Elder Qualification, Part 2

Continuing the discussion from yesterday's post, I wanted to detail some thoughts regarding elder qualifications. Some thought I was rendering the qualifications ineffective or pointless by advocating for low standards. I do not believe that's what I was promoting, but in an effort to clarify my beliefs, I responded to one of the comments with most of the following text.

The word for blameless in 1 Tim 3 is anepilēmptos, and it only appears in 1 Tim 3:2, 1 Tim 5:7, and 1 Tim 6:14. In Titus 1, the word is anegklētos, and it appears in 1 Cor 1:8, Col 1:22, 1 Tim 3:10, Titus 1:6 and Titus 1:7.

I believe that Paul would use the term(s) consistently in 1 Tim and Titus, so the interesting passages to look at are 1 Cor 1:8 and Col 1:22. In both of those cases, Paul is saying the work of Christ will make us blameless when he returns. 1 Cor 1 is speaking of how he sustains us (sanctification) and Col 1 speaks of Christ's death (justification). So, outside the pastoral epistles, we're actually found blameless in Christ Jesus, not on the basis of our works.

If you borrow that meaning and apply it to 1 Tim and Titus, then there really is no other biblical requirement beyond having a living faith. Naturally, that would include fruit (John 15, James 1 & 2), so that would not be advocacy for elders who live as heathens.

But I think Paul is using blameless in a slightly different way when he writes to his young proteges. I think he's taking the soteriological idea and applying it to community judgment. I'm not saying he's becoming lax in his standard (salvation is certainly a requirement for eldership), but rather applying it to a human sense of justice and asking the prospective elder to demonstrate that he lives what he believes before his peers.

Even though we actually sin, because of the blood of Christ we are found "not guilty" when God judges us. That is how he finds us blameless: in his Son. If you take that idea and apply it to a man's character, I believe that you have a good gauge for measuring qualification.

Here is an example. "Not violent but gentle" is a qualification. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ teaches that if you have anger toward your brother that you've murdered him. If the elder qualifications are really a standard of perfection according to the Law, every single man will be disqualified. Every man has some level of anger, so in his heart he is not only violent but a brutal mass-murderer. The qualification does not call for an anger-less life (which it would if you applied Matthew 5 to the qualifications). But if a person is justified in Christ, if they've been transformed into a new creation and the Holy Spirit lives within them, then God finds them "not guilty" in his final judgment. And that person will grow in sanctification, including the fruits of the Spirit (gentleness). The qualification for elder asks a man, and the body of believers appointing him, to evaluate his life for this fruit. If he's qualified he won't start fights. If he's qualified he'll turn the other cheek. According to observation within the church, he can be found "not guilty" of violence. Is he justified according to the judgment of the congregation? Of course the man won't be sinless, without anger or tempted to retailiate...but what does he actually do? How does he live his life? Is he growing in maturity in these areas and able to teach others the same?

I believe that is the standard by which you may judge the qualifications in a man. I'm not promoting that any church body be loosey-goosey with them, but I also do not believe that blameless means sinless, which is what some imply with a legalistic standard. I'm saying that a qualified elder is walking with Christ, but that's not saying anything more than is expected of all Christians.

Elder Qualification

There is a great article and discussion within the comments section at the Gospel Coalition on whether or not an elder's children must be believers in order to be qualified. [1 Tim 3:4-5, Titus 1:6]

Does an Unbelieving Child Disqualify an Elder?

I think Justin Taylor did a good job with his exegesis. According to the explanation of Scripture, I would agree that having unbelieving children does not automatically disqualify an elder. But I wouldn't leave the evaluation at that. A man with a house full of well-mannered pagans may not be the best choice for leading a congregation.

So I would add that the affirming body should evaluate the household management of a candidate more carefully if many or most of his children are not believers. While the responsibility of conversion does not lay on the shoulders of a father, discernment should be used to see if his neglect encouraged his children to reject Christ. Is the gospel central in his home, or is Christianity an extracurricular/add-on? If his children stray despite his daily pleading with tears, he's probably qualified. If his children model his lackadaisical attitude toward church, then he's probably not qualified. How he manages his household is how he will manage the flock, and his children are a reasonable gauge to evaluate the preeminence of Christ in the home.

With well-time providence, D.A. Carson wrote a November 2 entry in his devotional book For the Love of God which studies Titus 1 and the belief of an elder's children. 

James 4:2-3 - History Changing Prayer

You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions. (James 4:2-3)

You do not have, because you do not ask

A plain reading of James 4:2 implies that if you had asked God, if you had prayed for what you wanted, you would have it. I want to quickly get past any prosperity gospel charge coming from this line of thinking, because James shuts that down in the next verse. "You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions" (James 4:3). So for those who were asking, they were not receiving because they were selfish. They were not praying, "Lord, Thy will be done," they were praying, "Lord, my will be done." Just because a person asks for something from God does not automatically imply they will receive it. Everything asked for according to the will of God will be granted. However, as finite men and women we cannot know the whole will of God (Deuteronomy 29:29).

The Sovereign Lord's Will

Historical or theological exceptions of asking and not receiving do not destroy the logic of the verse. James is saying that there are some things believers fail to ask for that they would have received had they asked for it. This is a staggering thought. God, in his infinite power and wisdom has created a system that includes human response in the outcome of some events. That does not mean that we know what those events always are. But we do know some of them. When we pray to God, and he answers, "Yes," we have seen by the answered prayer that God ordained our ministry of prayer as part of his sovereign purpose. Part of what may bother us is not knowing what was missed because we did not pray.

Another objection to this line of reasoning might come from application of God's character. God is omnipotent, omniscient and immutable. Combining those elements to their full logical conclusion would mean a deterministic, fatalistic universe. If God exercised his omnipotence and immutability according to our simple definitions, we would not have free will. But through those two characteristics he created beings in his own image who contain some kind of free will. In the same way, God has chosen the direction of history in part by the prayers of the saints. This does not sacrifice his immutability. God may set the course of history as conditional outcomes instead of deterministic paths in some circumstances. In other words, God's may ordain an "if-then" branch on the basis of something like human prayer. If a person prays about a circumstance, then God will grant his intercession, otherwise he will not. God's will has not changed (he ordained the condition); what has changed is the prayer's action.

Moses as Example

Reformed Christians (of which I am) are very uncomfortable with this kind of thinking. However, here is a piece of biblical evidence that helps validate this interpretation of James 4:2. Consider the familiar story of Moses coming down off Mount Sinai to find Israel worshiping the golden calves they had made. At this point (not the only one!), God was ready to destroy Israel and start over with Moses, "Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them, in order that I may make a great nation of you" (Ex 32:10). But Moses interceded for them, "But Moses implored the LORD his God and said, 'O LORD, why does your wrath burn hot against your people? ... Turn from your burning anger and relent from this disaster against your people'" (Ex 32:11-12). God relented! (Ex 32:14)

Unless James 4:2 makes sense, the account of Exodus 32 should make someone even more uncomfortable. It reads as though God changed his mind, as if God is not immutable. But if God had chosen to decide the outcome based on Moses' response, then God is still unchanging and Moses' prayer affected the outcome of history. God's immutable choice was a fork in the road, and Moses was permitted to travel either branch. The same is true for our prayer life, even if we don't have the benefit of God's revelation on every choice we make.

Evangelism as Analogy

There is an important parallel to evangelism for those who subscribe to the doctrine of election. Hyper-Calvinists assert that Christians need not engage in evangelism because God will call whom he's predestined. They ignore their God-ordained responsibility in the Great Commission, that God uses us as the means of calling. Even though God knows who will be saved, we don't. It would be blasphemously presumptuous to pretend to know, and it's blatantly disobedient to ignore our call to make disciples.

Just as God uses his people to save those he's predestined, he uses the prayers of his people to accomplish his purposes. An omniscient God knows the outcome of all things--after all, he is God. God's omniscience does not mitigate our responsibility to pray or to evangelize. Do not subscribe to fatalism. Prayer changes things. God has ordained that prayer changes things. Otherwise, prayer would be incredibly superficial.


This does not mean that God is not sovereign over those conditional outcomes, our choices or the results. If you trace back all the conditionals leading to a person's conversion, we'll see a person is chosen in God before the foundation of the world. Perhaps God will grant us the understanding of this interplay as we look back in history from an eternal perspective.

Encouragement

Hopefully this is an encouragement to pray. We have too much to do to NOT pray. And we have too many impossible tasks, like winning souls, to ignore our call to prayer. Let's seek the face of God as wrestle with our Lord in earnest prayer.

Book Review: Worship Matters

Anyone involved in the music ministry of a church, non-musical pastors included, need to read Bob Kauflin's Worship Matters. Its content is broad, ranging from grand visions like the theology behind worship to nitty-gritty details of music team management and implementation of worship techniques (e.g. useful chord progressions for improvisation). Each topic is covered well, but Kauflin does a good job pointing to other resources for anyone interested in studying these sweeping concepts more deeply. What makes this book so helpful is that it strives to point your heart in the right direction in all worship decisions to make.

Worship matters. It matters to God because he is the one ultimately worthy of all worship. It matters to us because worshiping God is the reason for which we were created. And it matters to every worship leader, because we have no greater privilege than leading others to encounter the greatness of God. That's why it's so important to think carefully about what we do and why we do it. [p 19]

And he does think carefully. Your theology is probably different than Bob Kauflin's, but he doesn't impose his differences on you. Instead, he equips you to make wise decisions out of your theological differences that you may worship God in faith with a clear conscience.

The book is split into a few sections. The first part defines worship. He does very well, but it seems as though he's inconsistent with his definitions and terminology through the book. A person might feel guilty for using the term 'worship leader' after initially thinking it through, but then Kauflin decides to use that term throughout. After bolstering our theological understanding of worship, the second part of the book explores the phrases that defines 'worship leader':

A faithful worship leader magnifies the greatness of God in Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit by skillfully combining God's Word with music, thereby motivating the gathered church to proclaim the gospel, to cherish God's presence, and to live for God's glory. [p 55]

The final portion of the book details the ins and outs of music team management, and it can be beneficial to anyone calling themselves a worship leader, worship planner, music director, music minister (or again, pastor). Even general music team members might benefit from reading this part, because then everyone can be held accountable to having an appropriate heart about music ministry decisions. If a vocalist is asked to step down from the ministry, it doesn't necessarily mean the worship leader feels threatened by the talent of the vocalist (among other potential objections). So if the whole music team has the same understanding of expectations and potential logistical changes, it may mitigate hurt feeling when a hard decision is made. Kauflin says, "being on the music team is an opportunity to serve, not a right to protect."

I highly recommend this book. And if you're a pastor, please take the time to read it. At the very least, read the last chapter, which was written specifically to pastors.

Worship isn't a gig. It's the overflow of a life devoted to the glory of Jesus Christ. [p 230]

Judgment Day

October 21, 2011 marked the end of the world if you happen to believe a singular radio personality, and while the globe may be heating up, it has certainly not been consumed by a fireball. When this man's original prediction failed in May, many throughout the world mocked him for his folly. Sadly, many mocked Christianity as this one person became the straw man for all Christians. While he was predictably wrong about the date, he is not entirely wrong about a coming judgment.

For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot—they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all—so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. (Luke 17:24-30 ESV)

Belief in the consummation of God's redemptive plan--the return and judgment of Christ--is an orthodox belief. Many debate the details, but all Bible-believing Christians agree that Christ is coming again. Despite various disagreements, one element all should be unified on is the impossibility of knowing when Christ will return. The Son of God himself that we cannot know the day or the hour.

But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. (Matthew 24:36 ESV) [This verse itself probably deserves a blog post some day.]

Anyone choosing, calculating, or prophesying the day or the hour is arrogantly claiming to have wisdom greater than the Son. However, just because we cannot know the day does not mean we should not be prepared. The point of Jesus' message was to ensure his disciples had their affairs in order, "Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" (Matt 24:42-44). Be ready! Do you know your Savior? Is Jesus Christ your life, your truth and your hope?

The deceived followers need to read 2 Thessalonians 2, which was part of today's M'Cheyne reading. 2 Peter 3 would be another good passage to read. Believers need not be alarmed about the Day of the Lord (it will not be missed). And we ought to be grateful for the forbearance of our Lord--that we were not and are not swept away in a global judgment as in Noah's day. But our time is short. We must urgently proclaim the gospel, for as sure as the sun sets today, the Day of the Lord will come. The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Book Review: Surprised By Joy

In addition to reviewing Surprised By Joy, I wish to take a moment to review Google Books and their e-readers.

Google Books


I have been reading via ebooks since the first Kindle DX was released. Amazon has a fine system set up, and I like that I can buy a book and read it on my Kindle, my phone or my computer. I actually take advantage of this feature quite often. Google released their own ebook store not too long ago, so I've been looking for a good reason to use it. Surprised By Joy was the first ebook that Google sold that Amazon did not, so I read the book on my Android phone and through Google's web reader.

There is not much I can recommend; it is simply a terrible system. The ebook store sells copies of the scans Google has made as part of their effort to organize the information in the world's books. They sell ebooks of their scanned books where they've acquired the license. So instead of marked-up text (which is what Amazon and B&N sell when you purchase an ebook), you are buying an image. This gives you far less flexibility (e.g. in the ability to easily resize), and the quality is often lacking, and important features like a robust Table of Contents are corrupt. Google has a feature that allows you to read the book in flowing text, but their translation is awful. Commas are often periods and periods are often missing. "I" and "1" are interchangeable and many words are just plain wrong (for instance, on page 234 of Surprised By Joy, the word "direction" was translated as the non-word "dkection"). There are no easy ways to indicate problems, not that I ought to be helping Google polish their work after paying good money for a book.

Finally, Google's reader removes practically all of the advantages of electronic reading. It is not possible to highlight or bookmark. No notes can be saved in the text. I would rather find the physical book before paying for another book from Google. This surprises me because Google does so many things well, but not ebooks.

Surprised By Joy


This book surprised me in a pleasant way. I was expecting an autobiography. It was, but it was only biographical as it pertained to C.S. Lewis' conversion. So in reality, it's a book-length testimony. I am thankful for that, however, and my respect for a respectable man has increased tremendously after reading about the means of grace in this man's life.

This book can be good for practically anyone. It glorifies God and will give strength to a believer. It may point an unbeliever in the right philosophical or logical direction toward Christianity. No doubt many critics of Christianity are somewhere on the spectrum Lewis passed through (from the Absolute to "Spirit" and from "Spirit" to "God"). It will humble all as the reader understands how ignorant of literature he or she truly is.

For what the book is, I do not see any downsides, and so my only other recommendation would be to step through the few chapters on which I've written.

Chapter 1
Chapter 7
Chapter 9
Chapter 15

Surprised By Joy: Chapter 15

This is the final chapter in C.S. Lewis' autobiography. To this point he has transitioned from staunch Atheist to devout Theist, and this chapter shows how God brought him to belief in Christ. I would highly recommend reading this chapter if there's no time for the whole book (or the final three chapters if time can be spared). These, in my estimation, are the great parts of the chapter.

God used a great, logical mind to draw Lewis to Himself:

     In my mind ... the perplexing multiplicity of "religions" began to sort itself out. The real clue had been put into my hand by that hard-boiled Atheist when he said, "Rum thing, all that about the Dying God. Seems to have really happened once"; by him and by Barfield's encouragement of a more respectful, if not more delighted, attitude to Pagan myth. The question was no longer to find the one simply true religion among a thousand religions simply false. It was rather, "Where has religion reached its true maturity? Where, if anywhere, have the hints of all Paganism been fulfilled?" ...
     There were really only two answers possible: either in Hinduism or in Christianity. Everything else was either a preparation for, or else (in the French sense) a vulgarization of, these. Whatever you could find elsewhere you could find better in one of these. But Hinduism seemed to have two disqualifications. For one thing, it appeared to be not so much a moralized and philosophical maturity of Paganism as a mere oil-and-water coexistence of philosophy side by side with Paganism unpurged ... And secondly, there was no such historical claim as in Christianity.
     I was by now too experienced in literary criticism to regard the Gospels as myths. They had not the mythical taste. And yet the very matter which they set down in their artless, historical fashion—those narrow, unattractive Jews, too blind to the mythical wealth of the Pagan world around them—was precisely the matter of the great myths. If ever a myth had become fact, had been incarnated, it would be just like this. And nothing else in all literature was just like this. Myths were like it in one way. Histories were like it in another. But nothing was simply like it.

And finally, genuine conversion:

To accept the Incarnation was a further step in the same direction. It brings God nearer, or near in a new way. And this, I found, was something I had not wanted. But to recognize the ground for my evasion was of course to recognize both its shame and its futility. I know very well when, but hardly how, the final step was taken. I was driven to Whipsnade one sunny morning. When we set out I did not believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and when we reached the zoo I did. Yet I had not exactly spent the journey in thought. Nor in great emotion. "Emotional" is perhaps the last word we can apply to some of the most important events. It was more like when a man, after long sleep, still lying motionless in bed, becomes aware that he is now awake. And it was, like that moment on top of the bus, ambiguous. Freedom, or necessity? Or do they differ at their maximum?