1 Tim 3.8-15

Satanic Gossips & Female Deacons

This week’s sermon was on the role of Deacons in the church. Two topics I taught on may have generated some interesting discussion. Allow me to quickly comment on them both:

 

Women as Deacons

The prototype for a Deacon first emerges in Acts 6, where they help the Apostles solve a very pressing problem. Many are hesitant to state the men named here are officially deacons, mainly because the word used to describe their work (diakoneo: διακονέω) varies slightly from the word used elsewhere to refer to the position within church government (see below for the discussion on διάκονος). At the end of the day, that argument lends little to the church’s understanding of what a deacon is and what she/he does. The result in Jerusalem (Acts 6) as well as Ephesus (1 Tim 3) continues to be the result today: the church grows when everyone serves according to their assignments and abilities (Acts 6.7).

The word for and responsibilities of the “Deacon” is based on the Greek word diakonos (διάκονος), which literally means “servant.” It is used throughout the New Testament to refer to various individuals: Jesus (1 Cor 3.5), men & women serving with the title (1 Tim 3; Phil 1.1; Rom 16.1), & Paul (Rom 15.8), to name a few.

A quick look at what those prototypical deacons did, when combined with the meaning of the word used to describe their place in church government, yields a biblically comprehensive view of who these people are and what they are to continue doing today: they are servants who serve. And, they are expected to do so with defined restrictions on their moral behavior.

So, why do some traditions only extend this title to females today? Two reasons: a distorted view of the text, and the resulting distortion that view has had on church tradition.

 

The Text

Many proponents of all-male deaconship would point to 1 Tim 3.8 and argue that the word “deacon” is in the male form, which is correct and also what would be expected as Paul moves from discussing men in the role of Elder to men in the role of Deacon. However, we cannot overlook the women addressed in v. 11. Many English translations unfortunately translate this word (γυνή) as “wives” or “their wives” (such as NIV, NLT, KJV, etc.). This translation has colored the church’s view of how these women are addressed, and consequently who exactly can fill the role of Deacon.

The word used to refer to women in 1 Tim 3.11 is simply the Greek word for “women” (see the NASB translation for its proper rendering). Therefore, we actually see Paul addressing two groups of individuals during the section on Deacon qualifications: men and women. Followed up with the direct reference to Phoebe as a female Deacon in another letter (Rom 16.1), and we now have multiple 1^st Century Biblical examples of gender neutrality in the role of Deacon.

The NIV seems to have a particular agenda with “their wives” translation of 1 Tim 3.11 and “servant” translation of “deacon” in Rom 16.1. The inconsistency in a translation’s rendering of the original text makes it difficult for non-Greek-reading believers to gain an accurate feel for the writer’s original intent.

 

The Tradition

Problems arise today when we stretch the role of Deacon to mean something it was never intended to mean. An emphasis on an all-male deaconship guides contemporary leaders to extend the responsibilities of doctrine teaching and the authoritative enforcement of church policies (both Elder-specific responsibilities; cf. 1 Tim 2.12; 3.2) to the Deacons. Once this is done, we are bound to limit the deaconship to only men. However, we bind ourselves unnecessarily because we do so without biblical authority or necessity. Consequently, we (as Elders) abdicate responsibility when we relegate to the Deacons what God expects us to do.

The solution: select and equip Deacons in accordance with the biblical guidelines and then expect of them only what the Bible expects—service set apart by the highest of moral character.

 

Satanic Gossips

That’s exactly what the text says. Paul’s word here for slander/malicious talkers/gossipers (a female rendering of diabolos / διάβολος) is the same word used for devil elsewhere in Scripture.

This same adversary:

• · tempted Jesus (Mt 4.1),
• · produced Christ’s opponents (Jn 8.44),
• · prompted Judas (Jn 13.2),
• · oppressed God’s people (Acts 10.38),
• · actively conducts spiritual attacks against believers (Eph 6.11),
• · tries to trap church leaders (1 Tim 3.6),
• · looks for church members to devour (1 Pet 5.8), and
• · has worked to deceive the entire world (Rev 12.12)

That is the agent you go into league with if you decide to slander and/or gossip about others. God takes that sin serious enough to identify it in such a way. It’s a complete shame so many people today freely accept this as a “minor sin.” God takes your gossip seriously, so please don’t do it.

I’m a Sinner, but at least I’m annoying

non-Biblical Christianity

Wow! It’s exciting and refreshing to experience God pulling together so many people, resources, and ideas all at one time. The church I’m privileged to pastor has seen some considerable growth in the past year, and it has endured a couple challenges along the way. One of those challenges, to be sure, is being led by a sinner. Regardless of how hard I try, I just can’t seem to get out of God’s way fast enough to avoid making a mistake from time to time. Thankfully, I am pastored and led by Jesus-loving men of God capable of sharpening my iron with theirs. May they never shrink from speaking truth into my life, and may I never stop listening.

Other challenges come from those simply not willing to make the sacrifices necessary to reach a Christ-less generation with the life-changing gospel. Efforts made at trumping truth with tradition lead to frustration for any mission-minded congregation, and ours has been no different. Some stay, and some go; both decisions present challenges for a body of leaders who need to be both missional and pastoral. My deepest desire in life is to model Jesus as much as I’m able (1 Cor 11.1). The Jesus of the Bible[1] constantly reminded us of this often-ignored nugget of golden common sense: If we’re not being missional before everything else, there will soon be no one to pastor. Staying in the corral and spoon-feeding those who are under orders to sacrifice everything (including their spoons) so that others may know Jesus isn’t just bad leadership (though it is), it’s a blatant disregard of our King’s Command (Mt 28.19-20)[2].

I was encouraged recently through some stuff I read. While my heart breaks for pastors who struggle to keep their flocks from flipping Jesus off with the continual, “but I want…,” it’s somewhat soothing to know we’re not alone. One of the corny-yet-true-and-applicable clichés hits close to home: If you’re going to make an omelet, you have to break an egg or two. In the church world, I suppose that equates to seeing a few Jesus-loving eggs jumping ship when things don’t go the way they want. OK. That’s going to happen, and you do your best to take it in stride. But, the frustrating part comes when those who stay expect you (the paid Jesus representative) to go after them. Where is that in the Bible? (cf. John 6.66)

Perhaps we should be clear here: it’s not. And, quite frankly, it’s a downright insult to the Suffering Servant to even suggest it. Francis Chan touched on this in an article recently:

“Continuing, the popular Christian speaker challenged those in the audience to compare their lives to the Bible and see if it also fits. He said it is more weird that some Christians change churches because of the service time, the music style, or the fight they got into with someone. Think biblically ’What is weird?' 'Who is weird?‘ based on the scripture and whether we fit in it,” Chan stressed. “So many things don’t make sense. I got to look at scripture and go ‘Does my life make sense?’ I want my life to fit in this book one day.””

Brad Powell, another highly respected and successful pastor, recently wrote on the frustration and tension that exists when we’re “asked” by parishioners to chase down grumpy Christians or honor antiquated relics of the American Gospel at the cost of saving souls from the eternal reality of Hell (cf. 1 Cor 9.22 for starters).

“Sometimes the best thing that can happen for the health of a church is for the right people to leave. By the right people, I don’t necessarily mean bad or ungodly people. Though to be honest, this is sometimes the case. Rather, I mean those people who, for whatever reason, will never be part of the church moving forward. I strongly believe that you should let them go. But be prepared. These people don’t generally leave quietly or respectfully. I’ll never forget the very public words one disgruntled lady directed my way as she was leaving for the last time:  “You have the face of an angel, but the heart of a thief.” Ouch. When people leave this way, they seldom are content to leave alone. Just remember:  the negative splash won’t last long, but the health and peace that follows will have long-term positive impact.”

However, DCC must realize even larger challenges are (always) looming over the horizon. While growth is great, we kid ourselves if we don’t recognize the current superficiality supporting our numbers. Our goal now must be to convert, keep, and disciple those who have come to know, experience, and serve Jesus Christ. That task is daunting, and it requires continual realignment and constantly refusing to accept “good enough” when it comes to building the Kingdom. May we never stop going deeper, pushing harder, and asking for more from our flock. And, may we realize that starts with us (James 3.1)

Why do I get so passionate (or annoying, depending on your view point) about this? First of all, because I still remember my life without Jesus. It wasn’t good. And, it’s even scarier as I now realize that I didn’t then realize it wasn’t good. Now that I’m a pastor, I live haunted with the constant fear that some people sit in my pew with the false confidence that comes with believing in a Jesus they’ve conformed to themselves. When did we stop trying to look more like Him and start trying to mold Him into our image? Probably when we let Joel Osteen tell us Jesus came to give us Our Best Life Now rather than a cross to carry until He comes back. We have, “Blindly and unknowingly embraced values and ideas that are common in our culture but are antithetical to the gospel He taught.” (Platt, David. Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Gospel)

I’ll give Jesus the last word, as long as you realize he was preaching to a very “religious” crowd when He said this:

Matthew 7:21–23 (NLT)
²¹ “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. ²² On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ ²³ But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me…

---

[1] No, there exists no other Jesus; but, we too often hear people theorizing, ‘Well, I think Jesus would say/do this’ without opening their Bible to realize he never elevated anything above Evangelism—hymns included.

[2] Yep, the Great Commission. That part’s still in the Bible.

The Restoration Movement: What’s That?

 

November 2010 Newsletter

“Remember where you came from!” is something my parents told me when I was growing up. Regardless of where I went in life, they wanted me to remember my heritage, our work ethic, and the values most important to our family.

That’s good advice, and it carries over to matters of faith. With an influx of guests visiting DCC, now’s a good time to briefly answer a few questions about what kind of church this is.

 

What kind of Church is DCC?

DCC is part of the Restoration Movement, which is a non-denominational effort to restore Jesus’ Church to its original New Testament form. We do not believe we are the only Christians, but we do elect to call ourselves ‘Christians’ only (Acts 11.26). We do so out of a firm commitment to teach, do, and insist upon nothing except which is found in the Bible. We have no creed but Christ and no book but the Bible.

We believe this is the best way to [1] maintain unity in the Body of Christ (John 17.11, 23), and [2] avoid altering God’s commands with man-made creeds, denominational divisions, or extra-biblical requirements. This is summed up well by one of our founding leaders: “In the great leading principles, or facts of the New Testament, we agree, and cheerfully let each other have his opinions as private property.” -BW Stone

 

What kind of history does the Restoration Movement have?

Restoration Movement churches aim to simply replicate New Testament Christianity as closely as possible. Therefore, the Bible’s book of Acts is the starting place for our historical origins. Throughout Christian history, there have been many genuine movements to return to “no creed but Christ, no book but the Bible.” We gladly fellowship with any body of believers sincerely calling Jesus ‘Lord’ and obeying His commands.

As early as the 1700s, many independent groups throughout the US began to realize they were all separately coming to a strikingly similar pair of conclusions:

1. Complete New Testament authority as the sole guide for church matters

2. Absolute Christian Unity (one Church, many congregations)

One of those early leaders, Thomas Campbell, succinctly states “Our differences, at most, are about the things in which the kingdom of God does not consist, that is about matters of private opinion or human invention.” Our goal at DCC is to always differentiate between these matters of human invention and the necessary Kingdom of God. If you desire to follow Christ as Lord and Savior—growing deeper in knowledge of and service to Him, DCC should be your home!

Your Brother in Christ,

-bill

For more detailed information on the history of the Restoration Movement, see my article: http://pbilly289.blogspot.com/2010/10/brief-history-of-restoration-movement.html

Brief History of the Restoration Movement in the US

 

The Restoration Movement (RM) began not as another denomination, but as an effort to restore New Testament Christianity.
· It operates on a very simple premise: The Bible is the sufficient blueprint for organizing, governing, and “doing” church.
· “Our differences, at most, are about the things in which the kingdom of God does not consist, that is about matters of private opinion or human invention.”–T. Campbell on the division in Christendom
Today’s Restoration Movement churches aim to simply replicate New Testament Christianity as closely as possible. Therefore, the Bible’s book of Acts would be the starting place in terms of our historical origins. Throughout Christian history, there have been many sincere movements to return to “no creed but Christ, no book but the Bible.” We gladly fellowship with any body of believers sincerely calling Christ “Lord” and eagerly awaiting His return.
In the United States, most (though not all) churches with the simple designation “Christian Church” or “Church of Christ” flow out of one historically flowing river of church mergers based on a common set of beliefs. A few of the most notable leaders and mergers include:

 

O’Kelly & Guirey

· 1793-1794: James O’Kelly (VA) follows his personal convictions and leads a considerable group out of the Episcopal Methodist organization and into congregational church government

• They felt the episcopal form of church government then practiced by their denomination was non-biblical, so they decided to “…lay aside every manuscript except the Scriptures and take the Word of God alone as their guide.”[1]
  
• They also agreed to call themselves simply, “Christians.”

· C. 1808: William Guirey (PA, NC, then VA) separated from Methodism and formed a bond with O’Kelly over their simplistic devotion to the NT.

• In spite of his proclaimed devotion to following nothing but the NT, in c. 1810 O’Kelly broke from Guirey over Guirey’s biblical convictions on baptism by immersion.

 

Smith & Jones

While O’Kelly & Guirey were leaving Methodism in VA & NC to bind over simple NT devotion, a very similar partnership between two Baptists with near identical RM positions was forming in New England.
· 1790s: Elias Smith, a Baptist preacher (VT, CT), through his own study of the Scriptures, “became convinced that orthodox Calvinism was in error and that all standardized bodies of doctrine and creeds were wrong.”[2]
· 1801: He met Abner Jones (MA, VT), a Baptist who introduced him to the Christian Church movement of New England.

• Jones had increasing doubts about being a Baptist. His doubts centered on three areas[3]:
  • No scriptural warrant for the name “Baptist Church”
    
  • Calvinism, particularly predestination
    
  • The organization and polity of Baptist churches
• Jones & Smith formed a partnership, with Smith eventually taking the lead

· 1805: Smith published The Christian’s Magazine, Reviewer, and Religious Intelligencer

• Religious journalism has been a wonderful tool of the Restoration Movement, and continues to serve our brotherhood greatly through periodicals such as the Christian Standard
  
• 1808: Smith published The Herald of Gospel Liberty, what some have called the world’s first religious newspaper
  
• These publications helped spread the word about this Restoration Movement and eventually served to join the northern O-Kelly/Guirey with the southern Smith/Jones movements.

· 1809: Guirey & Smith exchange letters and find they agree on:

• Baptism, episcopacy, and Calvinism

· 1811: at an annual meeting of the Virginia Christians, the Guirey portion of the O’Kelly movement and the Smith-Jones movement formed a union solely based on the New Testament.

• O’Kelly worked to oppose and dissolve because of his stance on baptism, but his efforts were ignored.

 

Stone-Campbell

· 1790s-1800s: Barton W. Stone (KY), a Presbyterian minister, struggled with the Westminster Confession, a man-made system of biblical doctrine necessary for clerical service in the Presbyterian Church. His particular problems dealt with the doctrines of Calvinism and its belief of Total Depravity.

• 1801: Stone preached at a revival near Cane Ridge, KY. There (and at many other such revivals) he emphasized the individual’s personal responsibility to believe as a necessary component of salvation (vs. Total Depravity).
  
• 1804: Stone regretfully separates further from the Presbyterian synod with The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery—a jovial document detailing the combined decision of several ministers. Their largest grievances: a lack of Christian unity, the need for exclusive biblical authority, and the biblical example of local congregational autonomy.[4]

· 1809: Thomas Campbell (Alexander’s father) writes Declaration and Address, a document laying out the principles by which the church can restore primitive, NT Xnty. A brief summary of the propositions[5]:

• I-II: The Church of Christ upon earth is essentially, intentionally, and constitutionally one. There are not many bodies of Christ, only one. Local congregations exist, but only one church.
  
• III: Nothing ought to be inculcated upon Christians as articles of faith; nor required of them as terms of communion, but what is expressly taught and enjoined upon them in the word of God.
  
• IV: While the OT guided during the period of the Old Covenant, the NT guides us today. We should not, therefore, use the OT as a proof text for NT doctrine or practice (Sabbath, tithe, etc.)
  
• V: Where the Bible speaks, we speak. Where it is silent, we are silent.
  
• VI: We must separate our conclusions about Scripture from Scripture itself.
  
• VII: Creeds may be used for the sake of expediency, but not as a test of fellowship or to cause division with the Church.
  
• VIII: The only things necessary for one to become a member of the Church are:
  • 1. Know you’re lost
    
  • 2. Profess faith in Christ
    
  • 3. Obey Him in all things according to His Word
• IX: Christians should consider each other precious saints and act accordingly.
  
• X: Divisions are a “horrid evil,” which are anti-Christian, anti-Scriptural, and anti-natural.
  
• XI: All corruptions and divisions in the Church are a result of (1) partial neglect of the revealed will of God, and/or (2) making human opinions a term of communion.
  
• XII: Only those described in VIII ought to become members, and their conduct ought to reflect the reality of their profession.
  
• XIII: Churches may speak “where the Bible is silent” (i.e.: what time to have church or what kind of music) insofar as they do not elevate their opinion to one of fellowship or communion.

· 1813: Alexander Campbell (formerly Presbyterian by familial association) joins the Redstone Baptist Association and preaches throughout PA, OH, and VA. He appreciated the Baptists because they cared “little for anything else in religion than conversion and Bible doctrine.”

• Primarily through a study of Mark 16.16 (though obviously affected by various other parts of the NT), Campbell becomes convinced that baptism is not an “unimportant matter” which we may allow to “slip” per individual convictions. He teaches baptism for the remission of sins.
  
• 1823: Campbell begins a periodical: the Christian Baptist, through which he often receives attention for his attacks on extra-biblical church organizations, infant baptism, and other matters commonly enforced throughout Christian circles without biblical authority to do so.
  
• Campbell’s absolute insistence on the Bible as the only basis for church teaching and practice eventually distanced himself and his followers from other believers.
  • Baptist insistence to rely on Calvinistic tenets as a test of fellowship led them to label him a “heterodox.”

· 1830-1831: Campbell and Stone, through an agreement to focus solely on biblically essential matters for fellowship, merge their movements. This was most successful in Kentucky.

 

Commonly reemerging themes:

· Complete and absolute NT authority
· Christian Unity (one Church, many congregations)
· Believer’s baptism

 

Brief summary of the development of the Restoration Movement in the US

· During the late 1700s, James O’Kelly, a Methodist preacher from Virginia, and William Guirey, a Methodist preacher from North Carolina both caught wind that the other man was preaching the need to (in O’Kelly’s words): “…lay aside every manuscript except the Scriptures and take the Word of God alone as their guide.” The met and quickly formed a union.
· In the early 1800s, two Baptist pastors: Elias Smith from Connecticut and Abner Jones from Vermont, heard of each other’s desire to leave his denomination due to (1) a lack of scriptural warrant for such a division within the body of Christ, (2) a non-biblical form of church government, and (3) the existence of man-made theological systems for “humanly devised tests of orthodoxy.” They bonded together in 1809 and then joined forces with William Guirey in 1811.
· During the late 1700s and early 1800s, two men, Barton Stone and Alexander Campbell, struggled with the Westminster Confession, a man-made system of biblical doctrine necessary for membership and clerical service in many churches. They broke from the Presbyterian and Baptist churches, respectively, and finally merged in 1830-1831.
 
For more, see: North, Jim. Union in Truth: An Interpretive History of the Restoration Movement

---

[1] (North 1994, 17)
[2] (North 1994, 25)
[3] See: (North 1994, 25)
[4] (North 1994, 55)
[5] (North 1994, 89f)

1 Tim 3.1-7

What is an Elder?

We’re tackling a very important question this week because we’re addressing who can and cannot lead the church.  Frankly, that decision isn’t up to us.  God gave us guidelines about how He wants those leaders chosen, so we must study closely and honestly to be sure we’re letting the right people drive the car.

 

1 Tim 3.1-7 tells us how an Elder relates to God, His Wife, His Kids, and to Others.

 

Scripture Used

1 Tim 3.1-7 (NLT, ESV)
1 Tim 5.17 (NLT)
Hebrews 11.16 (NLT)
1  Peter 5.8 (ESV)

References & Statements

Everything rises or falls with leadership, whether it be a family or a local church.

If you become a pastor,your name/life is transferred to the Varsity Demon Shop so Hell's resources can be used most efficiently.

Knowing how to stand in front of a crowd and communicate a lesson is important, but that lesson won’t stick if the students don’t believe the teacher believes it.

Various scriptures depicting the role of a pastor/elder:

to lead (Acts 20:28); equip (Eph. 4:12); rule (1 Tim. 3:4–5); teach (1 Tim. 3:2; 2 Tim. 2:15); shepherd (1 Pet. 5:1–4); and to set an example for others (1 Pet. 5:3)

"I confess myself unspeakably ashamed to see men pleading for reformation and the ancient gospel, yet going in direct opposition to the very first principles of them, by making opinions the cause of disunion, and non-fellowship. Such men I cannot but view as sectarians in disguise."
--Barton Stone (1840, in the Millennial Harbinger)

Mesaeh, Bill: Layman’s Commentary on The 1st Epistle to Timothy

DCC Elder/Deacon Selection Process

North, Jim. Union in Truth: An Interpretive History of the Restoration Movement

1 Timothy Commentary

Just a reminder that I write a running, often-updated commentary on any book I’m currently preaching or teaching on.  The one for 1 Timothy can always be found at this link. 

>> 1 Timothy Commentary <<

I update it periodically, so check back from time to time for the latest version.

Unity

"I confess myself unspeakably ashamed to see men pleading for reformation and the ancient gospel, yet going in direct opposition to the very first principles of them, by making opinions the cause of disunion, and non-fellowship. Such men I cannot but view as sectarians in disguise." -Barton Stone (1840)

Every Member a Minister

"No church can be prospered in which all the ministration comes from the pulpit." -- Henry Ward Beecher, Proverbs from a Plymouth Pulpit

Grow up, DCC! "DCC 201: Grow with DCC" is a class to give us the tools necessary to continue maturing spiritually. RSVP: http://ping.fm/qTBKX