Jeremy Hoover

This article continues my look at biblical leadership. The first article in this series, Biblical Leadership is Exclusive, is found here.

One common reason men give for not serving as elders in a congregation is their inability to teach.

In 1 Timothy 3:2, in a list pertaining to elders, Paul tells Timothy than an elder "is to be...able to teach." This verse has commonly been used to disqualify men from serving as elders who are deemed to be not capable of teaching. It has also been used to disqualify men who are newer to the faith--they are not yet ready to be teachers because they don't yet know enough. Sadly, some men disqualify themselves from serving as an elder by viewing themselves as unnable to teach.

But what does this passage mean? Does it require elders to teach?

To answer the second question, we need only look later in 1 Timothy. In a set of instructions about the congregation's obligations to elders, Paul says, "The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching" (5:17, TNIV). This passage describes two possible functions for elders, one primary, the other secondary. The primary task of elders is to direct the affairs of the church well. The secondary task is preaching and teaching.

Paul makes this clear by the word "especially." This clearly implies that not all elders preached and taught. There is a clear distinction in scripture. Ephesians 4:11-12 discuss the evangelists, the pastors, and the teachers; all different functions. Timothy and Titus were evangelists. In the church it's mainly (though not always) the evangelist who preaches and teaches corporately. This task does not fall to all elders. We go beyond scripture when we make it a requirement for all elders to preach and teach.

Paul's letter to Titus sheds further light on this perspective. In the list of "qualifications" for elders, Paul does not say directly that elders must be able to teach. Indirectly, one can infer from Titus 1:9 ("He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine...."; TNIV) that teaching is required, but that is an inference only. The clearer sense of that verse is that elders need to know the core aspects of the faith in order to communicate it to and encourage others.

So what "teaching" is Paul referring to in 1 Tim. 3:2? Obviously, on one hand, he is referring to the corporate preaching and teaching. This is made clear by 1 Tim. 5:17, though it is not a requirement for all elders. On the other hand, elders, in directing the affairs of the church, will be engaged in pastoral care. They will need a knowledge of the faith, through their personal walk with Jesus, and they will need to be able to share that perspective with others, most often in a one-on-one or small group setting.

Two points come to mind:

First, Why are we so quick to want to disqualify men from serving as elders?

Second, if being able to teach publicly and corporately is not a requirement for being an elder (as 1 Tim. 5:17 makes clear), then perhaps we can lighten up a little with our view of elders' "qualifications." Perhaps Paul's list is a general outline of a godly man and not a specific checklist?

What do you think? What questions do you have? Do you agree or disagree with my interpretation?

In this 10 minute audio post, I summarize our discussion of 1 Timothy 2:8-15. This often-contentious passage details some of Paul's instructions about both worship and teaching leadership and authority in the church.

Biblical leadership is exclusive.

In the Pastoral Letters, Paul lists several character traits that must be present in the life of someone who is a candidate to become an elder or deacon. He also mentions some things that would disqualify someone from becoming an elder or deacon.

For example, Paul states that an elder must be “above reproach” and “gentle” and must “have a good reputation with outsiders” (1 Tim. 3:2-7). Presumably, a candidate for eldership who is a laughingstock in the community or is a violent man would not be considered further.

However, Paul also limits the eldership to those with spiritual experience. He says a candidate “must not be a recent convert” (1 Tim. 3:6). Deacons “must first be tested” (1 Tim. 3:10). If they pass the test, then they may serve. Elders are to be family men (1 Tim. 3:4-5; Titus 1:6), which cautions against younger men, many of whom lack the wisdom that comes from experience guiding a family unit.

In a biblically functioning church, elders and deacons lead the church into deeper spiritual growth even as they continue to grow spiritually themselves. But not everyone is included. The eldership and deaconship are exclusive—limited to those men who distinguish themselves in a godly manner in several ways.

