What is Necessary for Church Leadership? 1 Tim. 3:2 (Monday with Mounce, 62)

I was reminded the other day how meaning is conveyed not only by individual words but also by the larger context of those words. It is easy to hang on to a particular word and forget to check the overall context, but it is equally easy to miss the meaning of a particular word by not looking at its context.

1 Tim 3:2 says that “an overseer  must be (δει) above reproach.” δει is a strong word; it leaves no wiggle room. This is supported by its use throughout the Pastorals, throughout Paul, and throughout the NT (see my commentary, pp 169f). If a person is to be in a position of church leadership, then they must meet the overall standard of being “above reproach.”

I remember a discussion with a former elder when we were working on a elder position paper (available at my personal website, www.billmounce.com/publications, near the bottom of the page). The goal was to define what we understood to be the biblical instructions for recognizing official church leadership. When we were done he commented that he thought the whole process was unnecessary, and all we needed to do was elect good men who could make decisions. Wow. Such a blatant willingness to ignore the clear and unequivocal teaching of Scripture, and to replace the Word of God with the word of a man. (And he claimed to be an inerrantist. Ah, the intersection of belief and practice.)

If we care what Paul teaches, then he has left no doubt as to the type of person who is to be in church leadership. δει means “it is necessary.” The approach I took in my commentary was that “above reproach” is the head term, and what follows are the specifics of what it means to be above reproach.

So this means that every elder must be married and have more than one child. Right? So Paul and Timothy could not be elders. That sounds odd.

When you look at the larger larger, you start to see other factors at work.

1. As is true throughout the Pastorals, much of Paul’s instructions are given against the backdrop of the false teachers. The qualities Paul enumerates, while universally true, were chosen in contrast to the characteristics of the false teachers.

2. When you compare the three lists in 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1, you are struck not only with their similarity but their differences. It is not that they contradict each other but that they are different. If the lists were to be followed rigidly, then why the differences? Which list do we follow?

3. Paul has a preference for celibacy (1 Cor 7:7, 26-38), so why require the leadership to be married?

4. If it is true that Paul’s basic concern is that elders be above reproach, a pattern also visible at Titus 1:6, then the stipulations of marriage and having a family are not so much independent requirements as they are examples of what it means to be above reproach: he must be faithful in his marriage; he must manage his family well.

My conclusion is that the lists show us the type of person who can be in leadership. Some of the requirements would by definition apply to all people: above reproach, hospitable, skilled teacher, etc. But others would depend on the person’s life situation: if married, he would have (δει) to be a “one-woman” man; if he has a family, he would have (δει) to manage his family well (see pp. 158f).

Meaning is conveyed by words and by phrases and by sentences and by paragraphs and by even larger units. Our goal as exegetes is not only to give the words their full weight (δει) but  also to understand them properly. We dare not ignore either.

This whole issue of elder qualifications, how to identify those whom the Spirit has chosen, and how to train them for leadership is a question that has been haunting me for years. It was why I started my online school, BiblicalTraining.org. If you have found a way to raise up godly and effective leadership, or even know just part of the process, and especially if you have implemented a procedure for leadership development in your church, I would love to hear from you. This is our next primary goal at BiblicalTraining; you can contact me through the website.

William D. [Bill] Mounce posts every Monday about the Greek language, exegesis, and related topics at Koinonia. He is the author of numerous books, including the bestselling Basics of Biblical Greek (third edition recently released!), and general editor for Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament Words. He served as the New Testament chair of the English Standard Version Bible translation. Learn more and visit Bill's blog (co-authored with scholar and his father Bob Mounce) at http://www.billmounce.com

Comments

[Kristi Hovis]

Thank you so much for this post, Mr. Mounce! I am putting together an exegetical notebook on Titus 1:5-9 for my exegesis class and had thought the same thing about "above reproach" being the main qualifier that includes the other qualifications in the list. Your post has added confidence to my conclusions, for I'd take your word over mine. I thought "must" because of dei as well and that "husband of one wife" applies to those who are married but does not make marriage a prerequisite for church leadership. Thanks again for writing about this!

[A. Amos Love]

Bill

Just wondering how you reconcile the use
of the word “leader” With what Jesus said in Mt 23:10.

The word “leader” seems like a “high place.” Yes?

Jesus always took and recommended the “low place.” Yes?

Jesus humbled Himself, made himself of no reputation
and took on the form of a servant.
Php 2:7

Jesus in Mat 23:10 told His disciples
“NOT” to call themselves master/“leaders”
for you have one master/"leader” the Christ.

King James Version -
Neither be ye called masters:
for one is your Master, even Christ.

The Interlinear Bible -
Nor be called leaders,
for one is your leader the Christ.

Phillips Modern English -
you must not let people call you leaders,
you have only one leader, Christ.

Today's English Version -
nor should you be called leader.
your one and only leader is the Messiah.

The Amplified-
you must not be called masters ( leaders )
for you have one master ( leader ) the Christ.

Jesus told “His disciples” not to be called "leaders" and none did.
Ro 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ...
Php 1:1 Paul and Timotheus,the servants of Jesus Christ...
Col 4:12 Epaphras, who is one of you, servant of Christ...
Tit 1:1 Paul, a servant of God...
Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God...
2Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant...

His disciples "all" called themselves "servants."
None called themselves "leaders." None? None.
None called themselves "servant-leader." None.

Why are we trying to train “Leaders for the ekklesia of God?”
Why aren’t we training “Servants of Christ” like Jesus did?

Isn't "Servanthood" inclusive? Everyone can be a “Servant of Christ.”
Isn't "Leadership" exclusive? Only available to “A special few.”

If Jesus instructed “His disciples” NOT to call themselves “leaders,”
and someone calls themself a "leader,"
or thinks they are a "leader;"

Are they a "disciple of Christ?"

[Henry Milewski]

some egalitarians have seen this post and are saying your argument can be extended to say:

if male - must be a one-woman man.

i.e. being male is also just an example of a situation where one could look for certain qualities. So could you not have another situation if female - must be a one-man woman. Paul is just giving examples of situations, not saying each situation is the rule.

Does this mean that these verses may not be used to argue for male eldership?

Would love to see you respond to this.

Thanks