Elders and Their Qualifications

Transcript

GR 2283
02/23/2020
Elders and Their Qualifications
Titus 1:5-6
Gil Rugh


We're going to Titus 1 in our Bibles. Paul is writing to one of the young men who were a key part of his ministry, a man named Titus. And they have been together, ministering on the island of Crete, and a number of churches have been established in the various little towns and cities on the island of Crete. We don't know whether they were established by Paul and Titus when they visited on this occasion or whether they had had the gospel brought to them on another occasion. We mentioned on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, it specifically mentioned that there were people from the island of Crete who were there to hear the gospel on the day of Pentecost, so it could have been brought back. But at any rate, as Paul and Titus ministered there Paul felt it necessary to move on and he left Titus there to put things in proper order. And important for us to understand that the church is God's family, there is an organization to the church as there is in the family -- the father, the mother, the children -- established by God. And so he left Titus there to appoint leadership for the church and also to see that certain conduct issues were dealt with as they should be.

We talk about the church alot, so I mentioned, and I had them make a slide. And I appreciate it, John did this at the last minute for me. If you would put up that slide on the biblical church, and I've put in parenthesis, when I talk about a biblical church I'm talking about a church basically comprised of believers in Christ. Doesn't mean there would be no unbelievers attending, but what really makes up the church is a group of those who are believers in Jesus Christ. And these three things have to characterize the church. And the first is sound teaching, the teaching of the word of God, the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the teaching of God's word so that God's people can grow like newborn babes longing, feeding on the milk of the word as 1 Peter 2 tells us. The second qualification is godly leadership, that's what we are talking about in the portion in Titus before us. God has ordained and appointed leaders for His people. This is not a man-made organization, it's a spiritual organization and God has appointed leaders. That's what we are talking about in Titus 2, we'll say more about that. Then the third qualification to have a biblical church is functioning people. Like the church at Corinth, Paul told them you do not come behind in any spiritual gift, he started off the letter that way in 1 Corinthians 1. Then in 1 Corinthians 12-14 he gives more details about spiritual gifts along with some other passages of his letters. God's people functioning as God has equipped and gifted them to function.

I don't think you have a biblical church without these three items, I mention this because some people misunderstand. They'll use a verse of scripture like out of Matthew 18 when Jesus said where two or three are gathered together there I am in their midst, and they say as long as you have two or three believers you have a church. If you read Matthew 18 He is talking in the context there of church discipline, and you need two or three witnesses against a believer to establish that he is guilty of sinning and needs to be disciplined if he will not stop the sin. So what He is saying when those two witnesses join together, Christ is there with them, He is in the midst, He is there, this is part of His way of disciplining His children who are in sin or who persist in the sin. So we want to be careful we don't take a verse out of context and just say where two or three are gathered together, there I am in their midst. He is with you when you are alone, He dwells within you. And when two or three of you are there, of course He is in each one of you as believers. But the point is when these two or three have been made aware by God of a sin that needs to be dealt with, Christ is there, He is the head of the church, they are acting with His authority. That doesn't make it a biblical church. And we noted, it was Paul's practice to appoint elders. On his first missionary journey he went across Galatia and established churches, then he made a return trip as he made his way back and he appointed elders in those churches in Acts 14.

So I take it each of these three things needs to be present, and that's what comprises a church. That's why a group of people meeting together in a Bible study isn't in and of itself a church. Sometimes those grow into a church, the teaching should be sound in the Bible study, then leadership is developed and appointed and people begin to exercise their gifts and they have a church. It's not dependent particularly on size, although two or three people probably don't comprise a church even though they may be all the believers that are there. They may get together for the study of the Word and prayer and so on, and to encourage one another. But as we talk about a church in the New Testament this is what we are talking about. So you have an idea of what is taking place. Leadership is not optional, it's part of what God has appointed for His people, it's His family. He says these leaders will give an account to God for their faithfulness and for the people and how the people have responded to their leadership. So what is going on in Titus 1 is very practical and we get opportunity to apply it regularly. And I must say it is one of the most often abused characteristics of the church because we tend to fracture and get our own ideas about leadership.

I went over with you slides last week, let me just run over them quickly, starting with the three words for elders. The first, and this is no particular order, just the order I have them, overseer is the word translated. I've put the transliteration of the Greek word there, and the English word is the same—over see, “episkopos” -- “epi,” over, and then the “skop,” we see, we look at. So you look over, it's the oversight. That would fit with the responsibility of leadership, direction. The second word is the word elder and the Greek word is “presbuteros,” presbyterian we get from it. We get episcopal from the former word. So the Episcopal Church is a church governed by bishops because the word was often translated as a bishop, but it is simply someone who has the responsibility of leadership or oversight. The elder, it's a word used of an elderly person, I would be elderly. We still use that today. It could be used of physical age, it could be used of a position. In Israel 70 elders were selected from among the elders to provide leadership with Moses for the people of Israel. That's carried over in the New Testament, in the synagogues they were led by elders, they are mentioned as leaders of the people in the gospels and in the book of Acts. Then we looked at the word pastor, “poimenos,” it's just the word for a shepherd. So it could be used of a physical shepherd, somebody who watched the sheep would have been called a “poimenos,” a pastor or a shepherd. That refers to the fact that the responsibility is there for seeing that the sheep are cared for, watched over, protected.

So these aren't separate, distinct things, they together tell you that those men in this position are given the responsibility of the oversight, the leadership of the congregation. They are to be men of respect, dignity, meet the qualifications that we are going to talk about. And they are to see that the sheep are cared for. Part of the problem that comes when we don't recognize this distinction and one of the things that I was careful to clarify when I came and the church that was here agreed to, that I did not see myself as a pastor in the way some churches see it, that we hire the pastor to do everything. Because I was a lot more aware of my weaknesses and shortcomings than they were, and I didn't want them to give me the boot when I moved here all the way from New Jersey. So I told them ahead of time. But some churches hire the pastor, then he is responsible to do everything. He does the marrying, burying, the visiting, the counseling, the preaching, and in some smaller churches some of that will fall more to him. When I pastored a small rural church of 35 people I did visit the people. But what the goal is, you see that the sheep are taken care of. So we have a multitude of people with gifts doing a multitude of things and it becomes more evidently necessary even as the church grows. And it becomes necessary so the church can grow, otherwise it can be stifled under one leader.

So that's why I want to understand the titles or ways of identifying, but it is the same position. We call it a board of elders here, but it could be called a board of pastors, a board of overseers. But this is the responsibility.

From that put up the next slide on the structure of the church. This is… Christ is the head of the church, the elders are appointed by Him. We looked in Acts 20, Paul told the elders in the church at Ephesus the Holy Spirit has appointed you. Now there is a process to go through as Paul is doing with Titus, that Paul the apostle leaves Titus to appoint elders and he gives the qualifications. That's an indication these are the men that God has selected out. Christ the head of the church, He is called the Chief Elder, the Chief Shepherd. Then under them are deacons, then gifted men with the gifts of administration perhaps that help in the overall organization and structure. And you have the congregation exercising their gifts. This is not that you're on the bottom, you are less important, this is just an order. That doesn't mean that some of the most godly would be exercising their gifts as part of the congregation, some of the most mature. But they simply haven't been given the responsibility in some of the area. So that's the way the church is structured, that's the way we are structured, that's the way we understand the New Testament to set it out.

Let me say something about elder leadership, this always becomes an issue. Remember that leadership is a key part of God's structure for the church. These are just some things that I use as questions for people. We noted the elders aren't the bosses with nobody they are responsible to. We looked at elders can be disciplined in 1 Timothy 5. In that sense they are held accountable for sinning the same way any other member of the body. We noted that a way an elder is to be dealt with is the same as Matthew 18 for example. It takes two or three witnesses, one witness is not enough and because he's an elder you don't have to have ten witnesses -- two or three witnesses. Those who continue in sin are to be rebuked openly. Basically the same as you have in Matthew 18, if they will not stop sinning you rebuke them before all. So there is the pattern. So elders have accountability. You can't say I sinned but I'm an elder so I'm not accountable to you.

What do you do when you are under the oversight of the elders? Here are some questions that you ask when elders make decisions. And I have used this with people not too long ago from other churches who have come about situations in their church that they don't know that they agree with the elders. So they'll go to someone else in another church and ask them if they agree the elders are right. Well, here's the question I ask them, first, are the elders requiring you to do something that is not biblical, the elders make a decision, how does that impact you, is that requiring you to do something that is not biblical? Example: Come to confession every week, confess your sins to one of the elders. No, it's not. Okay, second question, are they forbidding you to do something that is biblical? Example: We don't want you any longer bringing your Bibles to church, we're not going to be doing a study of the Bible. Well, you'd say that’s doctrine. This church will no longer hold to the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, we no longer believe His deity. That would be something you say I can't agree with that. Now they are not saying you have to hold to this to be part of this church. Are they denying or changing biblical doctrine? These things blend together.

There are certain things we are going to agree on, disagree on. Should we expand the building or should we not? Should we have this kind of carpet or should we have another kind? Even elders can be wrong. Fine, they have to be corrected and you'll know what carpet we have. So those of you who think I dictate here … And it reminded me, we don't split and divide over carpet. And it wasn't my decision in the first place, and that's a good thing. We would have orange walls and pink ceilings.

What are they requiring of you? If they come in and say kneel, whatever. So ask yourself these questions. Most of the people that come about elders…, a couple of men I talked to relatively recently, they asked, the elders have made a decision, I don't understand, I don't agree with it. And then they say, one of them followed up with I don't think you would agree with it either. I say wait, before we go further let's make something clear, I am not an elder in that church, I am not part of that group that God has appointed to make the decisions for that. So it really is not of any importance whether I would agree with it or not. So I walked him through my questions as I would of anybody here. When it comes down to it, this doesn't involve me personally. Then just why are you in it? Well, I don't know that I agree with it. That doesn't surprise me. They are the leaders, they make decisions. The test of leadership is when you disagree. So that's fine, the elders are responsible for the decisions they make. That doesn't mean it's the decision you make if you are an elder, but God didn't appoint you as an elder and He certainly didn't appoint you as the elder over the elders. So now explain to me again why you are here. I think you ought to go back to your church, thank the Lord you have a church that believes and teaches the word of God, that God has appointed godly men to make decisions, decisions that you may not agree with and at times they may not be the best decision. But they don't change anything for you, so get back there and support the elders and get about your work. It's not so difficult. Most of the unsettling that comes in the church comes when we decide, I don't know that I agree with the elders. What is the doctrinal issue? We have some people that have said there is a doctrinal issue, when I call and ask them they won't even talk to me. Come talk about it if I am doctrinally off-track but if you are afraid that you are off-track, get it fixed, it's not so difficult.

We ought to understand the importance of this, I don't have any particular agenda except if I were going to say one thing that makes it difficult and has impacted our church over the years is when a major issue comes up. Somehow there are many people who think God has given them all the wisdom to decide what the elders ought to do. I don't find that position. Now if the elders are in sin there is a procedure to be followed, if the doctrine is not biblical there is a procedure to be followed. I want to be told if I am not being doctrinally correct. Well, I don't know enough to argue my position. Then you don't know enough to hold a position. What do you want the elders to do, be dumb like you? And I don't mean you personally. But I mean if somebody says I don't want to talk to Gil because I won't be able… If you point out the scripture says this and it says that then we ought to deal with it. I'm going to use an example as we work into this situation in the passage before us.

I'm going to use an example as we work into this situation in the passage before us. I think the test of leadership is when you disagree. If you answer these questions then go on. We get emotionally involved. Sometimes I have told people to start…, and I realize I repeat myself, I know I am repeating. People come and tell me, I want to tell you what so-and-so did. I said I don't want you to tell me what so-and-so did, I can't do anything about so-and-so. Was it something sin that you know? Well, I don't know exact kind of thing. I don't need to hear it. You are here, let's talk about what you are doing. Part of what we do is we listen to what we shouldn't listen to, that's no good. This is going on in the world, look at what happens in the governmental battles, people will stand up and tell a lie, they know it is a lie, and everybody else knows it's a lie. But do you know what they do? They put it in people's minds, they know what they are doing. I know everybody is going to know I lied, but people are going to have that now in their minds. And what do they think? Well, maybe there probably is some truth to that. That's what happens, we listen to things and pretty soon we are emotionally worked up, we're worked up. I have people that come to me, I think of some specific examples, when we got done walking through the scripture he says, I don't know, I'm just frustrated. Well, no wonder you are frustrated, you have taken upon yourself something the Lord did not give to you and you can't handle it, let it go and move on. That's not so difficult.

All right, we are ready for Titus 1. “For this reason,” verse 5, “I left you in Crete that you would set in order what remains.” You see there is an order God has established, set in order. These can be strong words he uses, these are things that need to be put right. “And appoint elders.” So this is more than just elders because he is going to go on to other things but the very start says the leadership because they'll have a key responsibility. If they are the overseers, if they are the shepherds, then they need to take the responsibility. “Appoint elders in every city as I directed you.”

There is a movement that has come up called the city church, some talked to me about that sometime ago now about we ought to just see one church in the city and so maybe the leaders from all those churches come together and it is the city church. I don't think that is a workable situation and I don't think it's the biblical situation. In this period of time, you can get your map and look at the island of Crete, in these early times there is probably one church in the city. It could have met in different times and different places but I think we'd be surprised if we traveled with Paul, looked at the churches he established, we probably would have several of his churches just from this auditorium.

So “appoint elders (plural) in every city,” and we see plurality of elders. When he writes to the Philippian church he talks about the elders (plural) in the church. The church at Ephesus, he called the elders of the church. So there is a plurality of elders.

Let me just say something about that and how we function. There is an equality among the elders. Now obviously I have a more prominent position and I am the only elder that gets to speak to the whole congregation regularly and so on. But when the elders come together there is an equality, that is demonstrated in that each elder has one vote, his vote counts as much as any other. An elder can stop any action or decision by just saying I would not be able to support that. So quite frankly in the meetings I don't vote but the non-staff elders vote. I am chairman of the board just by virtue of the position I have, but it's not that I can have more influence because I could state my opinion like other elders when it comes down to the vote. I don't even vote. Now constitutionally we are set up by the decision of the majority of the elders is the decision of the board. Now we function unanimously. If one elder said I have a problem, I'm uncomfortable, we don't proceed. But you have to have set up…, our constitution is our legal document. If there would come a time say an elder would get off-track and you have to deal with it, if you require a unanimous vote of the elders you can become paralyzed because that one person would never vote and legally according to our constitution then… We went through that early on in our history and had to resolve it. So if you read the constitution you'll see it's a majority, the elders making a decision can be a binding decision but in actual outworking we function with a majority. Any elder who is concerned enough to say he would be uncomfortable moving forward is enough to say we'll table it and continue to talk about it at a later time. Also says the senior pastor does not vote except if there is a tie, and that's another way to keep things from being paralyzed. So if you read the constitution… I'm sure most of you do that at least once a week.

How do you recognize elders? Somebody that has been in the church a long time? Somebody who is the most outgoing? Somebody who has the most friends? No, there are specific qualifications and we want to be careful here. It says they must be above reproach, and it's a man. The move to women in leadership, and we are focusing particularly on the church, as pastors is unbiblical. That is consistent in scripture, for the church it is men who are elders. I know a lady who is a pastor and she does a good job. By who’s standards? That's like saying I know a man who married two wives and they are doing fine. That makes it right? We ought to be careful here, this is what God says, “if any man is above reproach.” And we won't go through all of that because we talk about that on other occasions when we talk about the role of men and women. “Is above reproach,” that does not mean perfect. We've gone through…, and one thing about being in a ministry a long time, you go through the cycles. And you want to be sure you honor the qualifications and you don't say he wouldn't meet all these qualifications but I think he is a good man. No, he has to meet the qualifications. Until you have men to be qualified to meet this, you really can't formally organize the church, that's required. You don't have to have a lot but you have at least one or two that starts it out, then you build to that. Above reproach. But we go to the other side… We went through a period of time here at the church when we approached men and the only reason they had, I don't think I'm qualified to be an elder. And sometimes we raise it too high. There is a balance. These are qualifications of a mature, godly man, doesn't mean a man who is perfect, but a man who meets the qualifications and he is a godly man. And we've been blessed with godly men as our elders.