Other passages attest the exclusivity of biblical church leadership:

• In Acts 1:23-26, the apostles needed to select another man to join the apostleship. There were at least two men who met the qualifications, but only two were nominated. Of the two who were nominated, only one was selected—and this after prayer and spiritual discernment.
• In Acts 6:1-6, the apostles learned about a problem where food was not being distributed throughout the community in a godly way. Their solution was to delegate this task to godly men. Rather than simply gathering all the men together and asking them to handle it, they asked the congregation to choose only seven men who were full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom. These men would handle the food distribution.
• In Galatians 2:1-10 (esp. 2, 6), when Paul went to Jerusalem to share his gospel with the believers there, he did not meet with all the men but with “those who were held in high esteem.” Why? Didn't this leave some out? Yes, it leaves some out, but it reinforces the principle that biblical church leadership is not inclusive of everyone but exclusive—according to God's word.

Biblical church leadership is not inclusive of everyone; it is exclusive. It is not for everyone. There is a high standard set for those who would lead God's people. It's not for us to worry about how people might feel or to impose a democratic voting situation on top of the church, such that eligible folks have the “right” to vote in a meeting.

There are no “rights” in the church. We give up our rights for other people. Godly leaders know this and exemplify it.

What objections do you have to this? What other scriptures would you use in this discussion?

Here are some questions for you to work and pray through as we finish up 1 Timothy 2 and move into chapter 3.

1 Timothy 1 Study Questions

1 Timothy 2 Study Questions

Church Leadership: Elders

1. Why does Paul consider the saying in 3:1 about desiring the overseership/ eldership "trustworthy"?
2. Look at 1 Timothy 1:15; 4:9; 2 Timothy 2:11; and Titus 3:8. How does the use of this phrase in those passages influence your understanding of this verse?
3. Why is being an overseer (or elder) a "noble task" (3:1)?
4. Is someone arrogant or prideful to "aspire" to be an overseer? Why or why not?
5. Are all the traits listed in 3:2-7 required? Are they applications of what it means to "be above reproach" (3:2)?
6. Must a candidate for eldership excel in every area? Is there room for an elder to continue to grow spiritually or must he have topped out already?
7. Read this passage in several translations. Do they all read "husband of one wife" (3:2)? What does that phrase mean?
8. Must an elder have multiple children (3:4)? Must the children believe?
9. How can we gauge these traits in a candidate (3:7, for example)?

Church Leadership: Deacons

1. What does "in the same way" mean (3:8)?
2. Why does it mention "testing" for deacons (3:10) but not for elders?
3. Read several translations of 3:11. Do they all read "their wives"? What other options exist?
   
4. Why does the phrase "in the same way" repeat in 3:8 and 3:11?
5. If we interpret 3:11 to refer to deacons' wives, why are character traits listed for deacons' wives but not for elders' wives?
6. What is the result of good service (3:13)?

We're studying 1 Timothy in our Sunday morning bible study. This is a great study, and we've come to a difficult passage--1 Tim. 2:8-15. This passage raises a number of questions:

1. Are we to take it literally (as we typically do for 2:9-15 about women)? If so, why do we not hold it as a requirement for men to pray and lift up their hands?

2. What are we to make of Paul inserting himself into this passage through first-person language? Are these instructions merely his opinion?

3. What does Paul mean by "assuming authority" (2:12)? How far should this extend?

4. Why does Paul talk about Adam and Eve?

For the purpose of this note, I'm going to completely bracket out a discussion of verse 15, as well as any argument about Paul's restrictions on women.

To answer the first question: If we take one set of instructions literally (either to the men or to the women), we must also take the second set of instructions literally. It is not enough to say the instructions for men to pray with hands lifted is cultural but the instructions about how women are to dress or the restrictions on women are timeless (the apparent theological reference to Adam and Eve notwithstanding).

Secondly, we sometimes overlook how often Paul refers to himself in the Pastoral Letters (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus). Because this can be an emotionally charged passage, we look for ways to "soften the blow." Some even look for ways to evade these instructions, either by throwing out an uncritical "cultural" argument or by pointing to Paul's first-person language as though these instructions are merely Paul's opinion that can be taken or left as one desires.

Paul uses personal language often in these letters. For example, Paul refers to the way God used him to demonstrate God's great mercy (1:12-17). Are we to infer that this is just a good idea or one way of looking at things merely because Paul uses himself as an example to make a larger point about Christ Jesus' patience towards those who would believe in him (1:16)? On the contrary, Paul's theological argument is valid; his experience extends his argument and is secondary to it.

