Titus lesson 3 continued

So we're in Titus, and I thought it might be good. We're going to start today in verse seven, but let's go ahead and read verses five through nine, and I'll go ahead and take that responsibility. Okay, Bible's up in the Titus 1 guide. Okay, for this reason I left you in Crete that you should set in order the things that are lacking and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you. As a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of dissipation or subordination. For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled. holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and convict those who contradict."

Now that's New King James. Other versions are quite a bit different. But, you know, kind of summarizing, JD ended the session last week by saying, is not these qualifications for the elder the same? I'm going to say they are for all believers. So what's your thought about that before we get going in verse 7 here today in more detail? Is this not what we're all called to?

Okay, someone turned again to 1 Corinthians 1.8. And read it whoever gets it first.

Yeah, without reproach, blameless, the same kind of word is used that's used in 1 Corinthians 1.8. Donna, you got it? We shall also... We shall also confirm you unto the end that you may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Okay, so what's the difference here between what's written by Paul in 1 Corinthians 1.8 and what's written here about the elder or bishop, or, I mean, bishop's more of an overseer, the elder implies maturity and age. What's the difference in interpretation? I think it's just time. Okay, time. And what else, Mike? What else besides time?

I mean, that's the day of glory is when we're glorified, right? I mean, the day of the Lord is our glorification. And there we're looked at as blameless. Remember, there's no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, right? That's true of all of us.

But what's different about the same Greek word used here versus the qualifications for an elder? Well, Macaulay points this out. It's relative. And if it's relative, how does one judge these characteristics? Who's going to judge these? Now, in the times of Paul's epistle to Titus, Titus has been appointed to do this, but we talked about this last week. In mainline Bible-based churches, we don't have bishops who oversee all this kind of stuff, all this, if you will, incredible governmental administrative oversight that Paul gave to Titus and to Timothy.

So, it's relative. So, if it's relative, who makes those decisions? So, Courtney, I'm thinking about you. You said when there's questions here, but we always add additional ones. So, that's what I'm adding here today before we continue in the verses, verse by verse. Say the question again. The question is who judges these qualifications on a relative basis to determine whether Courtney or Bob or whomever else is qualified to be an elder.

I think the existing elders in church would be the ones who would do the qualifications within the body, but then ultimately the body accepts the elder. Well, that's been true with the history of this church. Yeah, well, in Titus's time, he was given charge by Paul to go out and choose these and set up the church. But once it's set up, then I think it's through the elders themselves. And again, the elders, it's a calling.

It's not that you seek really that position. It's almost you're led by the Lord to be in that position, and then the body recognizes that. But I think ultimately it's the elders, the existing body that determines this. So it's two different time frames. Titus' time and Crete versus what we have today and what is usually not. We have no Titus today. Yeah. Right. I guess that's the point. I guess we're going to end this discussion right here because this could go on for quite a while. But in a new church that's being formed, how are the elders chosen? Do we have scripture guidance as to how that should occur? Cheryl, what are your thoughts? The Lord himself? The Lord himself. Okay. I mean if nobody else is...

Who would be qualified in the church if they were just starting? Yeah, Mike. But a new church being formed with one that where some guys got together and said we ought to start a church and you can be... we think that you should be one of the teachers and you should be this and you should be that because they have a history. Okay.

What's interesting about this is that these churches that are being started and created have very little track record in terms of those that are attending. How do you decide? I think what Paul is doing is laying out qualifications. the kind of man you're looking for that maybe the Lord has raised him up. But it's interesting today, I think we've supplanted most of these qualifications with the seminary degrees. Okay, that's interesting. Yes. Is that right? Or is that wrong? These apply.

Yeah, I mean here are the qualifications, we'll review them in detail. And I think a lot of times we, as a body of believers, sometimes put too much emphasis on the initials after a guy's name. Yeah. These qualifications supersede anything else. I think so. If you come up with something else, you're adding to it. So that's why I think, you know, this is the qualification. This is what you're supposed to meet, you know, these qualifications.

