← Back to sermon library

Well, please turn with me in 
your Bibles to 1 Timothy 3. 1 Timothy 3. We'll continue our exposition 
of the book of Acts next week. This is a bit of an excursus. After the first missionary journey, 
the apostle Paul and Barnabas, on their way back to Antioch 
in Syria, stopped or revisited the churches so that they could 
appoint elders in the churches in those cities. And I thought 
it would be helpful for us to look at that appointment of elders. And 1 Timothy chapter 3 verses 
1 to 7 gives us the qualifications for elders. And in order to appoint 
elders, we must have qualified men. And as a church, we must 
understand what those qualifications are so that we can take up our 
responsibility consistent with God's Word. So I'll begin reading 
in 1 Timothy chapter 3 at verse 1. This is a faithful saying. If a man desires the position 
of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, 
the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, 
hospitable, able to teach, not given to whine, not violent, 
not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous, 
one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission 
with all reverence. For if a man does not know how 
to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of 
God? Not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride, he fall 
into the same condemnation as the devil. Moreover, he must 
have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall 
into reproach and the snare of the devil. Amen. Well, let us 
pray. Our Father in heaven, we thank 
you for the written word of God. We thank you that it speaks to 
all matters of faith and practice. And help us as a church to understand 
these qualifications. Help us as a church to vet men 
that are aspirants for Christian ministry. And God, help us to 
see the installation, the ordination of men. For certainly the harvest 
is plentiful, but the laborers are few. And not only for this 
church, but the church at large and the missionary enterprise, 
we need to lift up our eyes and to see those fields white unto 
harvest. And we pray to the Lord of the 
harvest to to equip and to furnish the church and to furnish missions 
with faithful men who will preach and teach the Word of the living 
and true God. We pray for your blessing upon 
the church in Vernon. We pray that in your kindness 
and in your grace you would provide for them a man that labors in 
the Word and doctrine. We pray for the brethren in Surrey, 
and thank you for Pastor Mike. and ask God that you would continue 
to look with favor upon that local congregation. And even 
now, Lord, forgive us for all of our sins, all of our transgression 
against your holy law. Cleanse us in that precious blood 
of the Lord Jesus, and guide us now by your Holy Spirit as 
we consider the appointment of elders in the churches of Jesus 
Christ. And we pray in his most blessed name. Amen. Well, before 
we get to the actual exposition of 1 Timothy chapter 3, I just 
want to point out that the New Testament authors use several 
words synonymously to speak to one office in the church. The 
words elder, overseer, and pastor are used, as I said, interchangeably 
with reference to the one office in the church that is tasked 
with preaching and teaching and leading the church. The other 
office, if we would have continued to read in verses 8 to 13, is 
the deacon. So there are two abiding offices 
in the Church of Christ. Elder slash pastor slash overseer 
or bishop, and then you have deacons. And then there are no 
more prophets, there are no more apostles, but rather the emphasis 
in the pastoral epistles, which are 1st and 2nd Timothy and Titus, 
is upon sound doctrine and the place of pastors preaching and 
teaching sound doctrine for the good of the churches. We saw 
that in Acts chapter 14. They could have easily got back 
to Syria or back to Antioch in Syria by just passing through 
Tarsus, but rather they went back through the churches so 
they could appoint elders so that the churches would be stabilized 
and furnished with men that would, in fact, equip the people of 
God. And there are several reasons why we see the synonymous use 
of these terms or several passages. You can turn to Acts chapter 
20 for just a moment. Now if you hear the word bishop, 
I don't want you to think Roman Catholic, I don't want you to 
think Big Red Hat. I want you to think of a biblical 
term which is basically overseer. So the word episkopos is translated 
here in 1 Timothy 3.1 as bishop, but it simply means overseer. 
overseer. Again, we see these terms used 
synonymously here in Acts chapter 20. If you notice in verse 17, 
from Miletus, he sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of 
the church. And then in verse 28, he's charging 
those elders of the church, and he says, therefore, take heed 
to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit 
has made you overseers, or episkopoi, or bishop, and then he goes on 
to say to shepherd or to pastor the church of God which he purchased 
with his own blood. So pastor is sort of the comprehensive 
term that is functional in nature and encompasses the reality that 
pastors shepherd, pastors guide, pastors govern or lead the flock, 
not according to their own authoritarian designs, but as ministers of 
the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Turn over to Titus chapter 
1. Again, just to see the synonymous 
use or interchangeable use of the various terms that are utilized 
for this office in the church that is tasked primarily with 
leading or governing and with teaching. And in Titus chapter 
1, 5 to 9, we have a parallel passage to 1 Timothy 3. And in 
Titus chapter 1, verse 5, he says, For this reason I left 
you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that 
are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded 
you. And then notice in verse 7 for 
a bishop, okay, or an overseer. So he is speaking about the same 
persons, but he is using these various terms that just sort 
of flesh out or indicate the nature of their responsibility 
in the context of the church. They are overseers. They watch 
over the flock. They are elders, they are men 
that are qualified, consistent with what we find in 1 Timothy 
chapter 3, to serve in the flock. And they are pastors, men that 
shepherd, men that seek to govern. Again, not according to their 
own desires or designs, but by the Word of God. When you hear 
that language of leadership or government or ruling elders, 
I think at times it suggests sort of this authoritarianism, 
but that's not how the Bible approaches it. Rather, the men 
that are governing, the men that are leading, the men that are 
exercising oversight are doing it by the Word of God, the primary 
way in which government leadership, shepherding is done is through 
the proclamation of God's truth, wherein we are disciplined or 
discipled by the Word of God and conformed hopefully further 
to the image of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. So just understand, 
if I say elder, if I say bishop, if I say overseer, or I say pastor, 
all those terms refer to the same office that is being addressed 
here in 1 Timothy 3, verses 1 to 7. Now, I want to look at several 
things with reference to qualifications for eldership. I hear that word 
several, and perhaps you're thinking we're going to be here a while. 
Well, please don't think that. We'll try to be out of here like 
normal. But there are several things 
that Paul sets forth must be in place before a man is received 
into the eldership. I want to look first at the man's 
desire for eldership in verse 1. Secondly, the man's personal 
holiness in verses 2 and 3. Thirdly, the man's domestic faithfulness 
in verses 4 and 5. Fourth, the man's experience 
in the faith, verse 6. Fifth, the man's testimony toward 
outsiders, verse 7. And then finally, the man's ability 
to teach in verse 2. You'll notice I took that one 
out and put it at the bottom because you'll see the similarities 
between elders and deacons in terms of virtue, in terms of 
things that must be true of the men. The only thing that differentiates 
elders from deacons is aptness or ability to teach. And as well, 
when we look at these particular virtues, there's something that 
everybody should aspire to. There's something that everybody 
should be pursuing. There's something that shouldn't 
be surprising. You mean guys in the church should 
be Blameless? You mean guys in the church shouldn't 
be violent? Again, this ought to be every 
Christian's pursuit, but with reference to men that we choose 
to function as elders, they must have demonstrated particular 
faithfulness in each of these areas. So again, it's not difficult, 
it's not, wow, I can't believe we want guys to serve in the 
church that don't like to fist fight. No, that's a no-brainer, 
but they must be men who have demonstrated the ability to not 
engage in, just this example, fist fighting. But before we 
look at the specifics, note the context. It's intriguing because 
in 1 Timothy chapter 2, Paul deals with the place of women 
in the context of the local church. And look at what he says in verse 
12. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over 
a man, but to be in silence. Now much to the chagrin of many 
people today, that means precisely what it says. Paul does not permit 
a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. And when 
he goes on to describe the particular qualifications, we see that they 
are peculiarly fulfilled by men. A man must be. Now, this is no 
harm or foul to women. This is not an indictment upon 
your abilities or intellect. It is simply to highlight that 
in God's world, he has purposed certain things to happen. He 
purposes for fish to swim, for birds to fly, and for men to 
function as the leaders in both the church and in the home. In Ephesians chapter 5 he says, 
the husband is the head of the wife. I think in so many instances 
we try to turn these things over on their heads and we end up 
transgressing God's design, God's purpose, and God's plan. So here 
he tells us specifically in 2.12, I do not permit a woman to teach 
or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. Some suggest, 
well, that's because the culture in Ephesus was bad. They had 
these kind of empowered women that were pushy and obnoxious 
and all that sort of thing. But Paul doesn't argue based 
on culture. He argues based on creation. 
And that's precisely what we see in verse 13. For Adam was 
formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but 
the woman being deceived fell into transgression. Nevertheless, 
she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, 
and holiness with self-control. So he prohibits women, which 
indicates that he only wants men to preach or teach in the 
context of the church. But 1 Timothy 3 verses 1 to 7 
goes further to delimit what kind of man. It's not just any 
old man, but it must be a man who demonstrates faithfulness 
with reference to these particular categories. So it's not open 
to any man just because you breathe like a man and You look like 
a man and you have the anatomy of a man, therefore you teach 
or preach in the church. No, you must be a man that is 
qualified according to the stipulations set down by the apostle here 
in 1 Timothy 3, 1 to 7. So let's look first at the man's 
desire for this role. Verse 1 says, this is a faithful 
saying. Some take it as what has previously 
been written. Others take it to govern what 
is stated here. I take it to govern what is stated 
here. This is a faithful saying. If a man desires the position 
of a bishop or overseer, he desires a good work. So there must be 
desire on the part of men that would serve or function in the 
eldership. It's not just sort of a routine 
that the churches do once in a while, hand every member a 
list, put a few names on it, and check the guy that you think 
would be good for a particular season to function in this capacity. 
No, there's a desire on the part of a man to serve in this capacity. And I think Albert N. Martin 
is very helpful when it comes to discerning a genuine call 
to the Christian ministry. And I take from him these four 
particulars with reference to a call to the ministry. If a 
man has these, it doesn't necessarily mean that he's going to serve 
in that capacity, but these things must be present for a legitimate 
call to the ministry. In the first place, working with 
1 Timothy 3.1, he says there is a desire born of right motives. There is a desire born of right 
motives. I've often said that people look 
at pastors like they do at the garbage man. The garbage man 
only comes to your house on Wednesday, so you might think the rest of 
the week he isn't doing anything. Pastors get up and preach on 
Sundays, so you might think for the rest of the week they're 
not doing anything. their golf game is improving, 
their coffee drinking is improving, their guts are getting bigger, 
whatever the case may be, they conclude that the pastoral ministry 
is for prissy, sissy men, and it offers a very happy and comfortable 
lifestyle. Brethren, that's not the case. 
That is absolutely positively not the case. In fact, look at 
Paul's language in Colossians 1. Colossians 1, relative to 
his ministry as an apostle of Jesus Christ. Now, pastors aren't 
apostles, but there is some interrelationship, there is some connectedness. 
And notice what he says in Colossians 1.28, him we preach, warning 
every man and teaching every man in all wisdom. that we may 
present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. To this end, I 
also labor, striving according to his working, which works in 
me mightily." Turn to 2 Corinthians chapter 11. 2 Corinthians chapter 
11. The apostle here is asserting 
his specific qualifications in terms of his apostolic ministry. I think I've told you before 
that some had come in Paul's absence to the church at Corinth 
and basically tried to undercut his ministry. They said things 
like, Paul's only in it for the money, Paul's only in it because 
he's got a big ego, Paul doesn't have your genuine good as his 
desire. That's why 2 Corinthians, Paul 
sounds like he's defending himself, because he is. He knows that 
if the Corinthians reject him, they will reject the gospel. 
Paul says that he is a man that has suffered on behalf of the 
cause of God and truth, and he gives that. Notice in 2 Corinthians 
11, 22, he's talking about these men, some have called them super 
apostles, these persons that have come in, these pig theologians, 
as Luther would have called them, these theologians of glory, these 
men that would assert themselves in a way that was ungodly, and 
they would speak ill of the apostle. Verse 22, he says, are they Hebrews? 
So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. 
Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. Are they ministers of 
Christ? I speak as a fool, I am more. 
In labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more 
frequently, in deaths often. From the Jews five times I received 
40 stripes minus one. Three times I was beaten with 
rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked. 
A night and a day I have been in the deep. In journeys often, 
in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own 
countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, 
in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils 
among false brethren, in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, 
in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. 
There's no connection there with Paul in terms of the modern day 
eldership. I grant that wholeheartedly and 
absolutely and positively. That ain't happening to elders 
in the Western world. But the next thing he says does 
happen to elders in the Western world. Verse 28, besides the 
other things, what comes upon me daily, not just Sunday in 
the preaching ministry of the church, but what comes upon me 
daily, my deep concern for all the churches. So a man must have 
a desire born of right motives. He cannot be simply looking for 
a comfortable life where he gets paid to read books. That concept 
is absolutely positively contrary to the whole gist of biblical 
eldership. A second thing that must be there 
in terms of assessing one's call to the ministry is the graces 
indicating genuine Christian experience. In other words, he 
must be born again. He must be a believer. He must 
have partaken of the very gospel that he stands up to preach to 
others. Now, this shouldn't be a revolutionary concept. This 
shouldn't be a, wow, I can't believe it, we want converted 
men to lead the churches. But just in case it is, I want 
to stress this reality. How can a man engage in spiritual 
ministry when he's not spiritual himself? There must be graces 
indicating genuine Christian experience. He has been born 
again. He knows something of the conviction 
of sin. He knows something of his own 
transgression against the law. He knows something of the only 
fount that is open for sin and uncleanness, that God Most High 
has plunged him beneath that flood and he has lost all of 
his guilty stains. There must be graces indicating 
genuine Christian experience. A third aspect in terms of assessing 
a desire to ministry or qualification or fitness for the ministry are 
the gifts indicating divine provision. So when we look at this list 
in 1 Timothy 3, verses 1 to 7, it's mainly virtue. He must be 
holy. He must be faithful to his family. 
He must be faithful to those outside. He must be all those 
things in terms of his conduct, in terms of his personal holiness. 
But there is a gift. And that's 1 Timothy chapter 
3 at verse 2. He must be able to teach. That doesn't mean he must be 
C.H. Spurgeon, he must be John Calvin, he must have the ability 
of any man or of the best of men that have ever lived. No! 
But both publicly and privately he needs to be able to open the 
Word of God and speak the truth as it is in Jesus. Doesn't mean 
he has to yell, doesn't mean he has to preach for an hour, 
doesn't mean any of those things. But it does mean he needs to 
be able to assimilate the truth for himself and be able to articulate 
that truth for others. He not only needs to eat the 
food, but he needs to, and I say this graciously, regurgitate 
the food so that others can eat it as well. That is absolutely 
crucial. Listen to Spurgeon on this point 
relative to gifts indicating divine provision. He says, God 
certainly has not created behemoth to fly. Now behemoth, according 
to the book of Job, some say it was a hippopotamus, some say 
it was a dinosaur, but it was without wings, okay? So behemoth, 
whatever its specific identity was, he says, God certainly has 
not created behemoth to fly. And should Leviathan, that was 
a water creature, again, lots of speculation in terms of what 
it was, but, and should Leviathan have a strong desire to ascend 
with the lark, it would evidently be an unwise aspiration since 
he is not furnished with wings. Do you understand? When God calls 
somebody to do something, he fits them and makes them able 
to do it. Hippopotamuses don't fly. I saw 
an interesting video the other day. They certainly get out of 
wherever they live and walk around a gas station in Florida. But 
they don't fly because they don't have wings. They don't fly because 
God hasn't equipped them that way. Spurgeon goes on, if a man 
be called to preach, he will be endowed with a degree of speaking 
ability which he will cultivate and increase. If the gift of 
utterance be not there in a measure at the first, it is not likely 
that it will ever be developed. That is a good thing to take 
into consideration. And here, brethren, I will give 
the qualification I always give relative to talking about eldership. It is not a sin to not be an 
elder. It is not a sin to not be able to teach. It is not a 
sin to not be given by God a particular gift. If you are never called 
to teach or preach in the life of the church, you can be as 
faithful, and in many cases, far more faithful than men who 
have been set apart to preach the Word of God as a vocation. 
So never get it into your head that I'm less somehow if I'm 
not teaching, or I'm not preaching, or I'm not leading a Sunday school. 
Brethren, faithfulness is required among the people of God. Wherever 
you are planted, you're supposed to grow. If God has equipped 
you and God has given you this desire, then by all means seek 
by grace to pursue these things. But don't ever judge yourself 
as having committed sin against God because you can't lead a 
Bible study. That's okay. That's perfectly 
acceptable. No harm or no foul. God is not 
going to say on the day of judgment, I can't believe you didn't have 
a neighborhood Bible study. I can't believe you didn't jockey 
for position in the context of the church. He's not going to 
say that, because these are gifts given by God, and if these gifts 
are absent, that's okay. No harm or foul on the part of 
the person who hasn't received the gift. And then the fourth 
thing, relative to a call to the ministry, is an opportunity 
indicating providential opening. Again, I'm giving credit to Pastor 
A.N. Martin. Desire born of right 
motives. Grace is indicating genuine Christian 
experience. Gifts indicating divine provision. 
And then that fourth one, an opportunity indicating providential 
opening. The same sort of thing obtains 
here. If God wants behemoth to fly, he'll put wings on it. If 
God wants a man to preach, he'll give him people that will listen 
to him. Solomon in the book of Proverbs 
says that a man's gift makes room for him. There is a specific, 
dare I say, conspicuous order in that passage. He does not 
say, a man makes room for his gift. That is a different ball 
game or a different animal altogether. And I have shared, and I'll probably 
die sharing it, that when people come here and the first time 
they meet me, they tell me, I should be teaching your Sunday school, 
or I should be preaching in your pulpit. That doesn't typically 
make me want to sign on the dotted line and sign them up right here 
right now, because a man's gift makes room for him. He doesn't 
make room for it. He doesn't parade himself as 
the rabbi. He doesn't demonstrate himself 
as the holy one of Israel, but rather he's humble and he bides 
his time. and he waits for the providential 
openings under God, and when such occasion arises, all these 
other things being in place, qualifications met, hands laid 
upon him, then he can preach and he can teach until the proverbial 
cows come home. Brethren, these things must be 
present. Now, to varying degrees, to varying 
experience within the context of the particular man himself. 
But this is a great sort of rubric or metric on how to measure a 
man's call to the ministry. Now, secondly, we look at the 
man's personal holiness. And we're not going to spend 
a lot of time here because each of the words means precisely 
what each of the words says. Again, it's not difficult. Virtue 
ought to be pursued by the blood-bought children of God, right? We have 
the Holy Spirit. The Lord Jesus points us to the 
moral law as our pattern for sanctification. Obviously, we 
should seek by grace to do what God calls us to do. But again, 
with men that are appointed into the eldership, they must be men 
who have proven a degree of faithfulness with these things. Not perfection, 
not sinlessness, not absolute moral purity, because we never 
have pastors in the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Take, 
for instance, this first one. It's sort of the overarching 
concern. Verse 2 tells us a bishop then must be blameless. A bishop then must be blameless. John Calvin writes, there will 
be no one found among men that is free from every vice. But 
it is one thing to be blemished with ordinary vices, which do 
not hurt the reputation, because they are found in men of the 
highest excellence, and another thing to have a disgraceful name, 
or to be stained with any baseness. So he makes a distinction. I 
typically use the language of garden variety sin, and then 
those things that are above garden variety sin. He speaks of ordinary 
vice. Can we ever find a man to function 
or serve in the context of a biblical eldership that is without ordinary 
vice? If you have for a moment ever 
entertained the thought that Butler doesn't have ordinary 
vice, let me disabuse you of that notion right here and right 
now. Every single man functioning in pastoral ministry has sin. That is why Jesus came into the 
world. It was to save his people from 
their sins. But this blamelessness that is 
invoked by the apostle has to do with what Calvin illustrates, 
reputation. If he is notorious for a particular 
sin, if he has a habit or a reputation for a particular sin, that ought 
to keep him out of the pastoral ministry. Notice, secondly, he 
says he must be a one-woman man. He is the husband of one wife. 
Now, interpreters typically go one of four ways in this. Now, 
as I said, we're not gonna spend a lot of time, but a few of these 
terms does bear our attention. So there are four ways to deal 
with this statement, the husband of one wife. The first is that 
the elder must be a married man. In other words, we don't ordain 
a man, and we don't receive into the eldership a man that's single. 
I do not think that's what Paul means here. It would bring us 
into conflict with teaching of Paul in 1 Corinthians chapter 
7. I think functionally, and I think practically, and I think 
for the most part, elders will be married men, but this text 
is not necessitating that they be. But if a married man is able 
to speak to married man sort of issues, a man with children 
is able to speak to men with children sort of issues, there's 
a practical edge that that man has having a wife and having 
kids. But does the text demand that 
elders in our churches be married? No, I don't think it does. The 
second option is that the elder must have only ever had one wife 
his entire life. In other words, if his wife dies, 
he is not free to remarry. Again, I think that brings us 
into conflict with other teaching in Scripture. Again, 1 Corinthians 
7 and then Romans 7, a very analogy that the Apostle Paul uses, assumes 
the validity of remarriage after the death of a spouse. The third 
option is that it forbids polygamy. Polygamy. If you read the Old 
Testament, and oftentimes I've heard this question, what about 
the Old Testament? David had a multitude of wives. Solomon 
had a multitude of wives. Well, let Solomon be the beacon 
of warning as to why that's a horrible idea. Because those wives led 
his heart astray and brought him into truck or contact with 
these idols. But the text does forbid polygamy, 
but I think option 4 does that better than strictly identifying 
it as polygamy. Option 4 basically states, the 
elder is to be faithful in marriage and in sexual matters. We might 
say he is a one-woman man, and that is the literal translation 
of the passage. He is a one-woman man. And therefore, it does forbid 
concunibage, it does forbid polygamy, but it also forbids other areas 
of sexual infidelity. And so the elder must be a man 
with proven faithfulness in this particular regard, or he's not 
to function or serve in the eldership. Now, if he gets better, if there's 
growth, if there's help, if there's hope, if there's that, I would 
never say that is absolutely disqualifying. There's an intriguing 
passage in 1 Timothy 5 that I'm not sure the church is ready 
for. Look at 1 Timothy 5 for just a moment. I don't mean this 
church alone. I mean churches in general. Look at verse 19. I think we 
all know this passage. We just don't pay any attention 
to it. Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from 
two or three witnesses. Now note verse 20. Those who 
are sinning rebuke in the presence of all that the rest also may 
fear. It's that sort of old covenant 
model when you punish somebody that all Israel would hear and 
fear. It's the same sort of a concept. 
But does Paul actually mean that an elder could have sinned in 
the eldership, be publicly rebuked for that sin, repent, and continue 
on in the eldership? The text seems to suggest that. I mean, there are disqualifying 
sins. There are things that should 
be a means or the reason for removing a man, you know, forthwith. But if it's a garden variety 
sin, or there's a pattern, or there's a habit, and he's rebuked, 
and he confesses, and he forsakes, and he maintains faithfulness, 
do we necessarily defrock him at that point? I think the typical 
pattern, at least in my experience, is defrocked for just about everything. Well brethren, that might lend 
itself to the lack of elders in our Reformed Baptist churches. 
Perhaps we have become more holy than God Almighty. Can a leader 
be publicly rebuked? Can that leader confess a known 
sin? Can that leader be restored to 
faithful gospel ministry? Again, I think there are gross 
violations, adultery, various sexual sins, various other sorts 
of things, embezzlement, you know, things where the man is 
proven unfaithful in terms of leadership as a whole. That ought 
to be the grounds for immediate dismissal. But are there a class 
of sins where a guy could be rebuked and continue on in gospel 
ministry? Again, I don't want to lower 
the bar, but at the same time, we don't want to make it so that 
no one could ever serve as an elder. Brethren, if you look 
at our Reformed Baptist churches, it's not just this one. It's 
not like we're bursting at the seams with elders. The harvest 
is white and the laborers are few. And we are supposed to pray 
to the Lord of the harvest to raise men up and to send them 
out. But if we raise the bar so high, that's why when it comes 
to this atlas to teach, I've had to examine my own art. I've 
had to look at my own heart. Am I looking for C.H. Spurgeon? 
Am I looking for John Calvin? I don't think that I am, but 
I am looking for somebody that can assimilate truth for their 
own benefit and then articulate that truth to another. But if 
we append a certain degree, a certain type, a certain measure of aptness 
to teach, well then we are raising the bar higher than the Apostle 
Paul does. And we need to guard our hearts 
in that way. So he must be blameless. He must 
be a one-woman man. Thirdly, he must be temperate. 
This can be used with reference to sobriety in the use of wine. But because Paul speaks specifically 
with sobriety in the use of wine, here it has to do with the mental 
sobriety. The word denotes self-control, 
balanced judgment, and the avoidance of rash behavior. There is no 
place in an eldership for rash behavior. Brethren, we have to 
deliberate, we have to think through issues, we have to search 
the scriptures, we have to look for explicit text, we have to 
look for implicit text, we have to ponder, we have to reflect, 
and then we move. There ought not to be ready, 
fire, aim guys serving in elderships. You get that? Ready, fire, aim. Any of you who've ever gone shooting, 
don't shoot that way. Never shoot that way. You ready, 
aim, and then fire. Okay? We need men that are sober-minded 
in the gospel ministry, men that are not given to reaction versus 
contemplation, rationality, and reflection upon issues that demand 
our attention. Notice, then, he goes on to say, 
he must engage in good behavior. The same word is used in chapter 
2, verse 9, where it is translated modest. It simply means respectable, 
orderly, and well-behaved. He must then be hospitable. Again, 
this isn't something, wow, I can't believe, no, it's all over the 
New Testament. There are many one-anothers, 
not just for elders, but for the people of God. Be hospitable 
to one another without complaint. Doesn't Peter tell us that in 
1 Peter chapter 4? There needs to be hospitality. And I think 
in this area, or in this arena, this is where a married elder 
is well served by a faithful wife that engages in this sort 
of activity and can serve as his helpmate to make sure that 
this is being met in their day-in and day-out lives. As I said, 
we'll take up, he must be able to teach at the end. Then seventhly, 
he says he must not be given to wine. He is not a slave of 
drink. He is not preoccupied with it or overindulgent. The 
Bible does not condemn the use of alcohol. The Bible condemns 
the abuse of alcohol. The Bible does not forbid man 
partaking in the good creature that God has made. It does forbid 
man in overindulging in that good creature. And that is prohibited 
by the apostle relative to eldership in the Christian ministry. He 
must not be violent. And I think this one is probably 
self-evident. You know, you come to your pastor 
for counsel, you shouldn't want to leave with a black eye. That 
just, you know, goes on to just pretty consistent with life. 
He's not pugnacious. He's not a striker. He's not 
one that, you know, this is a little bit of discipline for you. I 
got the five fingers of discipline. That's not what an elder should 
be. Again, remember temperate, sober-minded. Not rash, not a 
ready, fire-aimed guy, but rather he must not be violent. Next, 
he says he must not be greedy for money. This is absent in 
other Bible versions. It's here in the King James Tradition. 
It's certainly indicated in Acts 20. Paul says, I have coveted 
no man's silver or gold. I've not been in this for the 
money. 1 Peter chapter 5 tells us that elders are not to serve, 
they're not to do it for greedy purposes or greedy gain. Now 
that doesn't mean you make your elders live in huts out in, you 
know, the parking lot of the church and call it a manse. If 
a man labors in the Word and Doctrine according to 1 Timothy 
5.17, he is worthy of double honor, and honor in that context 
means payment. Now, no man should get rich from 
the gospel ministry, but no man should have to go begging in 
the gospel ministry as well. And we need to keep that in mind 
as the church, and I've got to give the qualification. This 
is not a complaint. I am not suggesting... No, no, 
no. I'm very happy. The Lord is good. This is what 
the scripture says in terms of elderships. Not greedy for money. He must be gentle. He must be 
gentle. Now remember, all men have their 
ordinary vices. And not all men may be as gentle 
as other men. So we got to make sure that we 
understand these statements. It's going to vary from man to 
man. Some men dispositionally are more gentle than others. 
That doesn't mean the man who's less dispositionally gentle is 
not gentle. He's just not as good at it as 
perhaps his brother or his fellow is. But a man of God must be 
gentle. Notice as well, he must not be 
quarrelsome. Turn over to 2 Timothy chapter 
2, where this is illustrated vividly. 2 Timothy chapter 2. verses 24 and, well, verse 23. 
But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate 
strife. And a servant of the Lord must 
not quarrel, but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient in 
humility, correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps 
will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, 
and that they may come to their senses, and escape the snare 
of the devil, having been taken captive by him, to do his will. Must not be quarrelsome. That 
doesn't mean you can't answer. It doesn't mean you can't give 
a defense. It doesn't mean you can't rationally engage with 
people. But it simply means you can't grab them by the shirt 
collars and shake them until they adopt your position. There 
must be that in the man of God where he's not a quarreling man. 
He's not a violent man. He's not so bent on his agenda 
that he's unwilling to hear everything that somebody may have to say. 
Brethren, this is what Paul says concerning men who serve in the 
eldership. And then the final one in this 
arena is he must not be covetous. He must not be covetous. Notice 
at the end there of verse 3. Again, it's not okay for you 
to be covetous. The Tenth Commandment forbids 
covetousness, but we need men with a proven track record of 
not being covetous men. And that's what Paul's point 
is. And as I understand it, there was money to be made in religion 
in the first century, in the Roman Empire. There was money 
to be made if you were a philosopher or you were a religious teacher. 
Do you know that in Acts chapter 19, the Apostle Paul rents the 
school of Tyrannus? He rents the school of Tyrannus 
and there he preaches the gospel and the text says that all Asia 
Minor heard it. Well, the school of Tyrannus 
was probably a philosophy school. It was probably a building where 
they taught philosophy. Paul books, you know, whatever 
slot or whatever time of the week it was, and there he sets 
up and he preaches. Philosophy, theology, metaphysics, 
things that mattered then don't really matter a lot now, but 
men made money from that. They had disciples. They had 
people that were followers. They had supporters. That's why 
Peter says in 1 Peter 5, they must not be greedy for money. 
Because that is a reality, at least in this particular instance. 
I guess it is true today. I mean, these guys have mansions 
and helicopters or planes. What does the one guy have? He's 
got three planes? I guess there still is money to be made in 
religion. But that is why these prohibitions are there, so that 
men who want that are kept out. If a man says, boy, I want to 
be a pastor, and I want to agree on this salary so that I can 
buy it. No, no, no, no. That's just weird, man. We don't 
want to talk about that sort of thing. That's just odd. You're 
not in this for the money. As C.H. Spurgeon famously said, 
if a man wants to get rich, he shouldn't join the Baptist ministry. 
I mean, that's just an oxymoron. Don't ever pursue that. But then 
C.H. Spurgeon as well wasn't a Gnostic. 
There's a famous story where Spurgeon was riding in the first 
class cart in a train. And a minister that he knew got 
on the train and looked at Spurgeon and said, well, this servant 
of the Lord, I'm going to spare the money of the Lord by riding 
in coach. And Spurgeon says, well, I'm 
going to spare the servant of the Lord by riding in first class. Now, I don't advocate that. First 
class in the plains is a bit different than trains and all 
that sort of thing. But I thought that was a witty 
sort of comeback. Another man once said to Spurgeon, they asked 
about paying pastors, and if you ever have to bring that up 
with your deacons. And then the deacons say, well, you should 
be preaching for souls. Well, yeah, but I can't eat souls. 
And my kids can't wear souls on their shoes. No pun intended. 
But you see, there are these realities. On the one hand, we 
don't want to overpay a man, but on the other hand, he shouldn't 
be the beggar on the five point or five corners because we're 
too cheap to pay the guy who's laboring, especially in the word 
and doctrine. Brethren, as I said last week 
or two weeks ago with the Eighth Commandment, men want religion, 
but they want it cheap. And oftentimes that's reflected 
in the way that people pay pastors. In short, George Knight says, 
the bishop's life is not to be dominated or controlled by wine 
or money, nor may it be one of strife, but rather it must be 
one of peace and gentleness. So that's the man's personal 
holiness. Notice thirdly, the man's domestic 
faithfulness in verses four and five. Notice what he says, one 
who rules his own house well, having his children in submission 
with all reverence, and then parenthetically, for if a man 
does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care 
of the church of God? Now the argument here is from 
the lesser to the greater. It is an argument from the lesser 
to the greater. If he can't manage his own house, 
how in the world is he going to be a steward in the Church 
of God? And the two words are different. He manages the house. He leads, or dare I say, rules 
the house. But in terms of the church, he's 
a steward. He's a minister. The language 
of government or leadership or ruler, again, it's not packed 
with authoritarianism, but with ministerialism. And so the argument 
is very clear, very consistent. If he can't rule his own house 
well, how in the world is he going to be able to take care 
of the Church of God? This means that he must be not 
only a one-woman man, But he must love his wife the way the 
Bible says. Do you get that? Ephesians 5. 
Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and 
gave himself for her. If a man doesn't love his wife 
the way the Bible calls him to, then you don't want that man 
overseeing your soul. You don't want that man in charge 
of your life in terms of feeding and preaching and teaching you 
the Word of the Living God if he's cold or he's calloused or 
he's hard or he's distant or he's unkind or ungodly with reference 
to the person he's supposed to be the most devoted to. Brethren, 
the marriage relationship is a one-flesh relationship. How 
a man takes care of his wife is very, very much an illustration 
of how he's going to relate to you and I. And if he doesn't 
do this well, that adverb is there. Notice what Paul says, 
he must rule his household well. See, he's not just sitting on 
the easy chair with his heavy hand telling everybody what needs 
to be done and making sure it gets done. That's not well management. It may be management. It may 
be leadership. It may be government. But the 
subjects are miserable. Well management, the subjects 
are happy. They're adjusted. They're healthy. 
They're secure. They're stable. And that's what 
Paul calls for relative to elders. Again, this isn't something every 
one of you brothers in here should be aspiring. Everybody should 
be aspiring to this. We should all seek to rule our 
households well, but there must be demonstrated faithfulness 
for the men we bring into the context of the eldership. So 
he must love his wife, but then notice as well with reference 
to his kids. Having his children in submission 
with all reverence. The parallel in Titus 1.6 says 
having faithful children, not accused of dissipation or insubordination. The NIV translates it as believing 
children. That has given rise to the interpretation 
that no man can function as an elder unless his children are 
converted. John MacArthur holds that particular 
view. Again, qualification. I love 
John MacArthur. I esteem the man. He's been a 
faithful, proven minister of the gospel. But at this point, 
he's wrong. Faithful is the better translation. We cannot make our 
children converted. Brethren, we are not Arminians. 
We are not Pelagians. We believe in sovereign grace. 
It must be God who opens the heart. It must be God who grants 
the graces of faith and repentance. It must be God who saves them, 
calls them out of darkness into marvelous light. But the faithfulness 
and the reverence means that they're under control. Not that 
they don't sin, but that when they do sin, they're dealt with 
by their parents. That's what Paul is saying. When 
you go to their home, it's not chaos. When you go to their home, 
it's not a free-for-all. When you go to their home, it's 
not like you've just walked into the circus. It is rather a place 
that is managed, and it's managed well. Wife is happy, children 
are happy. Again, not perfectly, not always. There's sin in wives, there's 
sin in children, there's sin in husbands and fathers. All 
of that thing, all of those things notwithstanding, the man rules 
his house well. And that adverb as well needs 
to be appreciated well. What does that demand? It demands 
time. Brethren, work is good. Hard 
work is excellent. But the hard work that keeps 
us from those that we're supposed to love and those we're supposed 
to manage well, we need to reorient ourselves as to how better to 
function in a well capacity in terms of household management. 
It's not just management. Again, you could probably walk 
into businesses and see that they're managed. But then you 
start asking employees, and they don't look like they're managed 
well. Everybody's unhappy. There's no morale. They walk 
around like they're, you know, just worker drones. There's no 
sort of joy in their life whatsoever. Paul says that ought not to be 
characteristic of elders' homes. Again, it's not spotless, holy, 
perfectly pure. but rather stuff is getting dealt 
with by the elder. He's not passive. He is not checked 
out. He doesn't just come home and 
tune out, but rather he's involved in the lives of his wife and 
children. He takes the time to nourish them and to nurture them. 
George Knight again says, what must not characterize the children 
of an elder is immorality and undisciplined rebelliousness, 
if the children are still at home and under his authority. 
Paul, that's important as well. Brethren, we got one kick at 
the can with our kids. They get married and they move 
out. We're going to keep a man out of the eldership because 
his kids have grown up and now denounce Jesus Christ? Again, 
maybe there are mitigating circumstances, maybe there are realities that 
reflect ultimately upon the elder, but it's not necessarily in every 
case the way. Think back to Luke chapter 15. 
The brother says, give me my share of the inheritance so I 
can go out and vent it on my lusts. Who's the father in this 
scenario? It's God Almighty. And yet we're 
always there to judge our fellows. Well, did you see how their kids 
turned out? Brethren, can I implore you don't do that? It's reflective 
on them. It's their fault. Now again, 
I don't doubt. I see things in my kids that 
I have contributed, and I'm not real happy about it. You see 
those little traits where, oh yeah, they take after dad in 
that one. Believe you me, I've got that list. And it bugs me, 
and I wish it wasn't the case, but it is the case. But there's 
a far cry difference between that, things we pass on, even 
unsavory things, versus blaming somebody that their children 
went off into the far country. Because we would then assume 
the posture in Luke 15 of blaming God the Father because his child 
went off into the far country. You know, I said it, I think 
it was last week in Surrey, when we looked at the woman, the anointing 
at Bethany, I preached that here, the Last Lord's Supper, and what 
does Jesus say to the disciples when they want to mess with this 
poor woman in Mark 14? He says, leave her alone. That's good counsel, not just 
in that setting, but for a lot of things. Leave people alone. When it comes to a child going 
off into the far country, your brother, your sister doesn't 
need a lecture on how they messed up when that kid was five. They 
need a hug. They need prayer. They need encouragement. That's what they need. If you're 
going to do that, then don't leave them alone. Love them, 
hug them, encourage them, and pray for them and with them. 
He goes on to say, Paul is not asking any more of the elder 
and his children than is expected of every Christian father and 
his children. However, only if a man exercises 
such proper control over his children may he be an elder. So again, I think that principle, 
not only relative to the children, but extrapolated over all of 
them. It isn't the case that any man 
shouldn't be aspiring to these things, but it should be the 
case that every man considered for eldership has proven faithfulness 
in these areas. Now it occurs to me, brethren, 
I am already moving fast. I don't want to move fast through 
the rest of this. We're going to stop at this point. I'm going 
to make a couple of final observations, and we'll take up the appointment 
of elders, part two, God willing, next Sunday. If you're interested 
and intrigued and you're a visitor, then I invite you to come back. 
because there's more that the Apostle says that demands our 
attention. But at this particular place, 
let us, in the first place, underscore this reality. When we look at 
these things, the man must be blameless, the husband of one 
wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, 
able to teach, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, 
but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous, one who rules his 
own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence. 
For if a man does not know how to rule his own house, How will 
he take care of the church of God? That's everybody's requirements. Now, if you're a woman, just 
switch the language, a one-man woman. That's how the widow is 
described in 1 Timothy 5. She's not to be put on the widow's 
list unless she's been a one-man woman. That means she's been 
faithful in sexual matters to her husband in the entirety of 
his life. So if you're a woman, it's the 
same sort of thing that you should be seeking relative to eldership. Now, as long as I'm breathing 
in this church, you will never be ordained as an elder in this 
church, because Paul, under God, by the power of the Spirit, prohibits 
a woman from teaching or exercising authority over a man. If that 
bugs you, if that makes you unhappy, if that irritates you about Jim 
Butler, it ain't Jim Butler you got a problem with. It's God 
the Lord because He moved Paul to write 1 Timothy 2.12. but 
with reference to a woman and the virtues of Christianity, 
this is a great list. With reference to men and the 
virtues of Christianity, this is a great list. This shouldn't 
have been earth-shattering for any of us. I hope nobody has 
come this morning going, wow, I can't believe spiritual leaders 
should actually look like spiritual men. It shouldn't be the case 
that a man given to ministry should be greedy for, oh yeah, 
this is no-brainer stuff. But what is different with men 
that we choose or select for eldership, they must demonstrate 
faithfulness. That's why the qualifications 
exist, and that brings us to a second thought or consideration. 
It is imperative in the context of the local church that we don't 
let feelings, experiences, or like or love dictate and ultimately 
trump biblical truth. It's the Bible that we go to. If a man goes forth for gospel 
ministry and he's not qualified, we shouldn't ever say, but he's 
so likable, he's so nice, and he's so good in a whole host 
of other ways. All that stuff may be true, brethren, 
but we are not given the prerogative under God to compromise the qualifications 
that God himself has given. Now where is Timothy when Paul 
is writing to him? Timothy is in Ephesus. Paul stationed 
Timothy in Ephesus to wage the good warfare. Turn over to Revelation 
2 to see the church at Ephesus in a later situation. Revelation 
chapter 2. These are the seven letters to 
the churches of Asia Minor. And the first comes to the church 
of Ephesus. And I think with reference to 
the church of Ephesus, we oftentimes only ever remember that they 
lost or left their first love. What a horrific thing, isn't 
it? That is a horrific thing, to lose your first love, to have 
a less than fervent or earnest appreciation for the Lord Jesus 
Christ. But Ephesus is commended for 
doing something as well. And I think that they are related. And I'll try and show you why 
in just a moment. But before we look at Revelation 2, there's 
a pattern in these letters. There's an obvious pattern. Jesus identifies, I almost said 
conspicuous, I said obvious. Jesus identifies himself, and 
that identification will come up later in the book of Revelation. 
Then Jesus either condemns if the church has need for condemnation, 
and then commends if the church has need or deserves commendation. And then he gives the exhortation 
or points out something specific within their church, and then 
he ends with the same exhortation about overcoming. You've got 
to overcome. You've got to persevere. And I think that end helps us 
understand one of the population or one of the people populating 
the Lake of Fire in Revelation 21.8. Revelation 21.8 describes 
a bunch of people we'd say are wicked, horrible sinners. But 
one of the identifying marks is that they are cowards. The 
Lake of Fire isn't populated with people who are afraid of 
snakes. The Lake of Fire isn't populated with, well, I mean, 
it may be, but that's not the reason why. Cowardice in Revelation 
21.8 is not overcoming. It's not persevering. It's not enduring. It is not 
being faithful. It is what John speaks of in 
1 John 2. They went out from us, but they 
were not of us. Because if they were of us, they 
would not have gone out from us. They would have continued 
in our midst. So when you look at Revelation 21.8, and you see 
that coward, and you think, boy, am I afraid of hippopotamuses. Those are vicious, horrible creatures. 
I'm glad I wasn't at that gas station in Florida when that 
thing was roaming about. It's always amazed me. We teach 
our kids to play with hippos. That's that game, Hungry, Hungry 
Hippo. Hippos are vicious, vile, horrific killing machines. If 
I saw one, I'd be terrified. But I wouldn't conclude that's 
why I'm going to go to hell, because I'm afraid of hippos. 
The cowardice of Revelation 21.8 is not a phobia. It is rather 
a failure to persevere by God's grace to the New Jerusalem. But 
look at the letter to Ephesus. Verse 1, to the angel. That angel 
is the bishop. That angel is the overseer. That 
angel is the man that is the pastor of the churches. The word 
angel doesn't just mean disembodied spirit, but it means messenger. 
To the messenger of the church of Ephesus write, these things 
says he who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks 
in the midst of the seven golden lampstands. Don't we love that? 
You may not feel it, you may not sense it, you may not experience 
it in the way that you perhaps should, but when a biblical church 
gathers together for worship, Christ is in the midst. It's what it says. It's what 
it says. Now, you say, well, this church 
is cold, or it's boring, or it's this, or it's that. Well, it's 
still a biblical church, and we still have faith that when 
we gather together, Christ is in the midst. See, it's not predicated 
upon our feelings. If you feel that he's with you, 
then he is. Don't you love that statement 
of the Lord Jesus when he says, when you go into your closet 
and there you pray, your Father who sees in secret will reward 
you openly? Do you always feel God in your 
closet? Do you always experience God 
in your closet? No, that's not necessary. It's 
good when God does that or when you have that, but that's not 
requisite to God's presence. God's presence doesn't always 
associate with us feelings and experiences and mysticism. There's an objectivity about 
faith. We walk by faith, not by sight. Too many Christians today walk 
by sight. They walk by feeling, they walk 
by experience, they walk by what really moves them. Brethren, that is not how the 
presence of God is measured. Notice, back to the text. Verse 
2, he says, I know your works, your labor, your patience, and 
that you cannot bear those who are evil. That's good. And you 
have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and 
have found them liars. So the church in Ephesus took 
seriously 1 Timothy chapter 3. They applied it when men came 
into the church saying, we're apostles, we should teach in 
your pulpits. They said, wait a minute, let's 
look at these qualifications and let's scrutinize your life 
and conduct and let's see if you have the mettle to be able 
to teach and preach in the church. Nope, you're not, you're liars, 
you're out. Brethren, that is a commendable 
trait on the part of a church. That is a most excellent trait 
on the part of a church. Now, I think that's probably 
why the condemnation then comes. Notice in verse 3, you have persevered 
and have patience and have labored for my name's sake and have not 
become weary. Now notice in verse 4, nevertheless 
I have this against you, that you have left your first love. 
that he's still writing to them and addressing them as a church 
indicates that it was an apostasy. It doesn't mean they had defected 
completely in wholesale. It doesn't mean that they were 
done. It just means that the earnestness with which they expressed 
their devotion to Jesus had suffered to some degree or other. You 
have left your first love. Now, I would suggest, practically, 
it was probably in the context of fighting against, not physically, 
because an elder must not be a striker, but fighting against 
these claimants to the apostolic ministry. When you're in that 
particular trench, engaged in that particular battle, you're 
not typically reading morning and evening. Not that morning 
and evening isn't good. Morning and evening is great. 
But you're reading Calvin, you're reading Turretin, you're reading 
Bovink, you're reading the sorts of guys that will help you test 
the claims of these false apostles so you can rule and say, no, 
that's not true of you, get out. You see, in that context, I think 
it's understandable, not that it's okay, we should maintain 
white-hot love for Jesus and fight for Jesus all in the same 
swath. But it doesn't always happen 
that way. And that's why Jesus commends them and then says to 
them, nevertheless, I have this against you, that you have left 
your first love. Now, look at the encouragement. 
Remember therefore from where you have fallen, repent and do 
the first works or else I will come to you quickly and remove 
your lampstand from its place unless you repent. That's grace, 
that's kindness, that's love, that's encouragement. He doesn't 
say, you've left your first love, that's it, you're apostates, 
I'm pulling away the lampstand, you're done. That's not it at 
all. He tells them repent. He tells them to burn with that 
white hot love for Jesus and keep these false apostles out. 
That's the mission of the church and that is absolutely crucial. 
But the larger point is, is that the church in Ephesus followed 
the qualifications. They didn't say, well, we like 
that guy. It's a lot of guys serving in elderships that are 
liked by people. And I don't think that's bad. 
People should be liked. But it's bad if they're functioning 
in an eldership simply because they're liked. And it kind of 
goes back to that thing I used in 2016. When I went and got 
hip surgery, my doctor was nice, but I didn't go to him because 
he was nice. I went to him because he knew how to pull out an old 
rotten hip and put in a new funky titanium one. That's why I went 
to him. Now, obviously, it'd be nice 
to have a nice doctor and one who's well-equipped at what he 
does. That's what I think elders ought to be, apt to teach, able 
to preach, faithful men and all that, and still be nice. I mean, 
can't we have both and? That would be good. You're probably 
thinking, well, you're not real nice. OK, it's a work in progress. 
But the bottom line is, brethren, It is not a popularity contest, 
it is not a likability contest, and it's not directly correlated 
to a man's success in the world. A man may be an effective business 
owner, he may be an effective business manager, he may be effective 
in that arena and not be so much so in the context of the church. 
There are similarities in terms of leadership in the church and 
the world. There are similarities and perhaps analogies that are 
useful and helpful, but there is not a direct transference 
or a direct correspondence. A man may be gifted and fitted 
and excellent for a particular task outside of the church and 
not so much in the church. So we can't just say, well, he's 
so great in this arena, therefore he'll be great in that arena. 
He may be, but he still needs to be scrutinized vis-a-vis 1 
Timothy 3, 1 to 7, to make sure that he is all the things that 
God has said he must be. So the church in Ephesus followed 
this, the church in Ephesus pursued this, and the church in Ephesus 
was commended by Jesus as a result. And then finally, and this goes 
with the exposition in Acts 14. The appointment for elders, or 
the appointment of elders in the context of these newly founded 
churches, is a good thing. It is an excellent thing. It 
is a helpful thing. Not to say you cannot read your 
Bible, you cannot read Bavink, you cannot read Turretin, you 
cannot read Calvin for yourself and profit. You can, absolutely, 
positively so. But God has purposed a preaching 
ministry in the churches of Jesus Christ. God has purpose, not 
drama, not social media, not mind, not skit, not movie, not 
theater, not any of that. God is pleased through the foolishness 
of the message preached to save those who believe and to edify 
and strengthen those who do believe. That's why they appointed elders 
in every city. It was for the maturation, the 
growth of the body and their conformity unto Jesus Christ. 
As well, it was for the calling of sinners to repentance and 
faith that they may close with Christ and have everlasting life. 
So the end game that I want to leave with each of you now, especially 
those who do not profess faith in Christ, see, if I can use 
this language predicated of God, I don't speak properly, but if 
you're following you'll appreciate, God is willing to save sinners. That is absolutely positively 
displayed in Scripture. It is absolutely positively displayed 
in the sending of the Son of His love. It is absolutely positively 
displayed when the Father was pleased to bruise Him, putting 
Him to grief. But it's also positively displayed 
in the reality that he has fitted and equipped a class of men to 
preach the gospel, to do the work of an evangelist, to call 
sinners, to come out of the darkness into marvelous light, to believe 
on Jesus Christ alone for salvation. The gospel ministry is another 
token of God's willingness to save you from your sins. And 
if you're a sinner here this morning, the way of salvation 
is not to imitate what Paul says here. The way of salvation is 
to believe the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who lived, 
who died, and who was raised the third day. As Paul summarizes 
it in Romans 4.25, he was delivered up because of our offenses, and 
he was raised for our justification. All those who look to Him in 
faith will have everlasting life. That is good news. Well, let 
us pray. Father, thank You for Your Word.