Further, Paul considers himself an apostle (1:1). In earlier New Testament letters Paul has shown no fear in arguing from his apostleship. He derives authority from his apostleship and uses it from time to time (for example, 2 Corinthians 10-12). It is fair to say that when Paul uses first-person language in this passage, he is not passing on his opinion, but his apostolic teaching about the issue at hand.

Thirdly, Paul deals with Adam and Eve (2:13-14). For what purpose? Are they offered merely as an illustrative example, or as the theological basis for Paul's argument? In my view, Paul uses them merely as an example to illustrate his point. This is in part because of verse 15, which Paul includes as a way of indicating that his example in verses 13-14 breaks down.

Finally, what does Paul mean when he says "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man"? The italicized phrase is difficult to interpret. It is a verb that is relatively rare in Greek and, in fact, only appears in the New Testament in this one place. That makes it even more difficult to interpret because there are no other uses in the NT to compare it to.

The rest of the sentence, as well as verse 11, is pretty clear. Taken simply and literally, Paul teaches that women are to be learners, not teachers, in the church. Grammatically, the verb for "to assume authority" is an infinitive used in a complementary way. Daniel Wallace says, "The infinitive is very frequently used with "helper" verbs to complete their thought" (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics [Zondervan, 1996], p. 599).

As an example, Wallace cites Matthew 6:4--"You cannot serve God and mammon." Notice how the verb, "serve," is complemented by "God" and "mammon."

Thus, in 1 Tim. 2:12, "to teach" and "to assume authority" complement the (negative) verb, "I do not permit." They both relate what Paul doesn't permit, and because they are complementary, they relate to the same thing. Specifically, in this passage, according to Paul, a woman teaching a man is the same as a woman assuming authority over a man, that is, to set herself above him.

However, if we understand that the phrase "to assume authority" refers to taking, seizing, or usurping authority from men, what if the authority to teach is granted to a woman from the leading men? Does that alleviate her from "assuming authority"? Which is the real issue in this passage--promoting male leadership in teaching, or teaching proper roles that respect cultural distinctions in society? [Consider that Paul is also concerned that the church not run afoul of the authorities (2:1-7) and the latter takes on more relevance.]

If, grammatically and contextually, "assuming authority" is limited to the teaching act (and even more specifically, to the act of women teaching men the bible in the church), then we must recognize its limitations. How do we extend this to cover the whole of the worship service? How do we apply this over other passages that clearly demonstrate the communal nature of worship, and the involvement of women in such (1 Cor. 11:2-16)?

Obviously, there is a lot more that could be fleshed out here. In this note I wanted to detail what Paul was actually saying in this passage as opposed to what we often think he was saying. Did I succeed? What do you think?

On Sunday we'll continue our bible study in 1 Timothy. As we consider chapter 2, please read 1 Timothy and think through these questions.

Christians, Prayer, and the Government (2:1-7)

1. What, if any, differences exist between the types of prayer listed in 2:1?
2. Who are we to pray for (2:1-2)?
3. What is the purpose behind praying for governmental leaders (2:2)? What types of prayer might this require? Is this a different perspective than you've heard before?
4. What two reasons are listed for why it is good to pray for governmental leaders (2:3-4)?
   
5. What is the evangelistic function of prayer for governmental leaders (2:3-4)?
6. How does Jesus function in reality like the governmental leaders ceremonially do (2:5-6)?
7. Why is Jesus a better mediator than governmental leaders (2:6)?

How Christians are to Worship (2:8-15)

1. What are men asked to do (2:8)? Should this be the posture of prayer today for men? Why or why not?
2. If men don't need to lift up their hands in prayer because that was cultural, does the "cultural argument" apply to the instructions to women in 2:9-15? Why or why not?
3. How are women to "dress" (2:9-10)?
4. How are women to learn (2:11)?
5. What is the reason given for why women need to learn in quietness and submission (2:12)? Is this Paul's reason or a biblical reason (see 2:13-15). How do you determine this?
6. What does "assuming authority" over a man (2:12) mean? How do we go too far or not far enough with this?

This is an audio recap (approx. 6 minutes long) of our adult bible study from Sunday, January 10, 2010. The text we studied was 1 Timothy 1:1-7.

