Jeremy Hoover

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.

The church is whole when is of one heart. We break God's heart--and the church's heart--when we practice deception within the church. Are you breaking the church's heart or working to mend it?

Please review these study notes on possession from Acts 4:32-5:11, Sunday's sermon outline, and the slides.

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)?

As I've been studying biblical church leadership over the past year, I keep coming back to the New Testament books of 1 Timothy and Titus and these passages: 1 Corinthians 12-14; Romans 12:3-8; and Ephesians 4:7-16. It's rare for a book on church leadership to give proper attention to these passages, so I find myself reading and thinking about these texts (and commentaries on them).

Recently, I found a book called The Equipping Ministry of the Pastor (EMP), by Jerry File. EMP is a short book, only 93 pages long. But it's well-written, and it covers the pastor's work by specific study of the problems in the Corinthian church (mainly due to the arguments over spiritual gifts in chapters 12-14), the work of the pastor detailed by Paul in 1 Timothy, and the five-fold ministry of leadership presented in Ephesians 4.

Dr. File states that the goal of church leadership, and the ultimate purpose of the pastor (referred throughout as the teaching-shepherd, via Ephesians 4:12), is to equip the saints for perfection. The pastor does this mainly through teaching the word to the congregation. (It's the congregation's responsibility to learn and to allow the pastor time for study and teaching.) Teaching the congregation is done both corporately and privately, either in small groups or in individual meetings.

File also places emphasis on the role of the evangelist. He points out that, biblically, evangelists would proclaim the gospel, call the converted together to form a church, and appoint elders before moving on to a different area. These appointed elders could become the teaching-shepherds of the congregation, or the congregation could employ a teaching-shepherd from outside the congregation.

As File is presumably Baptist, based on the seminaries he attended, it's no surprise that he does not cover the role of the apostle and prophet in the contemporary church. In fact, he states that these roles were foundational (Eph. 2:20) and have since passed away since the foundation has been laid. He locates this foundation in the completion and formation of the New Testament. While I see this logic, I also have some reservations about it and see no problem acknowledging that God may gift, through his Spirit, different individuals to function apostolically or prophetically. The difference for me is that these are not given titles of "apostle" or "prophet." Instead, they function this way because of their gifts.

Much attention is paid to the equipping of the church. The pastor is to teach the word because it's through the word that the church becomes equipped for ministry, and it's through equipping that the church is perfected. This incorporates insights from 1 Corinthians 12-14, as File points out that the church is not to expect the pastor to do all the ministry. In fact, the church, through their various gifts, is expected to minister to each other. They learn about this, and become equipped for it, through the teaching ministry of the teaching-shepherd/pastor.

This book is a little light in places and I would have liked more depth. Overall, it presents a nice study, almost in outline form, of the work of the pastor and the expectations of the church. For me, the attention paid to biblical texts lets me offer a strong recommendation for this book. If you are looking for a book that details biblical leadership, you will be happy with this one.

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?