1st Timothy 3:1-15

1 Timothy 3, 1-13 is what we're looking at. I won't address it in our time, but the two supplements include on the last part, revisiting 1 Timothy 2.15, which is the one we had questions about last week. And so I'll leave you to look at that. There's more in this Elders and Deacons handout in the supplement, which is in the middle of the sandwich. Then we'll take the time to go through as well.

But let me begin by reading 1 Timothy 3.1. Some of you have the handout. Some of you do not. They're still being copied.

It is a trustworthy statement if, and one of the things that we point out in the Greek, there are four categories of if, and this is the first category, if, and it is assumed to be true, any man aspires to, and this means to reach out after, to the office of overseer, and that's one of a few words that also includes elder or shepherd, same position. It is a fine work he desires with a deep passion to do." Okay, let me read that without all the commentary. It is a trustworthy statement, if any man aspires to the office of overseer, and it is a fine work he desires to do.

Now, so why isn't Timothy told that it is his primary job assignment to appoint elders like Paul wrote to Titus? Why didn't he tell him right off? Titus, as we're going to see, he says, you know, hi Titus, this is Paul, and I sent you to appoint elders, pretty quickly in his letter. Here he waits to the third chapter and says, if any man aspires to be an elder, why the difference between what he assigns to Timothy and to Titus? What's different in their assignments? Okay, that's an important qualification. As a matter of fact, we're going to pay attention to that because he basically uses an aspire and desire kind of word twice.

But why else would there be a difference between Titus and Timothy? What's going on with Titus, who was sent to Crete, and it's different from Timothy? Titus is Gentile, Timothy is half Gentile, half Jewish, and you're correct, but that's not the difference. You're also quite correct about that, but that's not the reason. Think about Crete. He sent him to appoint elders in Crete. Were there elders already in Crete?

No. There weren't any. So there were churches established and they didn't have elders. And with Titus in Ephesus, were there already elders there? Yes, there were. And as a matter of fact, Acts 20, Paul meets with the elders from Ephesus. And this letter is written after that, so there are already elders, so this is for additional elders. Additional elders.

And so the difference between Titus and Timothy is Titus is going to a place where there are no elders. And so his primary job is go there and appoint elders. But with Timothy going into Ephesus where there are already elders, He doesn't have a primary job assignment to correct, excuse me, he has a primary job assignment to correct the false teaching, but he is only adding elders as needed. So that's why he waits, Paul waits until the third chapter to even bring up this elder issue. Whereas with Titus, it's the first thing on his list. Are we okay with that? Next bullet there. There were already multiple overseers in Ephesus. This is Acts 20. So why would Timothy need to consider any more? Why would Timothy need to consider adding more elders? Yeah, it might be because the church is growing.

How long has it been since Paul met with the elders from Ephesus? It's been some years, right? So you may have had elders who maybe even gone home to be with the Lord by this time. You may have had elders who maybe they had to move. That occasionally happens. Maybe even some who were disqualified. It didn't Acts 20 say that from among your own selves, as he spoke to the elders, from among your own selves, some will come and tear the flock in pieces. So some disqualified themselves by their actions and behavior, and obviously stemming from spiritual problems. And so Timothy, for several reasons, may have needed to add more during the years that had passed since Paul last spoke with the elders at Ephesus. Okay, next bullet.

Why doesn't the New Testament just pick one word for the role of overseer, elder, shepherd, and then just stick with it? Why do we have a few different words for the same role? That's just to confuse us, right? So there's different words. Why the different words for basically the same position? Why have all these different words? Okay, well, you're on to something there because essentially, think of it, what does the word elder tell us?

Is this some guy right out of Bible college? Probably not, right? He is, in fact, older. Okay, so that would be one aspect of it. How about the question of, let's look at overseer. Does that have to do with age or something else? Yeah, in other words, an overseer is going to do what? We're going to be looking over things to see what's going on, okay? Hi. No, you'll need to talk to Nancy. They need to make more copies. We're running to catch up in terms of copies.

So you have an overseer who is looking over what is going on. An overseer then needs to be not somebody who's oblivious, not somebody who is from the outside and completely unaware of what's going on in the church body, but they are in fact looking to see what's happening in the church body.

What's going on with this flock? And it relates to and has a similar implication to the word shepherd. Does a shepherd just kind of snooze and let the sheep do what they're going to do? No, the shepherd is looking over things and seeing how are things going, is there something wrong here? Where's the next food coming from? Do they have water and is it good water? So lots of different things that the shepherd's looking at.

Aside from just looking at the sheep, what else would a shepherd look at? Yes, because you look at it, the shepherd not only has to care for the sheep and say where's the next water, where's the next food, and how are the sheep doing, but yeah, where have we got wolves, where have we got predators that are going to come in here and be ready to defend the flock?

And so all three of those names imply something a little bit different. And so that's the three names, the elders, the overseers, the shepherds, are because there is a set of roles there that the shepherd needs, or elder, or overseer, needs to fulfill. And so the reason for the multiple names there is not because you're needing to be confused, right? But it's because, in fact, the role is big and the three names are there to address qualifications and job description, right?

Yes, now let's talk about that. What has happened is we've got this word elder, that's presbyteros, right? What does that sound like? Presbyterian, right? So what we've done is we've taken that name Presbyteros and then made a denomination out of it. The next one, which is translated Bishop, is Episcopos. Sound familiar? Episcopal, right?

And so they've taken that. What happened in, right, this started to take place after Actually, when John was still alive and writing the book of Revelation, is they began to have bishops be something over several churches as opposed to just simply an elder. Two fellows in particular started grabbing hold of this idea of we're over this church and over that church and over this other church. And so it was something that evolved out of church tradition, but was not biblically directed. What's that? Yes. Yeah. And that's one thing is we're not going to have time to go into it, but looking in the attached material, we show the different passages where the different words are used. And now let's look at another one.

Poyman is the one that is literally shepherd. Because of going through the Latin, we've adopted the term pastor. But it really ultimately meant shepherd in the original form. And so that but that's another one where culturally we've begun to give it different definitions. And here's something interesting. Two things.

One is, are any of those terms ever used as a title in the New Testament? We've gone around, and heaven sakes, some guys who have some religious position will have two or three names. You know, right reverend, heap big, muckety-muck, you know, pastor, bishop, so-and-so, right? So we really heap on titles. That never happens in the New Testament. Not once.

Matter of fact, the only place that the word pastor is used as a noun is in Ephesians 4.11. That's the only place. And the only place it's used as a title is for Christ, the Chief Shepherd. That's the only place it's used as a title.

What is interesting is when Paul talks to the elders at Ephesus, and when Peter writes to the elders in 1 Peter chapter 5. In both of those cases, The writers or speakers do not use the word poyman as a noun, certainly not as a title. It's used as a verb. Paul and Peter both say, get shepherding. They're not interested in titles. They're interested in action. They're interested in action. Get shepherding. Forget the titles.

And here's one other little surprise. and that is outside of Jerusalem where James, Jesus' half-brother, was an elder. We do not know for certain the name of any elder in the entire New Testament. The elders do not take titles in the New Testament and outside of James they are all anonymous. Christ is the only one who gets the title shepherd or pastor Period. Yes, reverend was one that's been adopted and if you were to go in the King James Version, the Old Testament, holy and reverend is whose name? His name. Right? Not mine. Right? Yeah, none of them are called father. Even a warning against that. Right?

Okay, let's take a look, and this gets to Doris' point here earlier. Why does Paul make such a big point about an overseer aspiring and desiring to be an overseer with a deep passion? Why is that important? Is being an overseer all about the overseer's emotions? Is it just an emotional position? Can one be passionate about being an overseer and not have it be God's will?

So that's the other part of it. So let's go to the first question there. Why does he make such a big point about the overseer aspiring, and that means reaching out, and the next word he desires with a deep passion actually literally means panting after. Can you imagine that? So why is that important for an elder? Isn't it interesting? Yeah. He has to have a love for them. There has to be a desire. And why would that be? Why would that be?

That comes from the Holy Spirit, not from somebody else. Thank you. Which neighbor? Yeah. The Holy Spirit plays a part. Yes. As a matter of fact, Acts 20, Paul speaking to the elders at Ephesus, and what does he say? The Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Excellent point. It's the Holy Spirit who qualifies and makes people elders, not something that people just decide I'm going to do. But the Holy Spirit places the desire there.

Now let's ask another question. Let's ask another question. How about, should we push somebody into being an elder? We say, boy, we need some elders, you know, and we're going to take this guy and we're going to take him out to dinner and just strong arm him until he says yes.

Does that sound like the right thing to do? Why not? So I would call on you first, and secondly, that might be knowledge about the desires of God. Yeah, here is an elder who is to be aspiring and desiring, and what are you doing? You're taking somebody who doesn't have that, and that should tell you at the outset, you're not talking to somebody whom God has qualified, right? So forcing somebody, twisting somebody's arm into stepping into the position, that's the wrong approach. It's who has a passionate desire for this. Now, let's ask this other question.

Is it possible that someone says, well, I'd like to be an elder or a pastor, and they shouldn't be? Can that happen? Yes, yes, and it does in fact happen. Unfortunately, this thing of, I'd like to be a pastor or something like that can get way ahead of the spiritual qualifications. I remember years ago my dad had a pamphlet and it was titled, I was a pastor for 50 years and then I became a believer. So yes, as we look at this, it is possible for people to get way out of kilter on this thing. Having a desire to be an elder is essential. It is not the only qualification, is it? Right? Not at all.

Let's take a look at the next verses. 1 Timothy 3, 2 and 3. must be, and these are separate words here that indicate an imperative rather than built into the verb, the usual imperative, must be above reproach, above anyone making an accusation that sticks, the husband of one wife, literally a one-woman kind of man, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, means literally he loves strangers, Able to teach, not addicted to wine, literally around wine, he doesn't hang around it. Or pugnacious, literally not a hitter, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. And that is literally an affectionate attachment to silver.

So, let's ask this question, does the overseer have to be absolutely perfect in every one of these respects? What's that? It'd be difficult, wouldn't it? Yeah. If that's what's required, I better resign. Right? Yeah. Yeah. And so one of the things to look at carefully, can we look at this superficially? People do, in fact. But the reality is this takes a careful look, doesn't it? Because what you're looking at is not just a checklist. What we're looking at is what's the character of this person? That's ultimately what this entire list is looking at. What is this person's character? Or have we got a character issue here that's going to be a major problem?

The second bullet, does an overseer just have to qualify at first, but not later on? Just as long as he gets in the door, is that okay? You know, you say, alright, he qualified, he got in, you know, he's in the door, doesn't matter after that. That doesn't carry either, right?

That must be his present tense. He must right there, matter of fact, the Greek carries this idea, he must right now continue to be. So it means when he qualifies, right now, a year later, right now, five years later, ten years, whatever the time is, he must right now continue to be like this. Third bullet.

Do the qualifications of an elder require that a man be married in order to be an elder? Or is this looking at something else? In other words, it talks about he's a husband of one wife, or I think more correctly or literally, a one-woman kind of man. Lacking the definite article in the Greek means the focus is on the character. So, is an elder required to be married according to this? Is that what this is looking at? If you have a guy, he meets all the other qualifications, but he's single.

Do you say, sorry, can't do it? See, this is really looking at character, isn't it? It's not a checklist. It's character. And so it's not requiring that the man be married, but it's saying, if he is, what's his character? Right? What's his character? If we said he had to be married, what happens if the guy's wife dies? You've got five minutes to get married. You've got until the next elders meeting to get married. That would be a little rough. There are churches that do that.

How about this? If a person has ever failed in one of these qualifications, is he permanently disqualified from being an overseer? Can it be possible that a man has failed in one of these areas and he's permanently written off? Is that what Paul's talking about? You're saying you don't think so.