Studying 1 Timothy in our adult bible study on Sunday mornings will bring out many points for discussion, among them church leadership and women's role. I've been reading a commentary on 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus by N.T. Wright (NTW) as I've been studying 1 Timothy.

This morning, I anxiously read NTW's commentary on 1 Timothy 2:8-15. I really struggle with this passage because of how limiting it seems towards women.

NTW, however, pitches it in the context of the removal of gender stereotypes. He points to the existence of the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus (which is also where Timothy ministered). Artemis was a female deity, and she was ministered to in her temple by an all-women ensemble. Every priest of Artemis was female; all leadership in this religion was female.

This is the context NTW speculates is behind Paul's instructions to Timothy in this passage (1 Tim. 2:8-15). He says 2:8-10 is about the removal of gender stereotypes--men are to become men of prayer instead of the typical angry, argumentative husband. Women are not to adorn themselves like the flashy priestesses of Artemis, calling attention to themselves for how they look, but are to focus on good deeds, the building up of the community.

Then we come to 2:11-15, the passage used by many insincerely to hold women down, but also used sincerely as good Christians struggle with its interpretation.

NTW points out, correctly, that the bible typically holds women up in good ways: they were the first witnesses to Jesus' resurrection (therefore the first apostles?); women are possibly (likely?) mentioned in Romans 16 as apostles and deacons; women are expected to pray and prophesy in the worship assembly (1 Cor. 11).

Therefore, according to NTW, this passage should be seen as a corrective to the perspective that many women in Ephesus would have had--women were not to muscle their way into leadership and teaching roles in the church, but neither were they to be held down, separated from the men, and unable to learn.

Rather, women "must be allowed to study undisturbed, in full submission to God" (2:11; NTW's translation). He points out, correctly, I think, that even though the direct object of "full submission" is not mentioned in the text, it should be understood as God. That is, women need to be in full submission to God as they learn.

We've typically understood that, at least in the Church of Christ, to refer to women's submission to men. NTW's perspective makes more sense to me. Part of the submitting to God is to "learn" in "quietness," without assuming leadership and teaching roles.

Where I'm not so sure about NTW's perspective is in where he goes next. As he continues to translate this passage, he writes, "I'm not saying that women should teach men, or try to dictate to them; rather, that they should be left undisturbed" (2:12). His argument for this translation is that Paul did not intend to be understood the way we have understood him, but that Paul means women shouldn't be rushed into teaching and leadership roles; they should be allowed to learn at their own pace and in their own way.

Now, I completely agree with this last idea. Too often, men, especially those in "leadership," think they know best and can dictate to women how they are to learn. This is seen most often when men in leadership try to dictate or control how and when a women's class can meet, what the topic of the class can be, or who may teach such a class. The worst of this is seen when men expect a women's class to be taught by another man!

However, I really struggle with the first part of his argument. As much as I'd like to follow this interpretation, I just don't see it. I looked at several translations, even going back and doing a rough translation from Greek of my own. And I don't see it. At best, I see Paul correcting the abuses of the Artemis-religion and saying, "The church isn't to be like that."

Leaving aside the questions of 2:13-15, and whether this is Paul's opinion only (since he says "I do not permit," not "God does not permit"), a straightforward reading implies that the public teaching role in the church is to be led by men. But women should not be prevented in any way from learning. If they are, we have a problem.

As much as I'd like to go along with NTW on this point, textually, I can't. Your thoughts?

In this audio introduction to 1 Timothy, I lay out the uniqueness of this letter from Paul, the major themes of this letter, and the problems Paul desires to correct with the power of the gospel.

After listening to the introduction, think about and meditate on the study questions for chapter 1. Please leave some input, either about the introduction or your answers to the study questions.

1. What is the goal of Paul's command (1:3, 5)? How do the sub-elements listed in 1:5 relate to each other and to Paul's goal? How do you relate to these?

2. What is the purpose of the law (1:8-11)? Who is the law for?

3. How is a Christian to live (1:10-11)? What is the general concept of "sound doctrine" (1:11)?

4. What was the purpose for God showing mercy to Paul (1:12-17)?

5. How will Timothy be able to "fight the battle well" (1:18-20)? How do these two elements relate to each other?

Paul urges Timothy to teach the church to watch their lives and doctrine closely, staying pure.