So he is above reproach, that's going to be key. He's going to state a basic statement in verse 6 and then he repeats it to go into more detail beginning in verse 7, “For the overseer must be above reproach.” And you see he used the term overseer, he started out saying you appoint elders, then he calls them overseers. They are elders, men of respect, dignity, men to hold that position and they will have the responsibility of leading the congregation, he must be above reproach.

The others are the details of that so in verse 6, “the husband of one wife.” Now as I have read commentaries, this one gets more discussion, commentary, than all the others put together. This “husband of one wife,” it has caused more misunderstanding and disagreement so I have put five views down. Some have six or seven views, but these are five basic views.

Number one, they say the husband of one wife means the man must be married. Now the statement here is literally a one-woman man. And the word “man” here can sometimes mean a husband, so it could mean a man married to one woman. A one-woman man is the statement. So some take this a man must be married because how could he keep the qualification of being married to one woman if he wasn't married? That's not a common one, I've talked to one or two men in my years who do hold it but you won't find it too common and there are reasons why they don't hold it. We could talk more about that, I have a number of details on all of these but I don't think we need to go through those.

He cannot practice polygamy is another one. We say in those days they practiced polygamy, but as bad as the Romans were, they honored marriage. In fact they passed some strict laws under some men that are surprised when they were emperor. But to honor marriage. Now the unbeliever always fudges, you had to have one wife and take care of that woman, but you could have multiple mistresses. But they didn't practice polygamy. There is a problem, too. Come back to 1 Timothy 5, and here Paul is instructing how elderly widows who are without any means of support should be cared for and gives the qualifications for them. Down in verse 9, “A widow is to be put on the list only if she is not less than 60 years old, having been a ‘one-man woman.’ ” Has the same statement just reversed, instead of a one-woman man to be an elder, to be enrolled the woman had to have been a one-man woman. Well, nobody says that polyandry was practiced, a woman having multiple husbands. So I don't think there is much support for that view either.

Now I have three views here, the third is they cannot be a remarried widower and put up the fourth also with that, if you would, they cannot be divorced. Now put these two together because they get similar and can overlap. These are hold now more broadly by evangelicals. I studied in a school that held point three, cannot be a remarried widower, no matter why he was remarried. I had the Greek exegesis of the pastoral epistles with a man who has written a commentary on those and this was his view, let me read you what he says. He says when men were to be considered for this office of elder, I'm reading it without the exact word-for-word but he calls it this high office of elder, there must be no record of divorce or any kind of infidelity even before his conversion. This means if you were divorced or remarried before you were converted you are not qualified to be an elder. And they held to that. We had a man who came to seminary, been married for 25 years and had three children with his second wife. When they found out, they removed him from the seminary, said he could not be qualified to be a pastor. One of the other professors I studied under, and I had great admiration for the man, he was probably around 60, late 50s when I was there, appreciated his studies, he was a language professor and I got to know him personally. His wife died and after I left the seminary and moved on and he married a woman who had been divorced and they fired him from the seminary so they held strictly to this, it didn't matter when or why. I didn't hold it, I couldn't find it to be biblical when I was there and I don't to this day. But if you use the commentary of Homer Kent on the pastoral epistles, which is very fine… I have great respect for Homer Kent, he was a godly man, his practice was to translate a paragraph of the Greek New Testament every day to keep himself sharp. But I disagree with him on this, I don't think there is biblical support for it. Usually the support given for some of these things, our rationale, something from that former marriage could come up.

But he goes on, he'll make other statements here. He says when divorce and remarried persons are saved they should rejoice in their salvation, they should serve the Lord faithfully in every way they can, but they cannot be overseers. Now my problem with that is if God says I have washed you clean, whiter than snow, I have nothing against you, who can bring a charge against God's elect? God calls them holy ones, cleansed whiter than snow. You better be on God's side on this issue. Now I realize people get concerned about we lower the standard, and look at all the immorality in the world. Then we get emotionally involved and we become like the Jews. Do you know what the Jews did? They had so much respect for the Mosaic Law that they created volumes of laws and regulations to help protect people from breaking the laws of the Mosaic Law. That didn't make it right, good intentions.

This next one, they cannot be divorced, that's why I put them together, they are similar. They make this a lifetime qualification. Let me read you another commentary and you are familiar with this, he's a pastor we respect and his commentaries are popular. Was in a discussion with this many years ago with him and others. He makes a statement, he wants to start out, he tells how terrible the sins of immorality are and how they are hurting the church and the church is getting too soft and we fail to deal with it. Then he goes on to say God offers forgiveness and spiritual restoration to all believers, including pastors who basically recognize their sin and stop it. God's gracious promises to all Christians, He forgives us. But the Word also makes clear that the Lord does not accept such a person into spiritual leadership like elder. Now it's hard to argue sometimes and not look like you are going soft on sin, but he has paragraphs here but there is no biblical support. And when he does use the scripture it doesn't have anything to do with this, it's a general talking about sin and its seriousness. Nobody is disagreeing that sin is not serious and doesn't have to be dealt with. But his view is strong. He thinks this is perhaps the greatest battle. And I know something of the ministry, I don't think it has been the greatest battle there and the most damaging. Being above reproach is to be a lifelong characteristic of the elder, oversee, pastor. He uses all three words. None of these qualifications are lifetime qualifications or nobody would be qualified. I don't understand this kind of discussion and thinking and again it's not enough just to pull out a scripture and quote it. He goes farther.

And elder must have a lifelong reputation for sexual purity. I mean, we're back to lifelong? Are you going to do that with all these? Paul doesn't do an elaboration here, he mentions this, a one-woman man, then he goes on, then he goes on for more details about… It takes writers to elaborate and expand and give their opinions and so on. A person who commits adultery can never be free of reproach and never be above reproach. Any kind of sexual immorality is serious, any kind of sin is serious. But when God says He has cleansed me and I am clean, I am clean; and when He says you are clean, you are clean. When God says you are holy, when He says you are whiter than snow, when He says there is no charge to be brought against you, who are we to say you will never be above reproach? Who’s reproach? If God says I am above reproach in His sight, I do not care what anybody else says. Now people say you are being…, and I've had pastors tell me you are soft on sin. I want to be where the scripture is, I want to be where God is.

I was going through Joshua again last week and Joshua meets this man. Remember when they are getting ready to go into the land and take Jericho, and Joshua says are you for us or are you for our adversaries? And I love the answer -- no. I come here to represent the Lord. What does Joshua do? He goes down on his face, then he is told to take off his sandals because this is holy ground. It's not a matter of I on your side, you on my side. Let me tell you, the only side to be on is God's side. I'm on God's side. Now it matters, Joshua realizes that's where I want to be, he is down on his face. We want to decide where the scripture is and that's where we are. That could be abused, that could be misused, that could be misunderstood. Yes, it could, we have to be careful we don't. But we don't change scripture. And I get the feeling of that. He goes so far.

He uses David and Solomon as examples. David was a man after God's own heart, Solomon succeeded his father on the throne of Israel and God says there was no king like him. Both of those godly men were specially loved and blessed by God, yet both were morally disqualified as spiritual shepherds of God's people. Wait a minute, said who? This pastor? Gil Rugh? Some writer? God didn't say that. He kept David on, He kept Solomon on. We've read the scripture and studied the scriptures of both men. In fact, we read in Ezekiel 34, and I'm going to talk about this tonight in our Q&A because I had a question on it, he says David, My servant David will rule in My kingdom. No, he has a reproach. David wrote scripture, the Holy Spirit directed and guided him.

I don't want to go soft on sin but sometimes churches that want to be firm on sin swing the other way and they are pharisaical on sin. When God forgives it, it's forgiven. Now that doesn't mean everyone is qualified for every position and responsibility immediately, and we face this, face it with where there has been moral issue. I had someone sit, maybe they were reading this commentary, in my office, been here over 30 years, said a person who commits immorality can never be forgiven, they have to be put out of the church. I said I don't even know what to say to you. You're saying God's grace is not greater than all our sin? Paul murdered believers and God appoints him to the highest position in the church. We want to be careful that I am not emotionally wrapped up on this, by the way, they left, I appreciated they came and talked to me. Husband and wife, told me they appreciated their 30-some years, but they left.

What's the issue here? Should a person be welcomed back into the church when he has done something like this? This is an issue we have to face. Been involved in one of those conversations. And people say no, no, no, not for that. I have to back up, I stop and think, God saved me. This is what made Paul keep a perspective. What did he write to Timothy? I was the chief of sinners, God saved me as a demonstration He could save the worst of the worst. I persecuted the church, I was holding the garments when they stoned Stephen, I was going about… Was Paul the worst sinner that ever was? In his eyes he was. If we keep our perspective like that. Do you know who the worst sinner I know is? Me. Soon as I start thinking about my superiority, I didn't sin like that, I never sin like that, thank you, Lord, for keeping me from being a sinner like those people, I need to stop and say Lord, what am I? Paul could say I am what I am by the best of my efforts. That's not what he said. I am what I am by the grace of God. That's what we are.

So moving on here, it's a sideline, but having come out of that 50 years ago in seminary, it troubled me then. I know men who studied at that seminary when I did who were won over to that view and they've held that view. They have to be consistent with their convictions. And I wouldn't interfere in their church and how they handle their situations. That's what those elders have to do. But I want you to know where I am, where we as elders are on this, not light on sin. That doesn't mean everybody is immediately put into a position, but want to be careful.

Come back to Titus, “the husband of one wife, having children who believe.” Now this is another area. That word translated believe, “pistis,” it can mean believe, it can mean faithful. Does this mean an elder's children must be believers? That's our translation in the New American Standard, they must believe. That's the view of quite a few of what I would call the better and best commentaries on Titus. I find myself not in support of that either, I think faithful is better, and 1 Timothy 3, we're not doing a lot of comparison here, but this one just to mention, these children of elders as he mentions the qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:4, He must manage “his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity,” because if he can't control his house… I think it would indicate the children must be in the house. I don't think we are responsible for our children when they go out, but men pay attention, if you are going to be a godly man, you better have your children in responsibility. I'm always amazed when I go to the store, sometimes even the grocery store, since I used to work in a grocery store I sometimes like walking through, I see this little kid throwing a fit and the father walks along like it's nothing while the mother tries to sort it out. If I had done that at that age, I wouldn't have been in the grocery store for a month because I would have been healing. Not that we want to be mean or brutalize our kids, but fathers are to take care of the discipline in their home, if you're not, you can't be a godly man. Now you have no control over them when they go out, I don't find anywhere in scripture.

Come back to Ezekiel 18, this is my foundational chapter, you can see whether it holds up or not. If not you can write, I'll have to answer it in the Q&A. “The word of the Lord came to me,” first verse, “saying, ‘What do you mean by using this proverb concerning the land of Israel saying, “The fathers eat the sour grapes but the children's teeth are set on edge?” Do you know what that says? We're not responsible, my father brought this on us, God is punishing me for my father. “As I live,” declares the Lord God, “you are surely not going to use this proverb in Israel anymore.” You're not going to shift responsibility back to your parents, and the parents won't shift it to the kids. “All souls are Mine, the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die.” You see what the point is, each one is responsible for his own sin. Now that doesn't mean as the children grow up I as a father did not have responsibility for the disciplining of my children to keep them in order. Sometimes I try, but they don't do it. Do you know why? You give up, they win. You don't stop.

I went to grade school in days when they paddled you in school. It both hurt and was humiliating because they called you to the front of the class and made you bend over and grab your ankles. The bad kids got paddled. You got paddled for looking out the window when you should have been paying attention. It hurt. Do you know when you got disciplined at home? You would discipline the kids and we used a ping pong paddle on the seat because it was convenient. You could travel with it, right there. I don't want to embarrass my kids, but they have their own problems with their own kids and grandkids. We numbered, so if we were driving in the car, it's not always easy to spank them while you are driving. Texting is a distraction, spanking was worse. So I would just say that's three, they knew what that meant -- that meant when we stopped you are going to get three paddles on the bum. They didn't stop, now we are up to four, now we are five. Pretty soon it stopped and then as the car was pulling over, we are being good, Dad. Well, that's good or we would be up to six or seven or eight. You can't stop. I have to consistently discipline in love. I don't want to hurt them in the wrong way but it will be painful. But here when they get to be adults they are not under my control, they are making their own decisions for which they are accountable. Be careful, we fall into the sin that Christ is dealing with, accused Israel of. It's just like the rebellion of Israel against Moses and the leadership. We do it here. And we think why would Israel do that? Then we do it here for responsibility.

“If a man is righteous,” verse 5, “and practices justice and righteousness,” and then he goes on to details of how he practices this. He is a godly man and “ ‘he walks,’ verse 9, ‘in My statutes and My ordinances,’ is faithful, ‘he is righteous and will surely live,’ declares the Lord God. Then he may have a violent son who sheds blood and who does any of these things to a brother even though he himself (the father) did not do any of these things.” You see the contrast, there is no guarantee, you can be a godly, faithful father in many ways, every way, and discipline your children, that doesn't guarantee the outcome, it's not passed on. Godliness, righteousness is not passed on automatically to the children. Now I want to raise them according to what God says because that gives the best opportunity for them to be exposed to the truth, both by example. So I want my discipline not to be because I lost my temper. There will be times when you have to tell them go to the room and wait because you have to cool down because you get emotionally wrapped up. I don't want to discipline when I am out of control or can't be reasonable. But there is no shifting responsibility.

He may have a violent son, so you read that, verse 5, and then down in verse 10, the outcome is not guaranteed, “Then he may have a violent son” who does all these things. Verse 14, “he has a son who observed all his father's sins which he committed,” the son won't be responsible for the father's sins, the son won't be responsible… Come down to verse 20, “The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.”

I'll be accountable for the responsibility God gives me. As an elder, now I'm responsible for carrying out that responsibility. In my home as a husband, as a father, I was responsible. If I wasn't disciplining my kids as I should, when they get older and become adults that won't be an excuse for them to not believe or to live a wicked life. But I'll be accountable for not doing what I should have done. Lord, I couldn't control them, they were rebellious from birth. Of course they were, God tells us that. He says foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child, the rod of reproof will drive it out.

My family wasn't believers until I was about 10, but in those days there were certain biblical principles that still pervaded the society and one of those was fathers disciplined their children and kept them in line. So we didn't have any fights at school, we didn't have anybody fighting against the teacher because they would paddle me there, then they'd let my parents know that their child couldn't be controlled. At home… and that was not going to survive. We forget, we abandon principles.

So all of this, read Ezekiel 18. I don't think it supports the other, and I have a list of references we won't go through. You can look up God as the Father of Israel in the Old Testament, and Israel did not turn out. They will. Do you know what it takes? More discipline. But God says I have been a Father but you have been disrespectful, you haven't obeyed, and all this.

You come back to Titus, “having children who believe,” are faithful, and that word, if you read some of the better commentaries they'll note sometimes used in the context of being submissive. That's part of being faithful, being what they should be, doing what they should do. Being an unbeliever when they are young and in your home is not an excuse for them not being honoring and they have to honor their mother as well as their father. And if they don't honor their mother, their father takes care of it. Mother can exercise discipline. My mother chose to say, go to our room, when your father gets home he will take care of it. And I hated the sound of the door opening, and I'd hear them talking, then here come the steps. But Dad you don't know what Mom did. I don't need to know what Mom did, your Mom is right when she's wrong. Turn over.

I'm saving “not accused of dissipation or rebellion” because I have been mulling that over. We'll have to wait for a couple of weeks so you can work on it and we'll pick up there with the qualifications next time.

Let's pray together. Thank you, Lord, for your grace, Lord, the very practical things that You have revealed for how we are to function as Your family in this place. Thank you for the blessings You provide in appointing godly leadership to oversee, to protect, to help with the development and maturing. Thank you for every person You have gifted who functions as You have gifted them. And as we serve together we grow and mature. We want to honor You in our lives personally, in our life together as a church. Thank you for this time together, bless the afternoon before us. We pray in Christ's name, amen.