But keep in mind, again, they're being judged on a relative basis. This positional truth of us being, you know, without condemnation as we approach glorification. I mean, that's the same Greek term is used here, but it has to be on a relative basis. I don't think any of these attributes are if you will, negative aspects of this position really can't be very evident in someone who's appointed to this position.

We can't go into everybody's heart and their thoughts and their mind, but the idea is this life that a believer is leading is ultimately needing to be viewed in these I think it goes somewhat back to what Mike was saying, too, is time. You know, lay your hands on no one quickly or whatever in the qualification of an elder. It's got to be a demonstrated life that comes close to these qualifications as much as possible.

Okay. All right. I think we're on the same page. Let's go now to verse six, and we're talking about the first aspect. Ever since, a man is blameless. Blameless is what we're talking about here. We talked about the second one last week too. The husband of one wife is a one-wife man and that doesn't relate to a single man could be an elder. It could be someone who's divorced but currently has one wife. That's a one-wife husband, if you will. that we've, I think, answered that. Any additional thoughts about that before we go ahead? Now this gets a little bit more fun. I mean, not that that's not fun. Okay, so the third attribute is having faithful children.

And they're described further as not accused of dissipation or insubordination. What are other translations there for that verse? Having faithful children or Is that what most other versions agree to? It says not accused of riot or unruly. Yeah, that's why I've accused of riot. Having children who believe not accused of dissipation or rebellion. Okay, so those are kind of the things we're talking about here. Why do you, why do, let me pause. Do these children have to be believers? It says faithful. Does anybody else have, in their version, that they need to be saved? You know, it said, in the New American, having children who believe. What does that mean? Well, that's what we're going to discuss. That's the topic for us. I was going to look up what that word is.

It says faithful, right, Brian. And Macaulay says they're believers. And I think of a certain age, yes. But the faithful to some extent describe the negatives that follow them, not accused of rioting or insubordination. The idea there is that they need to be obedient and submissive. What are your thoughts? I mean, what if an elder, an appointed elder has children that are four and two? I mean, Is that any item that comes up in the discussion of who should serve as an elder? The First Timothy verse says that he must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control of all dignity.

That states it more clearly, doesn't it? I think that's quite good. In Ephesians 5, the only admonition for children is that they obey their parents. That's it. All right, we all know what a challenge that is at every stage of growth and development, don't we?

I do think you see, though, how do I say this? I think you do see in a man and a woman, a man who's qualified to be an elder before he's an elder, one of the things you look at is his family and how that family, the cohesion and the structure and the viewpoint and attitude of the children tell you a lot. So why is that important, Mike? Why do you think that's important? Several reasons. One, it shows that they're leaders. The parents are leaders. Two, that they have educated their kids. Three, they weren't afraid to discipline them. And they loved them. Okay.

And how does that relate to the position of an elder? Well, it's a shepherd to his sheep. OK. Remember, one of the interpretations of this Greek term for overseer is shepherd. Sure. OK. So there's a sense of responsibility by the shepherd. Okay, so a guy with unruly children, or have a history of that in their household, we're now trusting him to oversee the body of believers, right? So I think that's the extension of looking at the family in terms of how that's being operated. Yeah, I agree. Okay. Now, you could look at this in a somewhat different way. I mean, I came out of a very legal church. And the reason we went there was to get our kids in that school system.

But all that aside, You could have kids really performing under law extremely well, but down deep, they're as rebellious as can be. You're judging all these attributes of an elder on relative basis. You can't get into every last detail of how that home is operating. The second one is that they must not be guilty of dissipation of which is a word meaning incorrigible or really accused of rioting. Think about what's the practical interpretation of that? What's this kind of child then?

Let's turn to 1 Peter 4 that maybe gives us a little bit more of a hint of what this looks like. And again, whoever gets that, go ahead and read. They think it's strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation and they heap abuse on you. Yeah. So that's kind of the example of what this kind of behavior might look like.

