What Does it Mean for an Elder to be “Able to Teach”? A Proposal
Written by Nathan Finn, Posted in Ministry, Theology
Like most Baptists, I would argue the biblical terms translated as overseer, bishop, elder, and pastor are synonyms used to describe a man who has been set apart for the primary teaching, leading, and shepherding office in a local congregation. For that reason, in this post I’ll use the terms pastor and elder interchangeably.
One of the most frequently cited passages related to pastoral qualifications is 1 Timothy 3:1–7:
1 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, 5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil (ESV, emphasis added).
Have you ever noticed these qualifications include, for the most part, a group of expectations that ought to characterize any growing Christian man? Should any brother lack self-control and be known as a skirt-chaser? Should any believer, male or female, be a drunkard? Should any Christ-follower be known as a conceited, violent-tempered money-lover? It seems to me the bulk of these expectations simply indicate a pastor should be a man whose is an exemplary Christian role model with a good reputation, both within the church and in the wider community.
The one qualification for eldership that stands out from the rest is the ability to teach. And herein lies the debate—what does it mean for an elder be “able to teach”? Well, it depends upon whom you ask.
I know some who argue teaching should be equated with preaching, so the ability to teach means the ability to preach a sermon. This view is common among those who prefer a “single-elder” model of pastoral leadership. It is also common among some who affirm a plurality of elders, but equate that group with the church’s salaried staff. I hear these views frequently espoused among my fellow Southern Baptists.
I readily grant that in many churches, especially smaller ones, the only man who is biblically qualified to be an elder is the solo pastor. I also resonate with the idea that in larger churches, at least a majority of the paid ministerial staff needs to meet the biblical qualifications of elder. After all, who wants a youth minister who’s a bad role model and can’t teach the Scriptures to teenagers?
And yet, I cannot help but think these two views artificially limit the eldership to paid pastors who are able to preach sermons from behind a pulpit during a Sunday worship service. Though the New Testament is clear that elders are worthy of compensation (1 Tim. 5:17–18), there is no mandate that all pastors must be paid. There is also no indication in the New Testament that standing up and preaching a sermon is the only way to teach the Scriptures to God’s people.
Others opt for the other end of the spectrum, arguing teaching is simply the ability to explain the Scriptures to another believer. In this model, being able to teach more or less means being able to disciple someone else. It isn’t necessary that an elder be able to preach a sermon or even that he be able to teach a class of some sort (think Sunday School).
Hopefully, every pastor is making disciples through Bible-saturated mentoring. And yet, this seems to me to place the teaching bar too low. Don’t we want to equip all men (and women!) in the church to make disciples? Virtually any believer except very recent converts ought to be able to do this type of teaching on some level or other, especially with their children.
I have one additional concern about this second option. As a Baptist, I’m worried this view brings us too close to the distinction our Presbyterian friends make between “ruling” elders and “teaching” elders, a division I believe is biblically unwarranted. Though Baptists may debate the number of elders a church should have, we typically agree all elders are to both lead and teach.
I want to offer a proposal I believe strikes a balance between the two aforementioned polarities. I would argue being able to teach means being able to publicly explain and apply the Scriptures to the entire congregation. This doesn’t necessarily mean all elders must possess the ability to preach a sermon. But neither is teaching defined so broadly that any transmission of biblical truth qualifies. All elders should be able to stand before the congregation and expound the Bible, even if some elders are uncomfortable preaching in a corporate worship gathering.
My friend Kyle recently led his Southern Baptist church to adopt an elder-led congregational polity. Currently, the church has three pastors. In their church’s by-laws, it states that all elders, whether paid or unpaid, must teach the entire congregation at least once a year. Because Kyle is the full-time lead pastor, this means he preaches forty or so weeks out of the year. But for other elders, it could mean simply occasionally leading a congregational Bible study on a Wednesday or Sunday evening. They don’t understand one form of Bible teaching to be superior to the other.
I like this approach. All of the pastors (and many other church members) are teaching the Scriptures one-on-one to those whom they are discipling. But each of the elders is also expected to at least occasionally teach the whole body. All of the elders exercise their ability to teach the Bible, though how this is done looks different for each elder. As an added benefit, each of the elders is at least occasionally put before the entire church—there are no anonymous elders. We follow this model at my own church, First Baptist Church of Durham. We currently have nine elders. Three of our elders are paid pastors who serve on our church’s staff. Six of our elders are non-staff pastors who serve without pay; I serve as one of the non-staff elders. Several of us are comfortable preaching, but all of our pastors at least occasionally expound the Scriptures to the gathered congregation in some venue. Nobody doubts that each of our elders are apt to teach, even though only some of us would probably be considered “preachers” by our church’s members.
I would encourage Baptist churches that embrace a plurality of elders to institute this sort of system in their churches. Even among those churches that chose to equate the elders with the staff, I would urge requiring staff members besides the primary preaching pastor to periodically teach the entire congregation. Youth ministers, worship pastors, and collegiate ministers should be expected to occasionally bless the entire church through the ministry of the Word. This will both help to grow the body and develop all elders into the Bible teachers the Lord and his church has called them to be. It will also help provide one benchmark for assessing prospective elders— who are godly men with a heart for shepherding who are gifted to preach and/or teach the Scriptures to the congregation?
Without getting into the intricacies of the Greek, which I’m sure we could do, I believe there is a difference between being “able” to teach and desiring to preach to the entire congregation.
For instance, at the church I pastor our deacon committee acts very much like an elder board at times. I’ve told them on numerous occasions that those with the gift of teaching are essentially elders. I’ve told them that God has raised up 3-5 lay elders in the church and much of what they do is eldership and not deaconing.
With that said, these men are fully capable of teaching/preaching. Most teach SS classes or have taught children in the past. They can expound God’s word. They are church leaders whom God gives vision and direction to whom I trust and seek for council. However, I would probably be a little too presumptuous to ask them to each preach to the entire congregation once a year. Perhaps a few would like that, but perhaps some would not. The reason they wouldn’t I believe is a few have an introverted nature that more suits them for teaching in the “house to house” small group element and not the “synagogue” large group one.
I think that being “able to teach” means just that. At some level and in some context they must be able to teach the Word of God. What a group of middle schoolers hears in a small group setting from one of these men may be much more beneficial for them then one of them being a fish out of water and preaching to the entire congregation for 30 minutes. I believe those elders that desire to teach in the large group format will have that desire to do so and will probably make it known. However, those that don’t should still be recognized as elders since they are indeed able to teach.
Charlie,
I did not argue that he must preach a 30 minute sermon before the entire congregation. Many elders, perhaps even staff elders, wouldn’t be comfortable doing that. I said preach or teach; I think there should be flexibility here. And being put before the congregation doesn’t necessarily mean the largest weekly gathering so much as it means a gathering of the congregation “in general.” It could be a Wednesday night, Sunday night, or other gathering. It could be a 50 minute sermon, a 15 minute exegetical devotion, or a 25 minute exhortation. Flexibility.
The reason I want to emphasize it being more than (merely) teaching a small group is to preserve the idea that the pastors shepherd the whole flock, not just sub-flocks. Many elders focus their teaching on sub-flocks–I know I do. But again, I think asking every elder to at least occasionally teach the whole church in some manner communicates that all the elders shepherd the entire body, even if there are different areas of emphasis and expertise for different pastors.
NAF
NAF
Nathan, We have an Elder led congregation. I am the “Teaching Pastor”. We have two other Elders and 2 Pastoral Interns from CIU. I speak about 50% of the time, the other men fill the remainder of the dates. They also teach Sunday School classes, Small Groups etc.
I have also taught our people that there is more to ‘apt to teach’ than mere verbal skills, excellence in delivery etc. The Elder’s life must model what he is teaching.
In Grace,
Tom
Tom,
I agree 100%. Sound teaching is rightly handling, passing on to others, and personally modeling the truths of the text.
NAF
NAF,
That sounds good.
Hey Nathan,
I enjoyed this post, and think that I agree. One question I had, which is perhaps a bit tangential, is what you think the difference is between “publicly explain[ing] and apply[ing] the Scriptures to the entire congregation” and “preaching”. What is the necessary condition lacking from some instances of the former that would keep it from being the latter?
– Ross
Ross,
That’s a great question, and I’m sure different people would delineate preaching and teaching in different ways. For me, a difference is that preaching is to a broader audience and includes more application, while teaching digs a bit deeper into the text and includes less application. But good teaching is preachy, and good preaching is teachy. I just want to be clear that I think there are many ways to preach/teach/expound the Word, not all of which are limited to sermons at 11:00 AM on Sunday (or whenever).
NAF
[...] What Does it Mean for an Elder to Be “Able to Teach?” The one qualification for eldership that stands out from the rest is the ability to teach. And herein lies the debate—what does it mean for an elder be “able to teach”? Well, it depends upon whom you ask. [...]
Interesting post. I see the “able to teach” requirement more in terms of their grasp of the apostolic gospel and Scriptures. They are able to teach not because they are rhetorically gifted (although that would of course help), but because they know the gospel thoroughly. In the context of the pastoral epistles, an elder’s job will involve detecting false teaching and opposing it. He can only do this if he knows enough of the Word of God to be able to spot a heresy and refute it successfully.
Mark,
I agree that the ability to delineate biblical truth from error is foundational to being able to teach. Elders guard the gospel. In this post, I’m focusing more on how to apply that ability. And in that case, I think some degree of “rhetorical giftedness” is important. While not all elders are equally gifted in this area, teaching presumes some ability to explain and apply biblical material to others.
NAF
[...] Able to Teach – Nathan Finn looks at one of the biblical qualifications for an elder—that he be able to teach. He offers some useful correctives to the way many people understand it. [...]
I’ve rarely seen anyone mention it, but there is another qualification specifically listed for elder that is not specifically mentioned for deacon – and that is hospitality. 1 Tim.3 puts them right next to one another – “hospitable, able to teach”. Now, we surely want deacons who can show hospitality, but I think there is something important and mutually interdependent about hospitality and the ability to teach. We’re not just looking for elders who are lecturers. We’re looking for elders who can invite people into their lives and teach by word and example – this is what it means to live the Christian life.
Matt,
Good thoughts. We’ve actually talked about this among our elder team at FBC Durham. Elders should take the lead in life-on-life, gospel-centered hospitality, which will include an aspect of teaching and discipleship. In turn, we hope this helps to cultivate a culture of hospitality and iron-sharpening throughout our congregation.
NAF
We have a lay-elder at out church who would be scared spitless of standing in front of a group of people, but he is gifted and will readily take a one on one role with the most difficult of people (drug addicted, marital implosions etc {think nasty situations here}) and he will try to mentor them into a proper relationship with Jesus Christ and the local body. I think if we were to see ‘teaching’ as solely a preaching position, it limits the proper scope of being able to teach. This man does have a faith that the congregants are able to imitate (Hebrews 13) and I would propose that this is a proper form of being able to teach.
Doug,
I didn’t argue for teaching solely as a preaching position. I simply argued for the ability to teach the Scriptures to a gathering of the church in general, which may or may not include preaching. This would by no means necessitate standing up, standing behind a pulpit or podium, and being amplified. Flexibility is the name of the game, but being able to teach has to mean something more than simply being a godly role model for others to emulate, since that is assumed in the other qualifications.
NAF
Nathan, I know this wasn’t the main point of your post, but since you mentioned it I thought I’d ask… You said that “though the New Testament is clear that elders are worthy of compensation (1 Tim. 5:17–18), there is no mandate that all pastors must be paid.”
I wonder if I could feel out your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 9:14: “In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.”
Thanks for a stimulating post.
Mark,
Great question. Different folks interpret this verse differently (obvious), but my take is that context indicates that it is preferential to pay those who preach the gospel, but not necessary. For example, Paul turns around in the next verses and indicates he in fact didn’t receive compensation from the Corinthians for his preaching ministry among them.
Applying this verse today, I would argue that a church would ideally be able to pay all her elders (and enough elders) to shepherd the body. But many churches can’t afford to do so. In such churches (like mine), it’s appropriate for some elders to labor without compensation or at non-full-time compensation. But a church should pay as many elders as she can.
NAF
[...] What Does It Mean for an Elder to be “Able to Teach”? A Proposal: All elders should be able to stand before the congregation and expound the Bible, even if some elders are uncomfortable preaching in a corporate worship gathering. [...]
If I’m not mistaken teaching and preaching are English translations for the same word in Greek. I like the post and it has provided some thoughtful perspective. I have a question and concern I’d like to present. What if the church has elders/leaders (paid staff) that clearly cannot teach/preach? What would be the recommendation for example, to a congregant, if the paid pastoral position is held by someone who cannot make the distinction between law and grace in the presentation of the Gospel? What if their skills are terribly lacking in communication and understanding of the Gospel, and the elders are not concerned by it? What are your recommendations in this situation?
Rick,
I think that large churches may have certain types of staff members who can’t teach or preach, but for “ministerial” staff, they need to meet that qualification whether they are called “elders” or not. To say it another way, if a position has “pastor,” “minister,” or “associate pastor” in the title, then the brother needs to be apt to teach.
If the elders aren’t concerned about it and you know that for a fact, then I think you have two options. You can either submit to their leadership in this regard, or, if you believe this to be so egregious it undermines the body’s spiritual growth, you can look for another church. Not knowing the specific details, I’d be hesitant to offer much more in the way of advice. If possible, I’d urge you to follow their leadership in this, though that may bind your conscience, at which point you need to prayerfully consider looking elsewhere.
NAF
I’ve wrestled with this qualification and come to different conclusions. Here is my thinking, for what it is worth:
(1) The parallel concept in Titus 1 (where qualifications for elders are also given) leaves out “apt to teach,” but instead gives this “holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.” This seems to present the idea that (a) an elder has been taught with sound doctrine, and (b) that he understands and has a working knowledge of the Bible (by which he is able to correct error).
(2) The concept of teaching in the Bible is not really dealing with the ability to communicate alone. It is dealing with the mastery of information. Teachers were not those that relayed information that they didn’t understand. They were those that had grasped and mastered the information. The ability to communicate without the mastery of truth is incomplete if not dangerous. You see Paul commanding Timothy in 1 Timothy 1 to restrain people (who desire to be teachers) from teaching, because they do not understand what they say, nor what they affirm.
(3) Prior to teaching the Word, one must have the ability to rightly divide the Word (2 Tim 2:15). Poor and/or inaccurate Bible study skills lead to the proclamation of falsehood and error, regardless of our intentions. In addition to Bible study and interpretation skills, the unwillingness to do the tedious work of study (“be diligent”) is also part of “apt to teach.”
A working knowledge of the Word is prerequisite to teaching the Word. That concept of knowing must come before the practice of communicating. Also the skill of studying the Word is essential to be able to present the Word accurately.
My take.
Kevin,
1). I agree. I see this as complementing what I’ve already argued. I’m presuming the elder knows how to handle Scripture, so I’m focusing on the ability to pass that on to others.
2). I didn’t argue it had to do with communication alone. You are offering correction to an essay I didn’t write.
3). Agreed. Again, this is complementary to what I focused my post upon.
Thanks.
NAF