“Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,” (1 Timothy 4:1 (ESV).
The words the Apostle Paul expressed at the beginning of I Timothy 4 are sobering. He did not say a departure from the Christian faith might happen sometime in the future, but rather it certainly would happen. He affirmed this by invoking the person of the Holy Spirit. Paul said the Spirit expressly says (ῥητῶς λέγει; rhetos legei), which means the Spirit explicitly, presently, actively and singularly stated a departure from biblical faith would occur.
What does it mean to depart from the faith? The verb depart (ἀποστήσονταί; apostesontai) is a future, middle, plural verb. It means to fall away, to forsake and to turn away. The root word is aphistemi, from which we derive the English word apostasy and apostate.
“Those who fall prey to false teachers will abandon the Christian faith. The Greek word for ‘depart’ is the source of the English word ‘apostatize,’ and refers to someone moving away from an original position. They are professing or nominal Christians who associate with those who truly believe the gospel, but defect after believing lies and deception, thus revealing their true nature as unconverted,” explains Dr. John MacArthur.
Rev. Caleb Cangelosi, senior pastor of Pear Orchard Presbyterian Church in Ridgeland, Miss. writes, “It’s difficult to visit the internet these days without seeing another story about someone’s “deconstructing” his faith or undergoing a “deconversion.” The process these fancy terms describe once went by a simpler name: apostasy. The English word apostasy comes from the Greek apostasia.”
“Derived from a verb meaning “to withdraw, depart, desert, fall away,” the noun refers to abandonment of and defiant rebellion against authority. It is used twice in the New Testament. In Acts 21:21, Jewish Christians had been told that Paul was teaching apostasia from Moses—that is, he was supposedly teaching Jews to forsake and reject their Jewish culture. And in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Paul declares that the day of the Lord will not come until the apostasia (here indicating a general rebellion or falling away from the Christian faith) happens first”
“When theologians speak of apostasy, they are referring to those who once declared an allegiance to the Lord but then turned away from Him and His people. The Israelites in the exodus generation “turned back from following the Lord” at Kadesh-barnea (Num. 14:43). The people of God in the days of the divided kingdom were frequently denounced by the prophets for their apostasy (e.g., see Jer. 2:19).”
“Under the new covenant, apostates rejected Jesus and His church, deserting their previous profession of faith in Him. Jesus paints a word picture of apostasy in the parable of the sower,” states Rev. Cangelosi.
“As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away.” (Matt. 13:20–21).”
Paul initially declared professing believers in Christ would depart from the true gospel. However, with what would they replace the true gospel? The apostle, and the Holy Spirit, do not leave us with an answer. The apostles would be “devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,”
Devotingthemselves (προσέχοντες; prosechontes) means to presently, actively and collectively pay attention to, consider carefully, and continually believe deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons. Deceitful spirits (πλάνοις πνεύμασι; planois pneumasi) mistaken demonic spirits. This is to “whom” they devote themselves. Doctrines of demons (διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων; didaskaliais daimonian) is to “what” they devote themselves. This is not teaching about demons but rather teaching originating from demons.
“The reality is that not everyone who professes faith in Jesus actually possesses genuine saving faith in Jesus. Not every member of the visible church (“a society made up of all such as in all ages and places of the world do profess the true religion, and of their children”; Westminster Larger Catechism 62) is in fact a member of the invisible church (“the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one under Christ the head”; WLC 64). The visible church is always made up of wheat and weeds, the elect and the nonelect (see Matt. 13:24–30, 36–43). As John goes on to explain: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us” (1 John 2:19). Only those who have been granted saving faith from the Father and are therefore “of us” will persevere in faith to the end,” concludes Rev. Cangelosi.
May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a God honoring day in the Lord.
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit,seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations,believed on in the world, taken up in glory.” (1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV)
Today’s text is an early church creedal confession, containing three couplets, by the Apostle Paul setting forth the person and work of Jesus Christ as the core truth of the Gospel. These were truths Paul’s young protégé, Timothy, needed to know and preach as the pastor of the church in Ephesus. These truths are what every evangelical pastor needs to know and preach to the congregations they shepherd.
Paul began this doctrinal discourse with the following introductory statement: “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:” As previously noted, these nine words contain an important perspective for the church; then and now. This brings us to the following six statements referring to Jesus Christ:
He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world, taken up in glory.”
Paul used a literary structural format known as a Chiastic Arrangement. A chiasm is a literary device where the first part of a phrase or sentence is repeated in the second part, but in reverse order. The pattern is A-B, B-A, A-B. This format emphasizes contrast, balance and a central idea. Regarding this particular text from I Timothy, the chiastic pattern is as follows, reading them left to right. The A statements in the text parallel each other in their focus on the earthly, while the B statements focus on the heavenly.
He was manifested in the flesh, – A. vindicated by the Spirit, – B.
seen by angels, – B. proclaimed among the nations, – A.
believed on in the world, – A. taken up in glory. -B
“He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory” (1 Tim. 3:16). If you had been a follower of Christ in first-century Ephesus, you would have probably recited or sung those words. Those six phrases were recorded poetically by Paul as either a confession often repeated by Christians or as part of a hymn of praise sung about Jesus,” states one commentator.
Having seen how each of these statements relate to each other, what do they mean individually? It is imperative to study them individually in order to understand them collectively regarding the person and work of Jesus Christ.
He was manifested in the flesh. The personal pronoun he(Ὃς Hos) points us back to the subject found in I Tim. 3:13; Christ Jesus. It was the incarnate Son of God who was manifested (ἐφανερώθη; ephanerothe) or made visible. The manifestation took place when the second person of the Godhead came to earth in the flesh (ἐν σαρκί; en sarki) referring to Christ Jesus’ human nature and physical body.
Vindicated by the Spirit. Vindicated (ἐδικαιώθη; edikaiothe) means Christ was declared righteous and proven to be right. This declaration was done by the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:2-36).
Seen by angels. Seen (ὤφθη; ophthe) means to pay attention. The angels did this when Christ ascended (Acts 1:10-11) and witnessed the Lord’s vindication in the heavenly realm.
Proclaimed among the nations. Proclaimed(ἐκηρύχθη; ekerychthe) is from the word kerysso meaning to preach and announce. Nations (ἔθνεσιν; ethnesin) refers to Gentile peoples who were called pagans and the heathen. The apostles proclaimed the person and ministry of Jesus Christ to an international audience. So is the church today (Matt. 28:19-20).
Believed on in the world. The phrase believed on (ἐπιστεύθη; episteuthe) means to trust in, depend upon, commit to and worship Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. The world (κόσμῳ; kosmo) refres to all kinds of people groups within the fallen world system which hates God (Eph. 2:1-3).
Taken up in glory. The statement taken up (ἀνελήμφθη; anelemphthe) means to be carried away into glory (δόξῃ; doxe) to receive honor, praise and splendor (John 17:1-5; Acts 7:56).
Jesus referred to His completed mission in His High Priestly Prayer. The Aposlte John wrote, “When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. 4 I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.” (John 17:1–5 (ESV)
The Apostle Paul wrote to the Philippian believers, “5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5–11 (ESV)
“In the book of Revelation, Jesus is represented with many different symbols: the Lamb, the warrior King, the Lion of Judah. No matter the symbol or title, where do you find Him — where is He located? He is always on the throne, reigning and ruling. The book of Revelation was written to a persecuted and suffering church to remind her that Jesus was, right then, King of kings and Lord of lords. One of the major themes of the book of Revelation is: “Jesus reigns.”
“In His incarnation, the Son descended into gross humiliation. He left heaven for a hovel on earth. He came as a baby to a feed trough and was forced to flee to Egypt from a petty, paranoid king. He endured a farce of a trial and was crucified on a Roman cross (too ignominious for Roman citizens) while men mocked Him and spat on Him. Such a battle had never been fought previously nor has been since. So, when the King returned home, He received a name that was above every name, and all of heaven rang with praise. The Lion of Judah ascended and took the scroll, and heaven cried, “Worthy are you to take the scroll.” You can spend some time in Revelation 5 if you want to read about the triumphant homecoming in more detail. However, Paul only needed four words: “taken up in glory.”
May we seek to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ today. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1 (ESV)
Today we begin an exte3nsive treatment of Theology Proper. This category of systematic theology is also referred to as the Doctrine of God, or the Doctrine of God the Father.
The following essay is by Louis Berkhof. It is entitled The Existence of God.
Louis Berkhof (1873 – 1957) was a Dutch AmericanReformedtheologian whose works on systematic theology have been influential in North American seminaries and Bible colleges throughout the 20th century. He served at Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, MI and taught there for almost four decades. For the first 20 years he taught Biblical Studies until 1926. He then moved into the systematic theology department. He became president of the seminary in 1931 and continued in that office until he retired in 1944.
WORKS on dogmatic or systematic theology generally begin with the doctrine of God. The prevailing opinion has always recognized this as the most logical procedure and still points in the same direction. In many instances even they whose fundamental principles would seem to require another arrangement, continue the traditional practice.
There are good reasons for starting with the doctrine of God, if we proceed on the assumption that theology is the systematized knowledge of God, of whom, through whom, and unto whom, are all things. Instead of being surprised that Dogmatics should begin with the doctrine of God, we might well expect it to be a study of God throughout in all its ramifications, from the beginning to the end. As a matter of fact, that is exactly what it is intended to be, though only the first locus deals with God directly, while the succeeding ones treat of Him more indirectly.
We start the study of theology with two presuppositions, namely (1) that God exists, and (2) that He has revealed Himself in His divine Word. For that reason, it is not impossible for us to start with the study of God. We can turn to His revelation, in order to learn what He has revealed concerning Himself and concerning His relation to His creatures.
Attempts have been made in the course of time to distribute the material of Dogmatics in such a way as to exhibit clearly that it is, not merely in one locus, but in its entirety, a study of God. This was done by the application of the trinitarian method, which arranges the subject-matter of Dogmatics under the three headings of (1) the Father (2) the Son, and (3) the Holy Spirit. That method was applied in some of the earlier systematic works, was restored to favor by Hegel, and can still be seen in Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics. A similar attempt was made by Breckenridge, when he divided the subject-matter of Dogmatics into (1) The Knowledge of God Objectively Considered, and (2) The Knowledge of God Subjectively Considered. Neither one of these can be called very successful.
Up to the beginning of the nineteenth century the practice was all but general to begin the study of Dogmatics with the doctrine of God; but a change came about under the influence of Schleiermacher, who sought to safeguard the scientific character of theology by the introduction of a new method. The religious consciousness of man was substituted for the Word of God as the source of theology. Faith in Scripture as an authoritative revelation of God was discredited, and human insight based on man’s own emotional or rational apprehension became the standard of religious thought. Religion gradually took the place of God as the object of theology.
Man ceased to recognize the knowledge of God as something that was given in Scripture, and began to pride himself on being a seeker after God. In course of time, it became rather common to speak of man’s discovering God, as if man ever discovered Him; and every discovery that was made in the process was dignified with the name of “revelation.” God came in at the end of a syllogism, or as the last link in a chain of reasoning, or as the cap-stone of a structure of human thought. Under such circumstances it was but natural that some should regard it as incongruous to begin Dogmatics with the study of God. It is rather surprising that so many, in spite of their subjectivism, continued the traditional arrangement.
Some, however, sensed the incongruity and struck out in a different way. Schleiermacher’s dogmatic work is devoted to a study and analysis of the religious consciousness and of the doctrines therein implied. He does not deal with the doctrine of God connectedly, but only in fragments, and concludes his work with a discussion of the Trinity. His starting point is anthropological rather than theological.
Some of the mediating theologians were influenced to such an extent by Schleiermacher that they logically began their dogmatic treatises with the study of man. Even in the present day this arrangement is occasionally followed. A striking example of it is found in the work of O. A. Curtis on The Christian Faith. This begins with the doctrine of man and concludes with the doctrine of God. Ritschlian theology might seem to call for still another starting point, since it finds the objective revelation of God, not in the Bible as the divinely inspired Word, but in Christ as the Founder of the Kingdom of God, and considers the idea of the Kingdom as the central and all-controlling concept of theology.
However, Ritschlian dogmaticians, such as Herrmann. Haering, and Kaftan follow, at least formally, the usual order. At the same time there are several theologians who in their works begin the discussion of dogmatics proper with the doctrine of Christ or of His redemptive work. T. B. Strong distinguishes between theology and Christian theology, defines the latter as “the expression and analysis of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ,” and makes the incarnation the dominating concept throughout his Manual of Theology.
For us the existence of God is the great presupposition of theology. There is no sense in speaking of the knowledge of God, unless it may be assumed that God exists. The presupposition of Christian theology is of a very definite type. The assumption is not merely that there is something, some idea or ideal, some power or purposeful tendency, to which the name of God may be applied, but that there is a self-existent, self-conscious, personal Being, which is the origin of all things, and which transcends the entire creation, but is at the same time immanent in every part of it.
The question may be raised, whether this is a reasonable assumption, and this question may be answered in the affirmative. This does not mean, however, that the existence of God is capable of a logical demonstration that leaves no room whatever for doubt; but it does mean that, while the truth of God’s existence is accepted by faith, this faith is based on reliable information. While Reformed Theology regards the existence of God as an entirely reasonable assumption, it does not claim the ability to demonstrate this by rational argumentation. Dr. Kuyper speaks as follows of the attempt to do this: “The attempt to prove God’s existence is either useless or unsuccessful. It is useless if the searcher believes that God is a rewarder of those who seek Him. And it is unsuccessful if it is an attempt to force a person who does not have this pistis by means of argumentation to an acknowledgment in a logical sense.” [Dict. Dogm., De Deo I, p. 77 (translation mine — L. B.).]
More to come. May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed Lord’s Day.
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:
He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world, taken up in glory.” (1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV)
Systematic and Biblical Theology is the systemized and biblically contained doctrine or teachings of the Christian faith. Christology is the biblical doctrine of the person and work of Jesus Christ. Within the New Testament, there are several Christological passages containing important and fundamental truths believers in Christ confess (Phil. 2:5-11; Col. 1:15-20; Heb. 1:1-4).
Today’s text is an early church creedal confession, containing three couplets, by the Apostle Paul setting forth the person and work of Jesus Christ as the core truth of the Gospel. These were truths Paul’s young protégé, Timothy, needed to know and preach as the pastor of the church in Ephesus. These truths are what every evangelical pastor needs to know and preach to the congregations they shepherd.
Paul began this doctrinal discourse with the following introductory statement: “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness:” As previously noted, these nine words contain an important perspective for the church; then and now. This brings us to the following six statements referring to Jesus Christ:
He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world, taken up in glory.”
Paul used a literary structural format known as a Chiastic Arrangement. A chiasm is a literary device where the first part of a phrase or sentence is repeated in the second part, but in reverse order. The pattern is A-B, B-A, A-B. This format emphasizes contrast, balance and a central idea. Regarding this particular text from I Timothy, the chiastic pattern is as follows, reading them left to right. The A statements in the text parallel each other in their focus on the earthly, while the B statements focus on the heavenly.
He was manifested in the flesh, – A. vindicated by the Spirit, – B.
seen by angels, – B. proclaimed among the nations, – A.
believed on in the world, – A. taken up in glory. -B
“By drawing connecting-lines between the words which indicate realities that belong to the same realm, flesh, nations, and world are linked; and so are Spirit, angels, and glory. Thus, the X—which is the twenty-second letter of the Greek alphabet and is called chi—is drawn twice. We may say, therefore, that the six lines are arranged chi-astically.”[1]
“The six lines of this Hymn in Adoration of the Christ begin with a line about Christ’s lowly birth and end with a reference to his glorious ascension. It is clear that if in such a humiliation-to-exaltation hymn the chiastic thought-movement is to be maintained, there must be not less than six lines.”[2]
“The contrasts are clearly drawn:
Weak flesh (line 1) contrasted with strength-imparting Spirit (line 2)
Heavenly angels (line 3) over against earthly nations (line 4)
The world below (line 5) over against glory above (line 6).”