Why not? Well, we all have sinned. Okay. Alright. How about before the person is even a believer? I mean, so you're talking about, if you make it a checklist, an absolute checklist, someone, let's say that years ago, my fifth and sixth grade Sunday school teacher who, he wasn't an elder, but he started off the class.

He said, years ago, I was sold out to alcohol. That ruled my life. But he sat there and taught us. Should he have taught us? Yeah, and what that past failure did was show the Lord's transforming grace in this man's life. He is in fact a demonstration that ought to be something known and visible in the body rather than put aside and shoved off in a corner.

The passage that Randy covered about two weeks ago Paul says that he was a blasphemer, he was a persecutor of the church, and he was guilty of hubris. Basically, it's a complicated word that means to take joy in the suffering of your fellow man and to shake your fist at the gods. That's what the word in the full spectrum means. He says he's guilty of all three of those things.

And by the way, blasphemy is punishable under the Jewish law by what? Death penalty. He says, I was guilty of the worst possible sin as a Jew. And he says, and I persecuted, and he says this in Acts, I persecuted the church, if at all possible, to the death. And hubris in the Greek and pagan culture was the worst possible thing you could do. You're inviting the wrath of God, not only on yourself, but everybody else around you.

He's guilty. Yeah, Bud. An apostle and elder. They're both different positions and the term apostle applies to a gift that was only given in the first century. An elder is over only one church. And as we'll see here in the larger sense, should be a plurality of elders in the ideal. And an elder, unlike the apostle, here's a contrast. The apostles, we know the names of all of them. Elders, with the exception of James, we know the names of none of them.

Isn't that interesting? Interesting contrast. An apostle has the authority to write scripture. An elder does not. An apostle is not an ongoing gift. Eldership is. So they're both important positions in the biblical picture, but they do have distinct time frames and authorities. Let's look at the second side here. 1 Timothy 3, 4-7.

He must be one, present tense, okay? He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity, and that's the word techna, older than newborns and infants, but not a young adult yet, okay? And not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil. And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church so that he will not fall into reproach in the snare of the devil. So, first question. Is it required for an overseer to have children? Now, we'd really like to appoint you as an elder, but you don't have any kids. So, sorry. Does an elder have to have kids?

No. And that's one thing. This is not a checklist again. It is a set of character qualifications, and that's what you're looking at. You're looking at character. You're looking at present, ongoing character. And you're not looking superficially, but looking at character deeply, right?

So what if the overseer has only one child? Because after all, he puts this in the plural, right? You say, we only got one kid? Sorry, he can't be an elder, you know? If the child grows up as an overseer, then disqualified, in which case I better resign, right? Probably not, again, because the point is he's looking at character, not some sort of a superficial checklist, right?

So how far out of control does a child have to be before the overseer is disqualified? Can we give some definition to this? A time definition? If he gets out of control for five minutes, that's okay, but ten, nah, we don't let that. If he gets out of control, but the police haven't come, it's okay. Is that what it is? What are we looking at here? What are we looking for when we're looking at this? Are we looking for establishing some sort of a legal criteria, or are we looking at something deeper?

Do you have a general pattern to say that a family complies with things like the law rights of the children of their parents? Yes. Do you know of any sites in the Old Testament law, particularly in that one instance, that if your kids are not obedient and your kids are running the roost, you've got a problem? I will testify that I was not always an obedient child. This is a once-in-forever. I looked at my dad a long time ago.

And so, a question, is this saying that the kid is absolutely perfect? No. And one of the questions is, when the kid is getting out of control, how do the parents respond? Do they say, well, boys will be boys and so will girls, you know? Or do they say, okay, no, we need to, you know, step in here and, you know, do this and take action and, you know, curb the behavior, correct, etc. So the responsiveness when the kid gets out of control becomes a question, right? Okay.

Does managing a household and managing the church have anything in common? In other words, here's the criteria. He must manage his own household well. Then with the church, what's in common between the two? Yeah, in other words, it's a matter of scale, but there are some similarities.

Do people in the church ever get out of control? Get out of hand? Whoa. Can happen, right? Can happen. In other words, there are things to look at. The overseer in a family is one who oversees the family and looks at things and doesn't go around just oblivious, right? And then takes action as needed, both in terms of prior action as well as in response to kind of action, planning ahead and then dealing with things that come up. Alright, how about this next one?

1st Timothy 3.6 says that the overseer or elder must not be a new convert.

Why is it that Paul appointed elders who were new converts on his first missionary journey? That's all they had. Yeah, in other words, in the first missionary journey what he did is he went through the cities of Galatia and did evangelism and on his return loop he appointed elders and spent time teaching and working with the church to build up the church body, right? And Carol's right. That's all they had at the time.

Well, and that may have been one reason why he didn't just instantly appoint them, right? But take the time to look at and say, you know, let's let some time pass here and let's spend some time teaching and who's responsive and who shows an ability to teach and these kinds of things, right? Whereas later on, like in this instance, you've had the church had time to grow and time for things to develop, and then you see here the caution, at this point, don't appoint a new convert. You've got people who have demonstrated some spiritual maturity, right? Okay. Now, does being a Christian longer guarantee that one is more qualified? Why not? Why isn't just being a Christian longer all it takes? Maybe they haven't matured. How could it be that a believer is a believer for decades and not matured?

No teaching. Yeah, that's one. If you don't know, you can't grow, right? But grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. Yeah, some people don't, right? By the way, that word grow, in the grace and knowledge, that grow is an imperative. And some people don't heed it. They're not in the Word, they don't get taught, they don't listen to what is being taught, and they don't grow. So as a consequence, they can be Christians for a long period of time and still be in diapers, spiritually speaking.

Next bullet down, why do verses 6 and 7 have to do with the devil? Why does he mention the devil there in those verses? Each of those ends up with the word devil. How come he gets in this thing when you're talking about qualifications of elders? Satan was in a position of authority. So if you're putting an elder in a position of authority, does it not make sense that there are similar hazards? Right? That's part one. Here's the other part. If Satan wants to mess up a church, who's he going to go for? He's going to go for the leaders. And here's another interesting aspect.

We have record during the New Testament times, this is outside the Bible, when the Romans began carrying out a more heavy persecution, they had ten waves of persecution. When they had a more heavy persecution, when any of the people in a congregation were persecuted and the Roman soldiers came after them or the authorities came after them, the elders, as a tradition, would go up and say, take me instead. And that's something. The elders would step forward.

The position that an elder has makes him subject to greater attack. And the lessons to be learned about, here's Satan who was one of the authority, those same Problems issues are also there for an elder. Okay, there are greater hazards And you have any of you ever been a situation where an elder the overseer pastor fell stumbled Yeah, yeah, we've all seen and or heard of that kind of situation does happen can happen And Paul is saying we want to avoid that. We want to be mindful of the hazards. We want to be mindful of the issues that an elder is going to be dealing with.

Now we've got there at the bottom part of the page, deacons seem to have a similar set of character qualifications to those of elders in many ways. And in a few of the qualifications, it's absolutely identical to what is presented for the elders. So let's read 1 Timothy 3, 8-13.

Deacons likewise must be, and that's the same must be as is up there for the elders, must be men of dignity, not double-tongued or addicted to much wine or fond of sordid gain, but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. These men must also first be tested. Let them, and this is an imperative, they must, serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach. Women, the same word as translated wife in verses 2 and 12, must likewise be dignified in not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things. Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, or a one-woman kind of man, and good managers of their children and their own households. For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.

So let me ask you this, why would the character qualifications of a deacon matter? You say, he's just doing things. Well, I should say it doesn't matter what his qualifications are. Why don't we just set that aside? They're still in a leadership role, and it's interesting that we think of deacons as serving in various capacities, but scripture says that requires qualifications. They are still in a position and in a leadership role.

What does it mean to hold to the mystery of the faith? That means the faith is very mysterious. Now, I hold to the mystery of the faith. I have the foggiest idea what all that's all about, right? Is that what it means? What's the mystery of the faith?

Remember, some years back, we used to have a moose go flying on the screen from taking on the word musterion. That's this word. What does this word mystery mean in the Bible? And by the way, it has the same meaning in the Old Testament as the New. What does the word mystery mean in the Bible? I'm sorry, what?

Not known before, but now revealed and known. Right? Colossians chapter 1, Paul actually defines that word mystery. Something not previously known, but now revealed. So throughout the New Testament we see mysteries, not of things that continue to be mysterious, that's not the intent at all, but rather the opposite, things that in the past may have been mysterious or unknown but are now revealed.

So, what does it mean to hold to the mystery of the faith? That would mean then the mystery is revealed. What's the mystery of the faith? Why does he use that term? The faith that is now revealed, right? The faith that is now revealed. The term the faith starts in Acts chapter 6 and it continues on to the book of Revelation. The faith that is now revealed.

He says the deacons need to hold on to it. The deacons need to be able to teach. No, it doesn't say that. It means, it's interesting, here is the elder who is to teach solid and sound things, but the deacon is to hold to the solid and sound things. Right? Now let's ask the reverse of that.

Could an elder also be a teacher? Yes, an elder could be a teacher, excuse me, a deacon could be a teacher. A deacon could be a teacher. It doesn't have to be a teacher. An elder must be a teacher. See the difference there? So for an elder, it is required that he be a teacher. For a deacon, it is not required, but he can also be a teacher. Why is a clear conscience important for the deacon?

Why is that spelled out? Hmm, yes. Because if he has sin on his mind that would separate him from his relationship with the Lord, and how could he join people to the Lord if he isn't really sure what's going on with the Lord because he's separated from the Lord. Okay. Does it mean that the deacon then has never done anything wrong? No, it just means that he is continually keeping himself in check with the Lord, saying, okay, So if I understand you right, it's possible for a deacon to have had sin in his past, but to have a clear conscience now.

How is that possible? He is walking with the Lord. He is forgiven. God is merciful and gracious. And a deacon is not someone who has lived absolutely perfectly his whole life. But for those things that he has done wrong, he has dealt with it and recognized God's dealing with it. And then that person is able to serve focused on serving and focusing on the needs of the body instead of being focused on, oh, I've got this sin and I just can't get past it. What this tells you is that a deacon is someone who recognizes God's mercy and grace and understands it.

Bernard Nathanson is a fellow who just recently, just within recent months, went home to be with the Lord. He had been an abortion doctor. He said he was either directly or indirectly responsible for 60,000 abortions, which he later on, when he became a believer, said, I realized those were murders.

He said, how could I possibly deal with that magnitude of guilt without the mercy and grace of Christ? Right? How possibly could you handle that? Now let me ask you this question. It's obviously hypothetical because he's home with the Lord now. Could Bernard Nathanson have served as a deacon? Yes, even after committing what he himself called 60,000 murders. Yes. Why? Because he recognized the mercy and grace of the Lord and appropriated that for himself by faith and he could serve with a clear conscience. Right? And that is amazing. But God's amazing. Okay. Next one here.

Are the women, verse 11, deaconesses or the wife of the deacon? How can we tell? This is one of those that there are different positions among churches. Are these deaconesses or is it the wife of the deacon? Why would we think it's a wife of a deacon? They start talking about deacons, they continue talking about deacons, and that same word that's translated women is also used for wife twice in the prior verses. So on that basis, I would consider he's talking about the wife of the deacon having this characteristic. Let's take another look there.

How is the role of a deacon different from an elder and Don't ask the people in the Baptist Church Because they don't know Doesn't wear a badge or ride a bicycle. Yep. There we go What's the difference between a deacon and an elder I One is the deacon doesn't have to teach.

He could teach. Matter of fact, we have downstairs a deacon who is also teaching. He could teach. He does not have to teach. An elder must teach. They're good. So that's one distinction. Is there another? Yes. Yeah, in other words, the deacon's job, if you could define it this way, is to keep the elder from being distracted. You find the elder, he's off doing this, and he's off doing that. Well, why? It's because he's distracted.

And because these things are handled by the deacons, then the elders are able to focus on what God has called them to do. Second to last bullet there, would there be any reason not to just make the qualifications just exactly the same for deacons as for elders? Just make them all the same and do the same. Why would there be any difference in the qualifications?

Yes? But if they all want to teach and nobody wants to facilitate it, it's like too many people. Okay. All right. Yeah, you do need to have different qualifications because the roles are not identical. The roles have similarities, but they're not identical because God has designed it so that there are people who are gifted differently and assigned differently to do the different things that need to be done.

Should everybody in the church be an elder or deacon? Talking with Brad Mastin, who used to work in the Korean churches, he said, that's the way it is in the Korean churches. You've got to have one of those titles. And it's somehow an insult if you don't. It shouldn't be looked upon as something, boy, I've got to have that, or I won't be anything. No. God has given each of us one or more gifts, and he intends for us to use those one or more gifts, whatever those are. How do you know when deacons are needed? How do you know when you need deacons?

Most pastors are overwhelmed anyway. We haven't touched on it, but Acts chapter 6 is the instance when deacons are first brought about in the church. Remember what happened in Acts chapter 6. The church is essentially centered there in Jerusalem, and the apostles at that point in time were actually acting much in the role of an elder. because the church had not scattered and spread about. And so here's the church in Jerusalem, and the apostles are acting as elders in great part. And what was the need that came up in Acts chapter 6, where they said, whoa.

Yeah, it was a matter of dealing with widows, and there were widows who were of Jewish background, and there were those who were more of a Hellenistic background, more influenced from the Greek. And there's difficulty. How do we get this resolved? How do we make sure they both get treated fairly and equally and get all their needs met? And the apostles are starting to get all wrapped up in this thing. And they said, wait a minute. We're not carrying out our job fully here. We're getting too wrapped up in this. We need deacons. We need more single elders. More single elders. Yeah. I'm sorry, what?

Same thing happened to Moses, right? Yeah, got overwhelmed, so how was it resolved with Moses? Yeah, so they appointed others to handle these issues instead of everything coming to Moses, right? Okay. So it's interesting, it's another one of those things where we see a pattern of similarity between things under the law of Moses and things in the church.

At the same time, we also see the differences, right? So comparison and contrast, that's our principle. Okay, with that, let me just give a quick run-through on the supplements. We have lots of pages of supplements, as you've noticed. The first part is something that Hal and I put together back in November of 2002. And that's about 14 pages, and it even covers the church, you know, corporate function.

And it addresses qualifications. Now, three different categories. It talks about character qualifications on elders, what is the ministry, and operating guidelines. Character qualifications. An elder is to be a one-woman kind of man. Ministry, what does the elder do? What are the things that the elder ought to do?

And the operating guidelines are things like don't lord it over the flock. Do this, but don't do that. So those three things are spelled out in scripture and that's what this addresses. It also addresses other questions like Some more insight on deacons, aside from just what we looked at here this morning. And additionally, questions about how many elders should there be in a church, pointing to a plurality of elders. And may a woman be appointed as an elder?

That kind of thing. Which is something the church has gotten fairly far off the track on. And then the last one was addressing the question from the end of last week's lesson, and that's First Empathy 215, looking at, you know, what is Paul impending to say here? And I won't go into that, but just you can pace your way through that. There's about three pages on what that means there. Okay.

Questions? Comments? Exasperations? Inspirations? Extrapolations? Should I stop there? Is that enough? How are we doing? Okay. Well, you're either completely baffled or have answered every question you could possibly have. So, with that, we'll pray. Okay?

Lord, we do thank you. You have revealed what is sufficient for us in church leadership. It is amazing to see how churches have gone in various directions and yet what you have written is clear and we thank you for that. We pray, Lord, as we proceed through 1st and 2nd Timothy and on into Titus, we just pray that you would give us understanding and insight that we might take it to heart both individually and also as a church body. And we thank you. We give you praise in Jesus name. Amen.