And the third is they may not be rebellious, and I think the first Peter 4 verse probably fits with that too. And Titus, if you jump down to verse 10, for there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision. So remember, the audience is Jewish here. These are Jewish believers.

So the idea there is it goes beyond simply being incorrigible or, you know, ultimately tending to riot, but also this relates, I think, to disobedient, you know, not being submissive to the parents' rule. Mike? You know, in 2 Timothy 3, in Paul describing what people are going to be like very close to the end of the age, he says, For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, etc., etc., etc. That description would fit like a teenage son or daughter who is out of control.

An interesting question there follows that comment is that Does the Lord say anything in scripture about raising adolescents or teenagers? We've all been through it, those who are parents. What was different then perhaps than it is today and is this whole teenage experience one in which really is, may need to be described in any more detail? I'm at an elder's qualifications now, I don't want to get too far astray, but in terms of judging a potential elder's ability to oversee his home with children. Well, I don't think the Lord gives us specific instructions about raising teenagers, does he? So why is that such a difficult task and everybody say, oh, you know, she's 13 now or he's 15.

Things change, there's no question about that. Sure. I think there's some guidance on kids, you know, disciplining them and different things. It isn't just you're totally out to lunch and have no guidance. I mean, I think scripture says about, you know, fathers don't make or aggravate your kids or whatever. And there are certain guidelines for raising kids, you know, and don't spare the rod if you're, you know, there's a whole bunch of different criteria. So it's not just where it's free for all and we don't know what to do.

And then it, then it falls back on for the qualification of the elder that you do that well. So you're, you're managing your household. So JD, thinking a little bit about you still kind of having a lot of parenting left to do, you know, having raised five kids, I think a principle that Sharon and I learned for a while and then of course with Margaret more recently is that, you know, there's a transition from law to grace and for each child, Courtney can reflect on this other who have parented multiple children. There's a different time for each kid when that law to grace transition occurs and that relates to a lot of factors, environmental genetics, friends, school systems and all that kind of thing. That's the transition of being a good parent I think you need to understand.

I think that's particularly true during adolescence. Not that we did it well, perfectly, I mean no question. We had so many children because we had so many lessons to learn. That was what Sharon and I would say. But anyway, I think this whole issue of the question to the class is, can a candidate have kids that are out of control? And the answer is no. Right. I mean, that's the answer here. But how do we judge that? And again, this relative basis of judging this.

You know, think of our elders, Roger and Mike. We look at their kids. They seem to be doing well. I mean, I can't go back and judge that. But the decision made by Ben, Hal, and Vern, I guess, is related to looking at their household and how they were ultimately carrying out their responsibilities as parents. Not that your kids don't have problems, because they do. Sure.

But what's interesting is I think that as they grow older, they get more pressure from the world. And because of that, they're now faced with situations in their life that mom and dad really can't take care of. They're going to have to turn to the Lord about them. Okay, Mike, this is good because it opens up the store for another quick question for us to comment on. Are these children who remain in the home, do you think? Or does this relate to kids who've left the home now? I think remain in the home. And what makes you think that?

Because once they go out the door, your authority isn't there anymore. And their behavior patterns can be, you know, not at all the way they were raised for a while anyway. I don't think You know, we look at adult believers and some of the stuff that they do, you think, you know, the source of that sin, there's no question about it, and they've been slaves to sin even though they might be believers for a while.

But what's interesting is that I think there's a, maybe I'll ask it, do it in the form of a question. Do you think there's a time with children that you're struggling with whether they're in the home or not, where the parents says, you know, Lord, I'm, you know, I don't know what to do here. I'm gonna, I'm gonna give it to you, you're gonna have to deal with them. And I think it does with some kids. You know, I think it must mean the ones who remain at home.

It goes in this 1 Timothy when following the verse that I read before. It goes on to say that if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God? It sounds like they're at home. Perfect. I think that really relates very directly to this, Joan. Thank you. Yes. Yes, Dawn.

I'm struck by the two different sources you can come to these verses through, if you come through it through grace, in submission to the Lord, understanding your position, where you end up, versus legally. If you're under the law, coming out of Adam, you can still, I mean, you get that Sunday person, right? behaves a certain way on Sunday, because that's what we do.

And that's all you see in terms of the decision making that relates to reporting an elder. All you see is what you see on Sunday, unless there's something that happens outside that is made apparent to you. Well, I think that's part of when you're evaluating elder. You don't just see the Sunday. You see seven days a week, what kind of household they have. And if you're just evaluating somebody on a Sunday, I don't know if I would elect them, or not elect them, but feel comfortable as an elder if I don't know anything more about them. But here again, are you a Sunday person that's doing the evaluating? Well, I think the body is ultimately the one who makes the decision. I mean, you know, it's not just me, it's the body that would do it.

But if they're untouched in good doctrine, and they're legal, here again, it's this relative We have it, you know, I mean, evaluation. Well, you'd evaluate that and being the elder, if they're legal, if they're anything like that's your evaluation of the being an elder would be, are they legal? Are they, you know, I mean, it's almost what for an elder here, don't you answer like 80 questions and, you know, you know, kind of get a basis for who they are on, are they legal? Are they grace based?

And that, and that, Mike, didn't you go through that, the 80 questions or something? I think it's 70-something. Yeah, whatever. 75. So I think, yeah, Don, it's not just me.

I think it's the body finally, it recognized, the way I, through the brethren, it was always they recognized an elder. That, you know, that they looked at these qualifications, they know the body, that's another thing. An elder has to know the body. The body needs to know the elder. No, and I think this raises another important structural doctrine is fellowship, doesn't it? I mean, if you're thinking about appointing somebody an elder, you've got to get to know them.

Yes. And that's fellowshipping in Bible studies, not only on Sundays, but getting to know them even socially at times to see how they respond there, Mike. You know, the other limitation I think it puts on a church, the local body of believers, is the size of the church. Yeah, we're tucked in here. Everybody knows everybody. You can't get away with anything. I look at a church that's in the hundreds or even thousands. What do you do if you're appointed an elder and they've got 10 elders or 20 of them or 30 of them? Do you think there are churches like Holly Hills that have 1,000 or 10,000 members?

I mean it's not that, we don't ever want to think of ourselves as elitist. That's really a very human experience and not the way God looks at us. What our goal here is to rightly divide the word of truth. Isn't that the goal for all of us? Really understanding scripture and how to apply it?

And so I'm not saying those kinds of churches can't exist, but I mean, the idea of 10 elders with 5,000 people is just beyond our imagination. But there are churches that are that big, right? If understanding doctrine is important for eldership and by definition, you're not going to have a big church.

I remember talking a couple of years ago to Dennis Roxler, who's a pastor. And I was talking to him about that we were looking. He said, I know 25 churches right now that could use a pastor. And this is a guy who teaches a truce, who networks really well through dispensational, you know, position, condition, grace-based churches. 25, lacking 25 pastors, let alone, you know, can't find the people to do it.

You know, I think some local ones, you know, what is the perfect size? I don't think you can say there's a perfect size. You know, there isn't a scriptural that says that when you hit 500, you know, you're out of here. But there are, I mean, there's local brethren churches, I know that 300 have elders that are very, you know, attached and know the body. When they got so large, they basically had a church plan with some of those. When they got to the point where they thought they couldn't handle the numbers, they basically took some that were qualified, you know, from, they knew who they were, they were qualified, and they set up a church a second brethren church in the area that had the elders that had been known by the body, several, and then they started to grow. So I think that's, there's no perfect size, but I think there's, I think you recognize that there is a limit where you, as an elder, you just can't know the body. And as an elder, you need to know the body. I was thinking, I totally agree, Courtney. Sorry, Bob, I was just going to add a thought there. Talking to Miles, Juju, a little bit about this.

This is a shepherding role, right? So the question is, how many sheep can you manage? At what point does your... And there's two goals to shepherding, Miles talks about. First is to feed them, keep them alive, and then to keep them from killing themselves. Because that's what sheep do. They find their ways into complete and total end of life scenarios. So the idea here is can you feed these sheep and can you keep them alive?

And that relates metaphorically to obviously feeding the body with the word of God. When you've got a situation of a large group where you're not able to shepherd and feed those sheep, you're looking at a situation where you potentially reach the maximum of what that particular group of elders can manage. Okay, some good things about size and how that impacts these decisions.

Okay, let's go ahead into verse 7 now in succinct detail. So verse 7 says, for a bishop or overseer or shepherder, They must be blameless, which is kind of what we talked about, and that blameless again is not absolute in terms of the day of, you know, the Lord's Day of Glory, but in fact now. blameless in terms of perception and ultimately overall relative basis of being beyond reproach as a steward of God.

And of course, it would suggest that this man is ultimately a steward of God, is it not? I mean, he's not here to please the body. He's here to answer to the Lord directly in terms of his leadership responsibilities. But now, interestingly enough, we've got a series of negatives. And it's kind of interesting here, at the beginning of this verse, what's the verb tense? What's the verb, first of all, and what's the tense?

As a bishop, what's next? Must. Is everybody a must in their own translation? A bishop must be blameless as a steward. I presume the must relates to the things that follow that. The other example of must being used in a very strong sense, what did Christ say to Nicodemus? You must be born again.

It's pretty firm. So these qualifications here, a positive one in terms of being blameless as a steward of God, is followed by a series of negatives. And I think an interesting thing here, all of these terms that follow are one word in the Greek. And that's true of the next verse in terms of the many aspects of the leadership position as an elder are in the positive, not the negative. All right, so let's go ahead and drill down.

Number one, not self-willed. How do we interpret that? Would you say arrogant? I think arrogant could fit. Okay. Care about others? I'm sorry? You care about other people in the church? Well, I think that's an implication of not being self-willed. I mean, you're more concerned about others.

What's one of the most, important aspects of a true leader, pastor, bishop, whatever we want to call this individual, overseer, about his relationship to the body. And as a physician, I relate to this. My ability as a physician is to be a good physician, we'll look at that in relative terms, is to do one thing, and that's to what? What does an elder need to do in terms of the body?

Look out for the flock. Okay. Well, JD mentioned shepherding, but to begin with, they have to listen, don't they? I mean, as a, as a doc, if I don't hear what my patient says, I may have a perceptions or biases to what I think is going on in that patient. But if I can't listen to their complaints, and even though their complaints don't think, make me think of what they really have, I need to listen to those. I mean, so I think this, this is not being self-willed is not, you know, taking a position, I know the answer before you're listening to what a member of the body is bringing to you as an issue.

Your thoughts about that? Classic thoughts. Thanks. Self-willedness, looking after yourself, versus Christ-centered. You know, are you Christ-centered or self-centered is the way I look. Self-willed, because I'm looking out for myself or looking out for profit from this position or whatever. It's looking at selfish ambitions, desires, whatever. Instead you have to be Christ-centered and shepherd.

You're looking out for them more than yourself. I was thinking since, well my version said not overbearing, but that same word, but I was thinking since elders are always in the plural, that being self-willed doesn't really work in a plurality of elders. You need to be, you know, give and take and listen to the others. It can't always be one guy dominating over all the other elders. And I think that's a role that would clearly be led by the flesh, would it not be?

2 Peter 2.10, let's take a look at that as a parallel verse here. And this is describing, ultimately, a behavior that relates to what will follow in verse 10, which is not part of this section of the question.

Somebody read 2 Peter 2.10. And especially those who indulge the fledge in which corrupt desires and despise authority. And what's the downside of that? Does the verse describe that? Well, my version goes on to say, bold and arrogant. These men are not afraid to slander celestial beings. Are you looking for the bold and arrogant part? Yes. Okay, good. So that is another use of that same Greek term in terms of the self-willed or arrogant individual who is not in a position to have a shepherding role or an overseer role.

One of the things you see there is that The elder must recognize that he's a servant of the Lord, that it's the Lord's church, not his. And so, as a servant, his attitude has got to be, he's serving the Lord and he's also serving the people. And so, even though he's a shepherd, like you were saying, he lives on you. How can you properly pray for somebody if you don't listen to him? Right. And I think in the old nature of the sin nature, ultimately, if this person is arrogant or not a good listener, then he's biased in terms of how one would interpret that.

I mean, it reminds me of our brother, Hal, who used to, you know, you go to him with a problem. He said, that's wonderful that you're experiencing this problem. You know, So it just is the having, he listens, he knows your problem, but the issue is he brings kind of spiritual insight into shepherding believers to bring them along the path of grace. So the hungry heart's rich with that kind of attitude. Okay, we're going to look at one more negative today. I think time doesn't maybe permit too much more than that.

The second attribute or negative, if you will, or not attribute, if you will, is not quick tempered. What about that? Does someone have to display an atmosphere of anger or being short fused in a situation where it's perfectly evident? Or in fact, can we sometimes read other people that they're kind of right on the edge and inclined to behave this way? I mean, that's pretty subjective. I mean, the problem with subjective interpretation is that you may be biased in terms of interpreting in that way. But what are your thoughts about this inclination to anger or being so short tempered? quick temper. Why would that be a big negative?

JD, go ahead. Yeah, I think it goes to what you mentioned about the shepherd being a listener, right? This would have this shepherd responding and with quick-tempered, and we know consistently throughout Scripture, especially Proverbs, that those quick tempers lead to foolishness, right?

They lead to strife and angst amongst the, you know, in this case, the elder and the body. So, it is a mental sin that it's easy to get into because when you're self-willed, and I think this is why they're tied together, you're self-important, then you're operating with this idea that what you have to say is less important than what I believe, and that naturally leads and connects with the sin of responding to what I don't believe or what you're saying. as I like it, you know, and I've got my tipper is quick, I'm not able to patiently listen and understand. And I can't recover from it. I'm, you know, I'm angry. So foolishness is the environment that that that creates and that's not a place for the shepherd in the body.

Alright, let's, as we're looking at these, go ahead. I was just going to add, verses come to mind when I think about this in James, the practical book of James, in verse 19. This you know, my beloved brethren, but everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger, for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God. Lord, that's beautiful. That's James 2? 119. 119. Okay, that's what's noting down in 119. I'm going to put it down too. Yeah, James 119. That's what I said. That's what my name is on the book. That's a perfect verse.

Now I see why J.D. is not an Albert. He's arrogant. I've got a couple more verses. Okay, let's go circumstantially to say that a man being considered for an Albert position was shown to lose his temper under one circumstance. I mean, no, Courtney, you're shaking your head. No, this is a pattern.

All of these qualifications, if you can go to every one of these, even though it says must, it's very intimidating for being an elder to look at these qualifications, because is that, at must, it's like, wow. And I think it's the pattern, they're looking on a pattern, is he always angry, is he always, you know, or is kids always, you know, out of control, or is it, you know, these are kind of patterns of behavior or relations rather than a one-time event. You know, if our kids went crazy at, you know, Sunday school, and that doesn't disqualify me as an elder, but if they're constantly doing something, or you're constantly angered, or you're, you know, looking after yourself, these are patterns on an absolute basis.

Remember this is a relative judgment of the believer's life overall and one loss of one quicker tempered response to an issue does not necessarily preclude it. Mike? I think there's also a factor here and that is when a person becomes a believer he's coming out of whatever he was in Adam, whatever the self was, which is self-absorbed, and he could have a bad temper, he could have every one of these things. But now that he's a believer and the Spirit of God begins to work on him, he realizes every one of those, not only individually, but the source of these things, that God has taken care of him and he learns to live by faith and trust God. to begin to manifest the life of the Lord Jesus through him, knowing that that's who he was, but that's not who he is.

Now, I don't know if the body figures it out or not, but he becomes more and more eligible, What would be the expected response of someone being considered for this position who has just lost his temper and being judged, you know, negatively based on that? What would be the position of that man under those circumstances? Well, if it was a one-time lose your temper. Russ, go ahead.

Just a very quick repentance of, wow, I didn't mean to do that. That's what I'm looking for, forgiveness. This of course is directly to the Lord, but to the individuals who have experienced this quick-temperedness. I mean, I think sometimes we, I mean, I think even as I'm working in a Gentile Jewish world for much of my career, when I offended somebody and I realized it, I asked them to forgive me.

And, you know, because people think if you make a mistake and you're a believer, Christianity is worthless, right? I mean, they're looking at you as if you're polished glass and unbreakable. And when we fall short, we need to recognize that. So this man who's a candidate for an elder's position, he needs to recognize he's offended somebody by his temper and ask for forgiveness. I think Mike brought up a good point that we shouldn't gloss over.

Before you're a believer, none of that is counted against you. I mean, before you're a believer, correct, whatever your life was, if you were an alcoholic, if you were whatever, you were mean, you were crazy, you were whatever, and you come to know the Lord. As Mike says, you grow and you'll see as you grow out of that. You can't be judging what you were before you were a believer. That can't fall into the qualifications. It's after you're a believer and how the Lord is working in your life after you've come to know the Lord. Mike may have stolen cars when he was a kid, I don't know, before he was a believer. I'll tell you some other things. But I'm not going to judge him on before he was a believer. You know, if he did something more, you know.

That's all important. It's not prior to knowing the Lord. That slate is clean. Once you become a believer, then you're recognized based on your behavior, meeting these qualifications after you're a believer. Okay, good. I have a question about that. Yeah, go ahead, J.D. We're way after time. We're way after time. Sorry, I just realized that. No, go ahead. You can add after your comment.

I was just going to say, like, so for me, I became a believer when I was 12 years old. So then the question is, for these qualifications, before 12, you know, it would make sense that I was anger and angry and self-willed, etc. But at the age of 12, when I did become a believer and I understood the gospel, From that point forward, I could be judged for these qualifications as I grow up into manhood and become a potential elder candidate. Right.

So based on what Courtney said, I have some questions about that. Not personally, but just is it from the point that they become a believer or is it the point that they begin to mature into their faith? and Start to at some point during their their believing life. They do qualify for these things Or is it just is it hard case? No point of belief?

So maybe that's not what I'm saying. It's kind of what Mike said. It's your growth. Okay, you know, yeah You could spend 20 years not growing and then yes, that's or as far as again that okay. Yeah No, it's not that not that you have. Yeah that you started at 12 or you know, I younger even, it's your progression and your spiritual maturity that you're looking at. Some believers could be 20 years and not growing. Myself, until finding a lot of the identification truths and things like that, I think a lot of growth happened after that. It's more looking at the progression and where you're at.

Yeah. All right. That's what I thought. My bad. That's probably unclear. I need to read your book again. So I'm not sure who's next week, but he will begin with this. And, you know, in my text, it's not given to wine. So maybe, JD, you're going to pick it up at negative number three here. Negative number three. OK, so good. It's been a great discussion. Thanks, everybody.

So, Courtney, would you close us in prayer, please? Governor Talbot, thank you. We thank you again for this time. We thank you again for your word. And more importantly, the indwelling Holy Spirit, which gives us guidance and conviction of your word. So we just, we thank you again, just for all these things that point out for qualifications for an elder. And again, just looking at who we are in Christ. And again, we just pray for Mike in the next hour as he gives the word, just prepare our hearts to receive it. And again, all that we say and do this day, we pray that will honor and glorify you. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen.