3) Prayer (John 17).  (4) Singing (Matthew 26:30; Mark 14:26).  I am not sure where giving is supposed to fit into this.  Yet, this appears to be a different order than what is seen in Acts 20:7-ff.  It clearly is a different listing than is recorded in Acts 2:42.

Then let us consider 1 Corinthians.  In 1 Corinthians 11 prayer and prophesying (preaching) is mentioned before the Lord’s Supper.  This is clearly different from the supposed order of either Acts 2:42, or the night Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper.  In 1 Corinthians 14:15 prayer is mentioned  before singing.  In 1 Corinthians 14:26-ff psalm is first mentioned, followed by prophets speaking.  This cannot be harmonized in order with either Acts 2:42, or the order of night the Lord’s Supper was instituted.

The truth of the matter is that God has not specified an order of worship.  He has told us the acts of worship of which we’re to engage.  However, whether to sing should take place before or after prayer has been left to man.  Whether, preaching is to occur before or after the Lord’s Supper has been left to man.  Whether we close with a song or a prayer has been left to man.

Note: The order that we’re to partake of the elements of the Lord’s Supper (bread then fruit of the vine) has been specified, and it specified that a prayer of thanks should be made before partaking of each element (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26).

Together

It is God’s plan for the local church to assemble together upon the first day of the week: Acts 20:7, “Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread”; Hebrews 10:25, “Not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together” (emp. mine).  The word used in Hebrews 10:25 means according to Thayer, “a gathering together in one place… assembly.”  We’re to be together in song (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16), prayer (1 Corinthians 14:14-17), in preaching (Acts 20:7), and in the Lord’s supper (Acts 20:7).  There is no command, example, or implication to divide the assembly.  When we come together to partake of the Lord’s Supper, and to engage additionally in other acts of worship we’re to be together.

What about the children?  Gary Colley has written, “Some contend that children cannot learn from public preaching.  Let me exhort you, do not be fooled by this argument.  I still recall many lessons preached by my faithful father in public worship.  My dear mother made me sit still and pay attention.  If someone, in misplaced zeal, had taken me out of the assembly, I would have missed hearing and remembering great preachers, men like Foy E. Wallace Jr., C.R. Nichol, J.D. Tant, L.N. Moody, Horace W. Busby.  In my preaching I still use many of the doctrinal points and the illustrations of these men.  The influence of the solemn service and the impression of seeing my parents engage in an activity that was important to them created an impression on my mind that will never fade” (Should We Add Children’s Church? Firm Foundation, vol. 108, no. 5).  Children can learn in the assembly.  They may not grasp every point, however, they will learn the reverence and the respect which is to be present in the assembly.  They likely will learn something from the sermon.  They will see the faith of their parents exercised in the worship assembly.  Dave Miller has written, “Children can and should be disciplined to sit still and show respect to adult worship.  Such discipline is an essential ingredient in their preparation as responsible adults… The way for children to learn to function in an adult worship assembly is to be in the adult worship assembly.  Transferring them to a casual, ‘fun and games’ setting only compounds the problem by accommodating the very childishness that the regular adult assembly will, in time, correct and mature” (Piloting the Strait, p. 278-279).  Moreover, let us ask where is the authority for removing certain adults out of the assembly to provide ‘children’s church’ for the children?  This is the real issue.

I find no evidence that Israel separated the young (Deuteronomy 31:10-12; Joshua 8:34-35).  Jesus didn’t [Matthew 14:13-21 (cf. Mark 6:13-44; Luke 9:12-17; John 6:1-14); Matthew 15:32-39 (cf. Mark 8:1-9)].  Eutychus was in the assembly (Acts 20:7-12).  He is described as “lad” or a “boy.”  The original word signifies that he was young.  The generations before us reared their children in the assembly, even in this country.  Why can’t we?

A word to those without children to watch in the assembly.  Don’t grumble about the noise of children.  A congregation without such noise is likely on its way to a slow death!  Try helping those with several children.  Ask if one child may sit with you.  Let it be a congregational project to help love and encourage those with children, and to help the children learn and grow in the Lord.  Don’t be the grumpy grouch who complains but does nothing to help.  Many frustrated parents have stopped attending due to embarrassment, and grouchy reactions of the more ‘mature’ members.  Maybe it is not just the children who need to grow up!

Some congregations have grown to such size that a decision has been made to go to two assemblies. It is common for one eldership to continue to try to serve as elders over the two groups. I think such needs to be rethought. It seems to me that what one has is two congregations, which need two elderships.

Some  ‘Anglo churches’ have elderships which oversee a ‘Mexican church’ or ‘Samoan church’. These groups meet separately and in at lest some cases are divided by language. This is not one local church, but distinct churches sharing a common building. There is no authority for one eldership to oversee both. This seems like racial paternalism to me. Can they not oversee themselves? If support is needed, give it, but do not try to function as one eldership over multiple churches. This seem like a local church having to ‘report to Rome’.  It needs to be rethought.

Some churches are now setting up ‘satellite churches’ across the same city, or in another town. Where is the authority for this? If the group meets separately, then it is not the same congregation.

Bible class

Must all the saints be together every time teaching takes place?  The answer is clearly ‘no’ (Acts 5:42; 20:17-20, 28).  Thus if: (1) One can teach without all the members being called together; (2) Meet with a group within a local church without all the members being called together in one place; (3) Can teach on occasions other than the worship assembly; (4) Then, one has proven the component parts of the Bible class.

Let’s approach this another way.  Can an eldership send me (or another) to teach someone or a group?  The answer is ‘yes’ (Hebrews 13:17; Acts 15:22).

Have the elders been given the general command to “feed the flock”?  The answer is yes (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1-2).  Thus if: (1) They can send others to teach; (2) They have the duty of feeding the flock as a generic command.  (3) Then, they have been left to their discretion to ask teachers to teach certain groups classes.

In any given congregation there are different needs: (1) There are those in need of milk (1 Corinthians 3:2; Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 2:2).  This might include: (a) new converts; (b) children; (c) those who haven’t matured though they should have; (2) There are those in need of meat (Heb. 5:12).  This is the mature; those ready for deeper understanding.  (3) Specialty lessons may be needed for certain groups (Acts 20:17-ff).  This might include: (a) Bible class teachers workshops; (b) Men’s training classes; (c) Classes for elders of deacons, etc., etc.

There is absolutely no authority to divide the worship assembly in which we assemble to break bread and worship together in the five acts of worship.  However, a Bible class does not divide the assembly.  It is just an opportunity to get together and study the Bible in addition to what is done in the assembly.  Moreover, it provides an opportunity to more intimately study a subject, or a book and uniquely apply such to the group one is teaching.

Personal Practice of Fasting.

Our emphasis to this point has been upon public worship.  We have been studying the five acts of worship in which we’re to publicly engage in the assembly.

Most of the acts mentioned can be and should be done both publicly and privately.  (1) Prayer should be done privately (Mark 1:35; Matthew 6:6; Matthew 14:23; Luke 22:39-46; James 5:13a), as well as publicly (Acts 2:42; 1 Corinthians 14:14-17).  (2) Singing should be done privately (James 5:13b; Acts 16:25), as well as publicly (1 Corinthians 14:15-16).  (3) Giving should be done privately (Matthew 5:42; Luke 10:25-37; 1 John 3:17-18), as well in the assembly (1 Corinthians 16:1-2).  (4) Preaching should be done privately (Acts 20:20; 18:24-26; 5:42), and it is to be done publicly (Acts 20:7; 20:20; 1 Corinthians 14).

Only (5) The Lord’s Supper is to be done exclusively in an assembly, and exclusively upon the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).  It alone is unique in this regard.

However (6) fasting is exclusively a private act.  It is alone in this respect.

What does the Bible say about fasting?  In the Old Testament fasting occurred.  (1) In times of great personal sorrow and concern (2 Samuel 1:12; 12:16; Nehemiah 1:4; Esther 4:1-3; Psalm 35:13); (2) In times of genuine sorrow over sin (1 Samuel 7:3-6; Jonah 3:5; cf. Acts 9:9).  (3) Mandatory once per year on the day of atonement (Leviticus 16:29-31; Numbers 29:7; Isaiah 58:3; Jeremiah 36:6).

In the New Testament fasting occurs: (1) In times of great sorrow (Luke 5:35 cf. 22:62; 23:27); (2) In times of deep concern by non-Christians (Acts 27:34); (3) Before important events, or decisions (Acts 13:2-3; 14:23 cf. Exodus 34:28; Matthew 4:2); (4) Frequently in association with prayer (Acts 13:3; 14:23; 1 Corinthians 7:5 cf. Luke 2:37; Matthew 17:21; Mark 9:29).

Fasting is not: (1) a substitute for godliness (Isaiah 58:5-7); (2) to be used to draw attention to oneself (Matthew 6:16-18); (3) a reason to be self-righteous (Luke 18:9-14).

Wayne Jackson has written, “There does seem to be some benefits in voluntary fasting at certain times… (1) The scripture seems to suggest that God honors fasting when performed as a token of deep and sincere dedication.  (2) Physicians indicate that moderate fasting can be a benefit to health, having the effect of allowing our systems to occasionally cleanse themselves.  (3) The mind appears to be able to plumb greater depths of contemplation during periods of fasting.  (4) Fasting can help one hone a keener edge on self-discipline.  (5) Fasting can also have the added effect of re-enforcing our appreciation for those things which we’ve deprived during the periods of abstention today? (Christian Courier, July 25, 2000).  I will add (6) it helps keep before us the seriousness of the task before us (Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).

This completes our series on worship. Now go worship the King.

Posted in worship | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Acts of Worship – Participation and Praise in Song (Part 2)

   Christians should be singers (Acts 16:25; 1 Corinthians 14:15; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16; James 5:13).  This singing requires no unusual vocal talent, or special vocal training, but it does require a heart for God (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16).

Man discontent with congregational singing has sought to “improve worship.”  Innovations such as the use of mechanical instruments of music (e.g. piano, organ, guitar, even full-blown bands) and special musical performances (such as solos, duets, quartets, choirs, cantatas and the like) have been common place.

Some even try to defend these things with the Bible.  Let’s notice…

Mechanical Instruments

1.  It was authorized under the Old Testament.

This is true (Psalm 150:3-6; 2 Chronicles 29:25).  This we do not deny.

However, there is a vast difference between saying that a thing is authorized under the Old Testament, and saying that it is authorized under the New Testament for us today.  The Old Testament included such things as: a Levitical priesthood, animal sacrifices, the burning of incense, stonings, polygamy laws, various feast days and holy days.

Just because God authorized something once does not mean that such is always authorized.  Moses found this out the hard way (Exodus 17 cf. Numbers 20).

When one returns to the Old Testament for authority, is this not all but a tacit admission that New Testament authority

2.  It was authorized in the Psalms

True (Psalm 33:2; 43:4; 49:4; 57:8; 71:22; 81:2; 92:3; 98:5-6; 108:2; 147:7; 149:3; 150:3-6), but so is animal sacrifice (Psalm 66:15; 118:27-28).There are those who admit that man today is not under the Old Testament law.  However, they claim the Psalms are not a part of the law.  It is called law [John 10:34 (Psalm 82:6); John 15:25; 69:4;35:19); Romans 3:9-19 (Psalm 14:1-ff; 5:9; 140:3; 10:7; 36:1)].  Moreover, if it is still authority for us today, what about animal sacrifice (Psalm 66:15; 118:27-28) and other such things?

3.  It will be in heaven.

This argument is partially based on Revelation 5:8.  Let me get this straight – the incense represents the prayers of the saints, but the harps represent harps?  The book of Revelation is a book of symbols (Rev. 1:1).  Much of the book is built around temple imagery: incense, censer, a sacrificed lamb.

This argument is also based on Revelation 14:2.  The ASV reads, “And I heard a voice of many waters, and as the voice of great thunder: and the voice I heard was as the voice of harpers harping” (emp. mine).  The NIV reads, “The sound I heard was like that of harpist playing their harps (emp. mine).  This is a simile.

Another consideration: Whatever we may be doing in heaven has no relevance on earth (Matthew 22:30).

4.  It’s a part of the parable of ‘The Prodigal Son’ (Luke 15:25).

It is claimed that the Father = God, the Father’s house = the church, and mechanical instrumental music = mechanical instrumental music?  If everything else represents something else, is it not possible that instrumental music simply represents rejoicing (Luke 15:5-6, 9-10)?

Moreover, this is not a worship setting.  There is not worshipping of the Father mentioned.

5.  It is my talent.

Okay.  Mary cuts hair.  Joe makes ice sculptures.  Mike can make a car engine ‘sing’.  Sue bakes cakes.  Ted is a great bowler.  Karen is skilled in animal training and can make them do amazing things.

Should we be doing all of these things in the assembly?  Or, should we confine worship to what the New Testament teaches?

6.  It’s an expedient aid.

Some have claimed that mechanical instruments of music serve as an expedient aid to singing.  Let’s see if this is true.

Let’s set forth a distinction between a specific command and a generic command.  An example of a specific command: God instructed Noah to build an ark out of ‘gopher wood’ (Genesis 6).  If God had simply told him to build an ark, then Noah would have been left to his own wisdom as to the type of wood to use.  He would have had many options.  However, God specified the kind of wood to be used.  A specific command specifies how things are to be done.  An example of a generic command: God wants us to ‘lay by… in store’ (1 Corinthians 16:1-2).  Into what container we’re to ‘lay by’ we’re not told.  We therefore are left to various options.  We could use a silver tray, a cowboy hat, a shoe box, a bank bag, or numerous other things.  Another example is God wants us to assemble (Hebrews 10:25).  The time is not specified.  Though the day is (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2).  Man is left to human wisdom and the guidance of the eldership to specify what God has not.  A generic command is a command that is given but how to accomplish it has not been specified. God could have generically command us to make music, but He didn`t. He specified the kind of music we are to make.

Let’s also set forth a distinction between obligatory matters and optional matters.  Obligatory matters: Are matters which bear directly on one’s salvation and fellowship with God.  God has, for instance, instructed man to do something.  Man is to obey (Matthew 7:21).  Optional matters: Are matters which flow directly from obligatory matters.  Such choices arise when God has authorized and even commanded a thing to be done, but has not specified such things as where, when, or how it is to be done.

Let’s next consider the word ‘expedient’.  An expedient:  A way to expedite a thing God wants done.  It involves human wisdom as to what is the best, and most efficient and beneficial way to accomplish the obligation – from the options.  Understand that for something to serve as an expedient it must first be authorized (1 Corinthians 6:12; 10:23).

Consider the following charts:

Command (obligatory) Expedient (option) Addition (unauthorized)
ark of gopherwood hammer, saw, workshop oak, cedar, pine
Church is to assemble house, school, riverside
Lord’s Supper table, container, how passed milk, meat, vegetables
Give container   (hat, basket, bag)
Sing song selection, song books, song leader mechanical instruments of music
God’s Command Aid or Addition ? Man’s Response Conclusion
Baptize Baptistery Baptize Aid
Meet Church building Meet Aid
Sing Songbooks Sing Aid

Keep in mind that under the Old Testament mechanical instruments of music wasn’t just an expedient.  It was a command (2 Chronicles 29:25).

7.  It’s just as authorized as church buildings and electrical lights.

This would fall under point six above.  Church buildings and lights are expedient in carrying out the general command to assemble.  Mechanical instruments of music is an addition.

8.  The word rendered ‘make melody’ (Ephesians 5:19) means to pluck, to strike, to play upon an instrument.

This was dealt with in Acts of Worship – Participation and Praise in Song (part 1).  The instrument which we are instructed to play is the heart.

Moreover, if Ephesians 5:19 speaks of mechanical instruments of music, then all not just one is required to play due to the reflexive language used in this passage.

9.  It’s mentioned, and everything which is mentioned in the Bible is either mentioned to be upheld, condemned, or is held in neutrality.

While it is true that the use of mechanical instruments of music is mentioned in the New Testament (Luke 7:32; Luke 15:25, etc.), and while it is true that the use of mechanical instruments of music is not condemned in those passages, it does not follow that it is approved of, or neutral in worship.  This is the case because it is not mentioned even one time in connection with New Testament worship.  The passages mentioned involve daily life.

10.  I like it.

This is not the point.  The point is how did God tell us to worship.  Our worship is to be according to His revealed truth (John 4:24; cf. 17:17).

If God has given unto us all that we need to please Him (John 16:13; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:3), who are we really adding it for, Him or us?

Yes, ‘I like it’  may be the real issue with many.  However, worship is about Him.

Special Music

1.  Solos are authorized by 1 Corinthians 14:26.

There are a couple of things to keep in mind here: (1) The term “everyone” is not usually used favorably in this book (1 Corinthians 1:12; 11:21; 14:26).  This is a rebuke, not an approval of action.  This seems a rather strange place to seek authority.  What was happening is that many in the congregation wanted to lead the assembly.  They wanted the attention on themselves (1 Corinthians 14:4).  Multiple people wanted to proclaim a doctrine or a revelation.  Multiple people wanted to use their gift of tongue even if no one understood them, and they  even were prone to do so at the same time.  Still others were running over one another to used their gift of interpretation on occasion that they could interpret.  Still others were doing likewise with a psalm.  (2) There’s more than one possible meaning to “everyone of you hath a psalm.”  (a) It could mean everyone had a psalm they wished to read.  Remember psalms could be read or quoted.  (Acts 13:33; 1:20, etc.)  (b) It could mean that everyone wanted to lead a psalm.  That is multiple people wanted to lead singing, possibly even jumping up to do so at the same time without any decency or order.  (c) It could be that each had written or received by inspiration a psalm and each wanted to share such with the church without proper regard to decency and order.  (d) It is possible that they were jumping up and singing solos.  If this is the explanation there still would be nothing to warrant the conclusion that such is approved of, this is a rebuke!  No one can even prove that this refers to solos!

2.  We didn’t use mechanical instruments of music.

Some have argued that hand clapping in song and mimicking the sound of mechanical instruments of music with the human voice is okay, because we didn’t use the instrument.  This shows a lack of understanding of Bible authority.  The reason why the use of mechanical instruments of music is wrong is the same reason these things are wrong.

Moreover, the type of vocal sounds to be made was covered in our previous article.  Our voices are to be used in song to convey words which ’teach’ and ’admonish’ (Colossians 3:16).  No other sound has been authorized in our singing.

3.  In versus Out of the Assembly

Some have attempted to justify hand-clapping and the use of mechanical instruments of music with worship songs at youth gatherings and the like by saying, “It is not the assembly.”

Are the rules different in and out of the assembly?  I know of a few differences.  (1) Prayer in the assembly is mindful of others.  It is to be audible and understandable (1 Corinthians 14:14-17).  A prayer outside the assembly is between oneself and God (Matt. 6:6).  It may not even be audible (1 Samuel 1:9-13; Romans 10:1).  (2) A woman is not to teach over a man in the assembly (1 Timothy 2:8-12).  They are to be silent when it comes to publicly teaching over men (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).  However, a woman may privately instruct a man (Acts 18:24-26).

In general, things stay the same in or out of the assembly when it comes to worship.  Prayer, for instance, is still addressed to God the Father in the name of Jesus outside the assembly.  What differences exist, I only know to exist due to indication of such in the scriptures.  Where is indication that we have a difference set of rules outside the assembly when it comes to approaching Him in song?

Posted in Bible authority, Singing, worship | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment