1st Timothy 5:17-25

We're going to continue on with the last half of 1 Timothy chapter 5. And earlier in the week, I had commented to Jessica that I really didn't understand why the people in charge of dividing chapters didn't put a chapter marker between the first half of 5 and starting in 17 where we would start.

Because it really looks like he jumps topics, not just in a little way. elders. You're done. Oh, okay. So the transition at first, at least on the surface, was a little disjointed. But then after some further study, I'll tell you why. I think that, again, chapter numbering is not the Holy Spirit in this car, necessarily. But I think if I were a person looking to divide the chapter there, there is a relationship.

What was Paul's focus with the widows from the last set of verses? and the impact on the body. What were some of the elements of that? Correct, widows should receive help. Okay, so that there's a financial or material responsibility for the body to take care of the godly widows that were there.

And then in verse 17, and I'll go ahead and read this in just a moment, in verse 17 he jumps to elders, but he's talking about elders in and the financial opportunities that the body has to supply the needs of the elders. So let's go ahead and start in verse 17, and we'll read to the end of the chapter.

The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who For the scripture says, You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing, and the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not receive an accusation against an elder, except on the basis of two or three witnesses.

Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be free of sinning. I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in the spirit of partiality. Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others. Keep yourself free from sin.

No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments. The sins of some men are quite evident going before them to judgment, for others their sins follow after. Likewise, also, deeds that are good are quite evident, and those which are otherwise cannot be concealed."

Alright, so Paul makes a transition in this letter, abrupt as it is, from the financial responsibility to widows to the financial responsibility I won't even use the word responsibility. The financial opportunity to widows and the financial opportunity to elders within the church. So we talked about elders in chapter 3. My dad taught it, which is appropriate being an elder. It's probably good to have had him do that. He says, the elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at their gene teaching. And then for the scripture says, you shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing, and the laborers worthy of his wages.

I have the questions in possibly a slightly wrong order, so I'm going to reorder them verbally here for you. What does it mean to honor in this context? What do we see about honor based on 17 and 18? What does it sound like honor entails? Respect is absolutely part of it. He talks about muzzling oxes and workmen and wages. Does that sound like he's just talking about respect only or that there's a material aspect to it? The body should take care of the elders. Hopefully you have your Bibles with you and if you do, put your thumb there in 1 Timothy and flip back to 1 Corinthians 9.

In 1 Corinthians 9.9 you're going to find, well it's actually 1 through 11 really, you're going to find that Paul is actually defending his own consumption of some of the donations as an apostle. He says, hey I have needs as well and I need to take some of these donations and pay for my needs. Remember, Paul had a stewardship on part of his missionary journey. He was collecting funds to help out churches that were in need. And it seems like the Corinthians were a little bit chapped that Paul would use some of that.

But he's writing to them and he says in verse 9, and he quotes the same passage out of Deuteronomy. He says, For it is written in the law of Moses, You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing. God is not concerned about oxen, is he? And clearly there is an element to this Deuteronomy chapter 25 verse 4 where this comes from, where the Jews were receiving instruction in the law. This is part of the law of Moses. Don't muzzle the ox while it's threshing. What's threshing?

Anyone know that term? We don't use that a lot in modern technology. Not a lot of oxen. That's right, you separate the grain from the chaff. And so the ox would do that, their hooves would fire definers. I read up on it because I realized I had no first hand exposure to threshing. Their hooves are actually involved with that as well. And so they're around the exposed grain. Why would you muzzle the ox so that it doesn't eat the grain so that you can eat it, right? It's part of the flower making process.

But Paul uses this in 1 Corinthians 9 in his defense of having worked tirelessly as an apostle, a teach, and then he says we needed to participate in the material gains, not gains, but the material aspect of the offerings that they've been given to share in the needs of the church.

Now, let's ask an important question. This is the first question I've got in the handout. Why does Paul take an Old Testament law which is specifically given about oxen and apply it to both apostles and elders in the New Testament context and make it not oxen?

How can he do that? Does that break some rules of hermeneutics or Bible interpretation and application? common sense, things work. And that's an important detail. There's a correlation or a logical connection there that's common sense. Paul draws that out because there's a principle that's tied in with that passage. Then the optimist is you don't want to starve the oxen and work it without having some of the fruits of its labors. Does this bring the law into the life of the elders or believers in general? Is the law now secretly sneaking its way into Christian New Testament theology? No. There's a principle.

And Paul is deriving that principle. He's pulling that out and highlighting its application in this context. Now, so honor, I think from this context, we can say, OK, honor seems to have some material impact in the way that the body is participating in stewardship.

But he uses the ox. connection, and then he says, does the scripture not say, how many of you have a New American Standard Bible, or some of the other translations or editors have done this, where if there's a direct quote, it's in all caps. Do you see that about the ox, that it's in all caps? Does anyone? My dad nodded his head, but I didn't know if anyone else. Wayne's got it. All right, how about the laborer is worthy of his wages? Is that in all caps?

So we have to ask ourselves, why does Paul say this is in the scripture? And he takes something like that that is from the law and brings the parallel application. But then he says, this other thing is in the scriptures, and yet it's not in all caps, because the all caps is a direct quote. what's Paul doing there? Since it's not directly in Scripture in those words.

Any guesses? He's paraphrasing. Very good. That's it. There's something that that is common in the New Testament, it is to quote the principles that are in the Old Testament in a paraphrased form. And this is one of those cases where that's being done.

Again, as believers that are not apostolic, and I believe that's all of us, We don't have the authority to go reinterpreting and reapplying Old Testament passages the way that Paul does, because he's inspired by the Holy Spirit to do that. Be careful grabbing parts of the Old Testament, saying this is a principle, and drawing into New Testament context without careful study. Because you are not an apostle. That's probably not a big surprise. You won't lose any sleep over that. But it is interesting to see how the Apostle would take an Old Testament context like that and redirect it for application inside the life of the body.

So, Paul says that there should be double honor to the elders who rule well. Why only the elders who rule well? Any thoughts on that? How about the elders who rule mediocre? The elders who rule below average? Is this about average? What's this tied to?

Well, I would think if someone weren't doing a job you admire, they might not have as much respect. True. In this case, because the honor seems to have a material element to it, the idea is that Make sure that somebody who's working really hard and doing a thorough job, especially someone who's working in the preaching and teaching element, make sure that they get a good material compensation. But it's not just material compensation. Honor, the Greek word, has elements and nuances of financial or material aspect, but also there is the element of respect. And I think that it is a rich complexity that as the body we all get to participate in.

My dad being an elder, I have this extra special relationship with him because he's my dad and he's an elder. So sometimes I go to my dad and say, Dad, I need to ask you an elder question and I'll talk to him about things as he is my elder. Sometimes I go to Mike Doyle. Sometimes I talk to Roger.

It's good to have multiple elders. Which leads us to another important question. Does this passage give us any clue as to the number of elders that should be part of the body? It's more than one. The implication here is that there's more than one. And it's going to do so as we step into the next section that's talking about correction as well.

How hard do these elders need to work? Is it 40 hours a week? 45 is overtime? 50, they're doing a great job. Do they get time and a half for Sundays? What are some of the nuances of this? Is this really about work in a physical sense only? Or what is the complexity of this?

The Holy Spirit is hopefully directing the lives of the elders. There is a lot in this that is, Paul is being very specific, but when we take a look at it in the context of the bigger picture of church leadership, The focus is really on making sure that the body is meeting the needs of those who are feeding them. If you're being fed by somebody that we're working on and responding, what is motivating our response in this honor as sheep?

The Holy Spirit, hopefully. That should be the thing. If you're giving 10% because it's the tithe, then it's the Old Testament law, which is not for believers. Is that the Holy Spirit? If you're responding to the law, no. But if you're giving to the body in some capacity, it will be by the Holy Spirit.

It's going to impact the elders. It's going to impact the widows, too. So the stewardship is tied in here. The last question I've got for this section is, what is the fullness of honor that could be shown to elders? And that's really rhetorical. we could discuss the nuances of that for quite some time. Because it is personal and relational. It is material. It is spiritual.

How many of you find yourself praying for the elders with any frequency? I know that when I get to talk to my dad and he expresses to me any thoughts or burdens on his heart, he's very careful to be confidential about things, so often I know there's something on his mind, and he's wrestling with something, and he just says, ah, stuff's going on in the body. And his elder, the heart of the elder is burdened for one of the sheep. He's loving the sheep. And since I've received his love as a son, I know that's a very deep and meaningful love. It's a little weird to talk about my dad in front of him, but so be it.

But the honor is going to involve prayer. The honor is going to involve fellowship. The honor is going to involve material things. It's going to involve the fullness of who we are in Christ. Now, Paul switches gears. We went from honoring elders to, oh no, somebody screwed up. So when we move through this next section here, Paul is warning Timothy, he says, do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses. And we'll stop there for a moment. What kind of accusations are we going to be finding brought against elders?

We can think about Colorado Springs and they've had a couple of big dizzies down there. Either their teaching or their personal actions. Those are two very key areas. If they're theologically off, that's a big deal. Recently there's a guy, is it Shane Bell? No, it's Rob Bell. And he's one of those guys that believes everybody's saved. And he's teaching as though he's coming from a Christian perspective. That everybody is saved. He's got the whole world in his hands. There was a slide earlier, he's got the whole universe in his hands. That everyone is saved. through the work of Christ. No one's going to help. That is theologically erroneous and that has to be addressed. Cause is quite a curfuffle, but he's not being held accountable by other elders within his body to address this problem. So you have that, and then who is it? Is it Ted Haggard? Well, there's probably any number of Who's the guy in Colorado Springs? Is it Ted Haggard?

Sexual perversion and drugs seem to be an issue. So, don't take any accusations unless it comes from two or three people. This is a warning to Timothy. We don't have Timothy here anymore. But still, there's a principle here that as we look at this as a body, If there was some issue that were to come up, it would need to come up and it would not need to be just one of those things where one person is starting a rumor. Hey, I think so-and-so is doing such-and-such. Do you have evidence? Is this real? Is there a real concern here?

Now the good thing about recording lessons at Holly Hills is that if somebody were to say something theologically, at least it would play it back and listen to it. Now, I'm going to ask on the spot, Dad. I'm going to ask, what happens when the elders don't see eye-to-eye on a particular doctrine at the elders' meetings? We pray about it and talk about it and study it, sometimes for months, sometimes even longer. But we pursue unity.

Built in, at least here at Holly Hills, and I wish this was everywhere, built in at Holly Hills is an honesty and integrity of doctrine so that I don't really freak out or worry about the doctrinal things coming here where there's going to be this issue of accountability, where there's going to be this problem where elders need to be corrected, and that it's going to be this catastrophic problem. might cause a church split. Those are my favorite. I've been through a couple of those.

That is not a concern to me for the most part at Holly Hills because the elders, and you can ask each one of them, where is your authority? It's God's Word. Where is truth in God's Word? What do you do when there is not eye-to-eye thinking about a doctrinal thing?

And each one of them will tell you, because I've asked them. I've talked to them about it. And you know what? They don't like it that there's not unity. you ask any of the three and they'll tell you, no I don't like it, that there's not unity. And so they pour hours and hours and weeks and sometimes weeks and months into resolving it so that they see eye to eye on whatever that doctrinal distinction is. So here at Holly Hills we don't have to worry about that to the same level as one might. I've been to churches where I've heard within one hour two different elders speak two very distinct contrasting and disagreeing doctrines. And I think that's great today. It's diversity. Isn't diversity the best? Unless, of course, you're a sheep and you're confused. So that's a rabbit trail, and I have taken that way outside the scope of this passage.

But if there's going to be an accusation against the elders, it could be doctrinal, or it could be one of those life practice or acting mistakes. Now let me ask this important question. Is Paul talking about a positional or a conditional problem? Is this earthly or heavenly? It's earthly.

So just because an elder screws up, they haven't lost their salvation and they've got to be kicked out of the church necessarily. I don't know of any, but could there be a case where an elder is not a believer? I'm going to say that in this context that Paul is talking about, it should never happen. That being said, I am aware of one situation where, and this isn't exactly an elder, there was a church that had a non-believer on their missions board. Their evangelistic outreach board, they had this non-believer there operating And the church really didn't see a problem with that.

They just thought it was a great way to bring somebody in to help reach them. I thought that was a little naive or stupid. Mix the wolves and the sheep and see what happens. Not a good strategy in that case. But in the case of an elder not being a believer, I would hope that would be super rare, although It does happen. Yeah, as I'm saying, I'm a little reluctant to say that it's not possible.

I think you've shared a story or two about somebody who was supposedly a pastor and then they got saved when they were much older or something like that. Yeah, I did. The pamphlet that I was a pastor for 50 years and then I got saved. Yeah. So that would be an example of that. Next question on here is what is the consequence to the body? when an elder is found sinning. It can be devastating. Yeah. There was one situation in Carson City that there was a pastor at a church that just spent a bunch of money on the church's credit card. Just maxed out one or two credit cards for the church.

And then they came and said, hey, that's not good. And then, instead of looking at this passage, which is a New Testament passage, which says, wow, I've got to be corrected. He said, he used one of the Old Testament passages. David spoke with Saul and said, don't touch one of God's anointed. That was out of context, but he hadn't equipped the flock to really wrestle through that one. He missed the opportunity to actually teach them and prepare them to be able to expound on God's word and identify that that was not right.

So another question, see I always, how many of you would rather find out you have cancer than do things to prevent the cancer? You'd just rather live life to the fullest and then get cancer and then be surprised by it, or you could do the alternative and do some things to prevent the cancer. I think all of us would rather not have the cancer if we could avoid it. The next question that I've got on here is one of those kinds of questions.

What level of intimacy should the elders have so as to avoid this problem? How intimate should the elders be with one another so that this is really not likely to happen? Should the elders have a monthly meeting and see one another once a month? Or maybe every six months? The idea that I think is scripturally outlined in other places, not here, is that there is an intimacy amongst the elders such as this would never happen.

Unless somebody is really super sneaky and good. Well, good is relevant. Bad, super sneaky, but good at being super sneaky. Communication has to be constant, I think. It's heavenly communication and it's communication amongst the elders that is constant and very regular. The elders get together every Tuesday in the afternoon usually, right? If I understand correctly.

Probably right in the middle of when Mike would normally take a nap on vacation. We'd vacation with him and he took naps in the afternoon and that's made me chuckle. But Mike's there, and Roger's there. The cool thing is that Roger's a consultant, right?

Like he's a contractor now or something like that. Yeah, that's his relation. And so he can set his hours, I think. So he meets Tuesday afternoons. That's where the other person gets time. I'm an elder, I'm there. And they're together. Unless somebody's traveling, they'll get together. And I know there's probably lots of email communications throughout the week. There's good intimacy here. Phone calls. Phone calls, yeah.

And I asked this question earlier about the last set of verses, but does this passage teach us anything about the number of elders a body should have? Again, there's this principle of plurality. There's an entire rabbit trail on the discussion of the number of pastors that there should be.

But I'll say this, there was a Pastor Alistair Begg, he's Reformed, so I don't recommend listening to a lot of his theology, but He shared a story one day on the radio when I was driving to work that really impressed me. He said he really strongly believed in verse-by-verse exposition, because when you came to a passage like this in 1 Timothy chapter 3, you would have to wrestle with the text that was there. So he went to some random church while he was out traveling one Sunday, and the pastor said, well, we're going to continue on in our series in 1 Timothy, and he thought, great! verse by verse exposition.

And the pastor says, but we're going to skip 1 Timothy chapter 3 verses 1-7 because we don't have elders so this doesn't apply to us. So rather than saying this describes elders and eldership and then later on in chapter 5 a plurality of elders, so we should probably have a plurality of elders, they just skipped over it because they didn't. So for us as a body, we don't really have to sweat the number of elders that we have. Because we have three, which I think is probably as few as you elders would like to have in a group. Because with a body this size, that's a lot of responsibility and a lot of relationships to have.

Because they don't just shepherd by teaching from the podium or from the Sunday School class. They actually want relationships with you. I know that a number of you participate in Bible studies throughout the week that are involving the elders. And they're constantly monitoring the flock in a loving way, not just a checklist. See where you're at spiritually. I know that I look forward to Wednesday nights at the Doyle's house because I get to participate in the body, but I also know that that's a way for Mike to know where we're at as an elder. I talked to my dad at least once a week about various things. Sometimes it's silly stuff. Sometimes I send them pictures of strange things that have been photoshopped on the internet. But sometimes it's about much deeper things.

So, the next question I have on here, if an accusation sticks, does the elder lose their position? This really is contextual. It depends on what the accusation is and what's going on. Like if there's a disagreement about doctrine, the elders might be able to work that out and that's not a big deal.

If they're found having an affair, the elder needs to step down and have their marriage set before Christ and resolved. That gets into a whole rabbit trail of one woman kind of man. So we'll kind of refer back to 1st Timothy 3 in that context. But there could be a concern where the elder would stop being an elder and just need sex and counsel and the spiritual growth there.

I think one of the things that it says is that if there's an issue, you deal with it. Oh yeah, absolutely. You know, I have a good friend, a guy I went to school with, but he was on staff at a church and it was a fairly large church and one of the guys on the pastoral staff And just a great turnover in the church leadership, as well as the church body, because they didn't deal with it. There's knowledge of the problem and they ignore it. Not dealing with it is not biblical. So there's a dealing with it.

And then the other thing is Paul warns in the next verse that Timothy should not lay hands on someone too quickly. The principle of laying on of hands was kind of a prank to commission. So you don't commission this person to be an elder. just quickly. Ah, you look like a nice guy. You have a firm handshake. He's a good hugger. What are the qualifications for eldership?

Well, we've got those in 1 Timothy 3, verses 1-7. Don't commission, don't lay on hands, don't commission this elder with too much expedience, with not enough checking to see the qualities are supposed to be there. Because he says, and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others. You're commissioning someone who's not really qualified to be an elder, and they could lead an entire flock of sheep. That's a pretty big responsibility.

One thing I look at in the history of the church, if we go back to Ephesus where Timothy was set up, is the church still there? Is there a thriving church in Ephesus? No. No, there's not. It's in Turkey, right? If I recall correctly, if I've got my geography right. And that's not Christian. I think there's an Orthodox Greek church or something there. But it's certainly not. There's missionaries from America there. Are we in Kent? Is it Kent Sarani? Yeah. There's a missionary there. Oh, we're in Turkey. In Turkey. Because it's not a Christian area.

But the problem is if you've got an elder who's not qualified to be an elder and equipped to lead the body, leading the body, what do you get? You get a whole flock of not-equipped people that aren't being able to pass on an equipped state to those who come after them, and you get an atrophy, if you will, in the spiritual growth of the body. So you want to watch out for those things.

Paul keeps writing, keep yourself free from sin. Obviously he's, that seems like a pretty obvious statement, but he's warning Timothy, hey, you keep yourself free from sin. What happens if Timothy blows it? He's the guy setting up the church there in Ephesus. Bad example, and then your church again, you've got to collapse. Now, verse 23 is one of my favorite verses in Pastoral Epistles, because it's that burr under the saddle, if you will. He says, no longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments. I always think it's funny that sake is spelled similar to sake, so every time I read that, my brain always converts it to sake.

But do not drink water exclusively, but use a little wine. Now, he's not saying get drunk, right? We can all see that it's clear. He's not saying, hey, go get liquored up. You'll feel better if you're sick. That's not what Paul's saying. But he's saying, have some wine. Now, there are some who have argued that the word for wine really just means grape juice. That's not the Greek word for grape juice. It is wine.

So we have to ask the all-important question, Does Christianity lead us to abstain from alcohol at all times, always, for every believer? Is that a Christian doctrine taught in the New Testament? It is not. Now, what is the biblical doctrine about consumption of alcohol?

As outlined across scripture, don't get drunk with wine, Ephesians 5.18.

What are we supposed to do instead in Ephesians 5.18? not to abstain if you're going to lead someone else, if you're going to be a bad example and lead someone else into sin. Does it say that? You should not do things that will lead your brother into sin. Sure. But it doesn't mean you should never have wine, it just means you should be attentive to who's around you. And that's the thing, I've had some people say, well aren't you worried about your testimony? You're going to have, I will tell you, I enjoy beer. I don't enjoy beer in mass quantities of beer. I don't like Coors. I don't like the big three. I like craft beer.

I've had beverages of alcoholic sorts that are incredibly robust and rich in flavor and taste really good with certain foods. But I try to limit myself to at least a portion or less that I know will not get me drunk because then I'm not filled with the Holy Spirit. I've been drunk before on a few rare occasions and it was one of those most embarrassing things because the Holy Spirit said, hey, we're not, this isn't working.

And it was really embarrassing. It was very embarrassing for me. It was like, okay, that's not okay. So I limit myself. But I'm also not afraid to have alcohol, because alcohol is not the problem. What's the problem? Excess is the problem. It's not walking in the Spirit. Where is that line for each believer? That line is between you and the Lord today, right now, moment by moment. And I obviously went to the same church at that time. Then it was something that I should look at as being important to me.

And so I never got involved in the excesses because I never got started in the beginning. And it was the same thing with smoking. I smoked. My dad smoked. But it's an interesting thing. Many parents that I see And that's not the rule all the time. It's a pattern. But it is a pattern and it is a principle. So I think there's more to it than just not getting drunk. I think it's kind of what Pat said about in Romans where it says, you know, if you don't do the things... In Romans 14. Right. It's not a stumbling block.

And I'm very cautious about who I'm with There are believers that the Lord has brought in my life and I'm so grateful for what I've learned from them just as a blanket statement. But for them, alcohol is a stumbling block. So I do not drink alcohol around me. And you know what? When I do have alcohol, it's usually with food as a culinary experience.

I think that food and beverages as a whole are a reflection of Genesis chapter 1 verses 26 and 27 and being created in God's image. Would you agree with a statement like that? That our palate, our sense of taste, and our ability to explore that within the constructs and boundaries God has given us is part of being created in God's image? Wine was certainly a beverage that was consumed by the majority of people because it was a staple.

And it was a moderate light consumption. I would disagree with that. Paul warns us in 1 Corinthians 11 when we do the Lord's Table this morning, that's in a stanza that is actually a correction of the church because people were coming to communion with the issue of gluttony and drunkenness. At church, this is the body coming together. So I'm not, I'm not, keep going, but I would say that it's not just moderate to like, there was a problem, but go ahead.

Yeah, I'm not saying that there wasn't any problem, I mean that it was Sure, absolutely. And that it was used as, probably as we use water, and I don't know about the quality of the water then, they certainly didn't have a lot of the chemicals. No, they didn't have clean water. But they probably took it out of the, It was culturally not perceived the same as we have now.

There's a lot of cultural stigma on alcohol in the church. I think there's another aspect to it too. Different groups of Christians can make a stigma about different things. Some years ago there was a gathering of gathering of Christians in Jerusalem. And there was particularly one group from Italy that was consuming some wine. And another, you know, group came over to them and said, I think it was an American group, said, you guys are drinking wine! And the Italian said, well, we've been noticing you guys have been drinking COFFEE! Yes, a terrible coffee. I have some right here, so I'll own up to that.

The funny thing is that if we are fixating on, well let's turn to Ephesians 5.18 because I think this is really where we should be setting up the doctrine.

Ephesians 5.18, he says, And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, or a waste of time and waste of energy, but be filled with the Spirit. The issue is being filled with the Spirit. That's the fundamental issue. Are you being filled with the Spirit? If I cross the line from sober to not sober, I'm not walking by the Spirit. Period. That's the problem. Every time.

Paul tells Timothy, hey, your gut's hurting, you need to have some wine. I remember the first time I heard a pastor say, I have a glass of wine in the evenings, it helps me relax and I can go to bed. And I just remember going, wow. He's saying that from the pulpit.

Growing up, I just figured that didn't happen unless it was in secret. I can tell you that when I was a teenage boy, my dad one time had a beard and I freaked out. Because I was under the impression that that was sin. Absolutely. I freaked out. I think you dumped most of it away if I recall correctly. I dumped most of it because I know that bothered you. My parents were way too nice to me getting bearded out. Sometimes they should have just kicked my honey. But my dad was very careful. He had all beard. Literally, that was the beard that was in the house. I can't remember where it came from. It doesn't really matter.

But it was certainly not enough to get him drunk. 12 ounces of something, at this point in time, I think it was probably pretty gross tasting anyways, but that was it. But he was not going to stop being filled with the spirit and walking in the spirit by virtue of having this one beer, which I was freaked out by. It was a stumbling block for me, and I've grown since then, but it was one of those things where he just respected that and he took care of it.

I dumped the rest of it. Yeah, he dumped the rest of it. But it's the being filled with the Holy Spirit that's the important part of this Ephesians 5 context. If you keep going, what does he get into? He gets into marriage. He gets into submitting to one another in the body. Then he goes into marriage and submitting to one another husband and wife. It's the Holy Spirit that's the important part.

That's the part of the nuance of of this passage that we need to take with us. We have a few more verses left, and really, I don't know that we have any time left, but Brian's, oh, we've got five minutes left, because Brian's getting up to ring the bell. Let's just say this.

Don't let it be a stumbling block, and don't let it consume you. But alcohol by itself is not a sin. Walking in the flesh is the problem. 24 and 25. The sins of some men are quite evident, going before them to judgment, for others their sins follow after. Likewise, also deeds that are good are quite evident, and those which are otherwise cannot be concealed. How many of you know about all of my sins? It's probably better that you don't know every sin that I've ever committed.

There's been times when as I teach or I talk about things, my parents will be there, or I know they'll listen afterwards. My mom listens to all the lessons, usually. And I think, oh no, I am going to be honest to you, because you're my brothers and sisters in Christ, and I'll confess some past sin. Not only do they go before me, but then I put them on the record. But they're usually a good teaching illustration.

That's not what Paul's talking about today. But he's talking about the reputation that people are going to have. What does the reputation of an elder matter? What does the reputation of a church sheep matter? This is going before them unto judgment, or into judgment. But what does your reputation matter? If you are a believer who is representing Christ. You're an ambassador. You've been given the ministry of reconciliation, as Paul says in his other epistle. His other epistle, like he's only written two. Stan?

And Paul said several times that imitate me and imitate us because he was the walking example of Christ because Christ was no longer there. Imitate me because I'm imitating Christ. And that is right there Abigail turned nine two weeks ago, and Evelyn's going to turn six in two months, October 24th, so less than that.

As a dad, I really hope that I am imitating Christ so that they will know what a godly husband looks like. So when they go to find Mr. Right, and I say that with a little sarcasm, they know what that looks like. Jessica is, in my opinion, a godly woman. Hopefully my daughters will see that as an example of what a godly wife looks like. My mom and dad were great examples.

Jessica and I have had conversations where we see people who reject their parents' lifestyles, even though their parents were godly. And then we look at people whose parents were ungodly and they rejected that and followed Christ instead, and followed a godly pattern. And it's sometimes just mystifying why someone would reject godliness.

And it's usually because they're walking in the flesh. But 24 and 25 are in part inside the body about that example. It's about the quality of those things. There is an element of judgment in the sense that When you talk through 1 Corinthians chapter 3, you said, some people get into heaven naked and smoking. Their earthly actions will lead to them being burned up. The fruit of the actions being burned up is wood, hay, and stone.

Coming back to the principle of eldership, which is the general theme of this passage, We don't need elders that are examples of carnal fleshly behavior. Because that's going to say that's okay to the body. And we don't want the body doing that, because that's going to tell the world that's okay inside the church. And we're just walking in sin.

Any other thoughts or questions on this? We're just about out of time, but I've talked about and asked some questions, but I want to see if there's any other things, curiosities, disagreements. Anyone who would object to if I had a beer in front of them, so that I will not do that if you ever come over to my house. I don't always have it in my house, it's not like we've got to have one. Thoughts or questions?

Let's pray and we'll go before the Lord. Heavenly Father, thank you for this time that we've had in your Word. Thank you that you have given us good examples in our body here at Holly Hills. Lord, thank you for your grace in all of our shortcomings and your mercy that you sent your son to die in our stead. We ask that you would give us a fruitful week, unless of course even more exciting than you would come and take us to be with you as your bride. We just thank you in Jesus' name. Amen.