“Yet, the beauty of it is this, that though the hymn pictures these regional contrasts, the thought is throughout that of glory and adoration. To be sure, the word flesh in line 1 indicates Christ’s humiliation; but the expression “manifested in the flesh” (“veiled in flesh the Godhead see”) points to his exalted, glorious nature. His glory is also indicated by the expressions “vindicated by the Spirit,” “seen (with adoration) by angels,” “heralded (joyfully) among the nations,” “believed in (unto salvation) by the world,” and “taken up (for exaltation) in glory.” Hence what we have in these six lines is not antithetic parallelism (in the sense in which that term is usually employed), but chiastic, cumulative parallelism.”[3]
“Paul gives the standard of faith his readers were to uphold in the form of a creed or hymn (which Timothy probably already knows). If “taken up in glory” refers to Jesus’ return (cf. Dan 7:13–14) rather than to his ascension, then the lines are in chronological order; but not all scholars think this proposal likely. “Justified” or “vindicated” in the Spirit refers to the resurrection, God’s acquittal after the human judicial condemnation of the cross.”[4]
Next time, we will separately examine the meaning of each of the six lines of this hymn. May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
Soli deo Gloria!
[1] William Hendriksen and Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles, vol. 4, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953–2001), 139.
A SERMON DELIVERED ON LORD’S-DAY MORNING, SEPTEMBER 29, 1878, BY C. H. SPURGEON, AT THE METROPOLITAN TABERNACLE, NEWINGTON
“If I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15 (ESV)
PAUL’S design in this epistle was to instruct young Timothy how he should behave himself in the church of God, so as to discharge his office as minister, evangelist and pastor with honor to himself and profit to the people. He reminds him that the church is the house of God and in God’s own house a man ought to be upon his best behavior, for it is no light thing to draw near unto the Lord. A poor man who is called to visit a prince or king will anxiously inquire how he ought to act. We, poor creatures that we are, when we are admitted into the church which is the house of God, should inquire what conduct will be decorous and comely in those who are admitted into the presence of the great King, and permitted to dwell within His palace gates.
Especially should each of us, endeavor to behave himself aright in the house of God, if we know that we are looked up to and imitated. All who teach the young, all who are parents, all who are persons of age and experience, all who occupy influential positions and especially all deacons, elders and preachers, should pray the Lord that they may know how they may behave themselves in the house of God, lest inadvertently their misbehavior should be injurious to the weaker sort. Such need to learn how they should behave to their brethren, to the Elder Brother, and to the great Father of all. We need to learn the ways of the house, the customs of the palace. Part of the objective of the sermon this morning, will be that those of us who are in the house of God may learn how we should behave in it. But special prominence will be given to steadfastness in the faith which makes a man not only a dweller in the church but a pillar of it.
First, I shall at some length expound the text, and then try to enforce the lesson from it. In expounding it, I see three things to note, and the first is THE GLORIOUS NAME OF THE CHURCH—“The Church of the living God.” First, it is called the church. What is a church? It is an assembly. And a Christian church is an assembly of faithful men, of men who know the truth, believe it, affirm it, and adhere to it. The Greek word signifies an assembly summoned out of the whole population to exercise the right of citizenship. An ecclesia, or church, is not a mob, nor a disorderly gathering rushing together without end or purpose, but a regular assembly of persons called out by grace and gathered together by the Holy Spirit. Those persons make up the assembly of the living God.
In order to be a church, there must be a selection and a calling out, and that calling must come from God, who alone can call effectually. Touching all the members of this select assembly there is an eternal purpose which is the original reason of their being called, and to each of them there is an effectual calling whereby they actually gather into the church.
The church is not a number of unregenerate people coming together entirely of their own notion to defend such-and-such dogmas. Such persons may form a club, but they cannot make a church. There must be a coming together of renewed men, in the name of Jesus, by the power of the Holy Spirit, and these must meet for purposes which God Himself ordains, and be joined together after His own fashion. Jesus must be the uniting cornerstone, and His Spirit the indwelling power, as it is written, “In whom you also are built together for a habitation of God through the Spirit.”
Secondly we will consider HER DESIGN IN REFERENCE TO GOD. The Apostle speaks of the church of the living God as the house of God. This is a very beautiful and instructive figure. “The Most High dwells not in temples made with hands,” whether they are called cathedrals, churches, or meeting houses. Today there is no consecrated shrine, no appointed building where we must resort if we would meet with God, for behold the Lord is to be found everywhere by those who worship Him in spirit and in truth. True hearts view the entire universe as a temple wherein everyone speaks of the glory of God. Yet there is a shrine and a temple, but it is living and spiritual, the called-out assembly, the church of the living God is the special abode of Deity.
Thus, have we spoken upon the design of the church in reference to God—the tug of war comes in the third place, THE DESIGN OF THE CHURCH IN REFERENCE TO THE TRUTH. Paul compares it to a pillar and its pedestal or basement, for that, I think, would be a fair translation.
What does the expression mean—the pillar and basement? I think it means, first, that in the church, the truth should abide. In the church of the living God it always does abide, even as a pillar stirs not from its place. In the confession of the church made by each one of her members, in the teaching of her ministers, and in the witness of the whole body, truth will be found at all times. The church of God is not the quicksand of the truth, but the pillar and pedestal of it. She is not the floating island of the truth, but the eternal column of it. The church stands steadfast and unmovable as a pillar of truth fixed on its base.
If you find not the truth anywhere else, you will find it in the church of the living God, which is truth’s castle and stronghold. “In which church?” you ask. I said in the church of the living God. I did not say in the Church of England, or in the Church of Scotland, or in the Wesleyan church, or in the Baptist church, or even in the assembly of Exclusive Brethren. But I did say that the truth of God is as a treasure in the church of the living God, and it is never removed from her keeping.
Therefore, if the truth is not maintained by any so-called church, it is not the church of God. When the truth is given up, everything is given up. The very idea of a church involves the retaining of the truth with constant steadfastness, and if this is neglected, the so-called church has nothing left in it but the name. As a pillar and its base are always in one place, so must the church be a fixed, permanent and unalterable column of gospel truth, and woe to her if she is not. It means that in the true church the truth is lifted up as upon a pillar. Truth not only rests there as on a pedestal, but it stands upright as a pillar. It is the duty and the privilege of the church of God to exalt the truth into the open view of all mankind.
Once more, it is the Church’s business to maintain the truth with all her might. She is set as a bronze wall and an iron pillar against all error. However men may cringe or bow, there stands the column fast and firm, fixed on its pedestal, set on its base. So should the church in all ages stand fast to truth and yield to no error, nor concealment of doctrine, nor change of ordinance. The church of the apostles is the model of the church of today.
May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
14 I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, 15 if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:14–15 (ESV)
Having provided Timothy with specific instructions on prayer, worship, and church officers, the Apostle Paul then stated his reason for writing to the young pastor in the first place. It was to set forth the nature of the church and the mediatorial ministry of Jesus Christ.
The historical context indicates Paul was confident he would soon come to see his young protégé. In anticipation of this reunion, he reminded Timothy of this letter’s purpose.
First, Paul wanted Timothy to know how to conduct himself as a church’s pastor. In other words, the apostle wanted Timothy to be a leader and to know how to be a leader. Paul set forth the character and behavior of church leaders in I Timothy 1:1-3:13.
To behave (ἀναστρέφεσθαι; anastrephesthai) refers to how believers in Christ are to conduct themselves in life and living. The emphasis is on an overt daily behavior. See 2 Cor. 1:12; Eph. 2:3; 1Tim. 3:15; Heb. 10:33; 13:18; 1 Peter 1:17; 2 Peter 2:18.
Second, Paul wanted Timothy to also know the nature of the church he pastored, and the nature of churches all other men pastor.
This overt, daily behavior by believers in Christ is to be seen within the fallen world (Rom. 12:1-2). However, it most importantly is to be seen in the household of God. Household (οἴκῳ; oiko) in the context refers to family. This is the family of God.
The text speaks of this household as the church of the living God. Church (ἐκκλησία; ekklesia) is the congregation, and not a building. The church is God’s called out ones. The church is God’s sole possession. Believers are to display godly, daily behavior among each other. This is to be the norm. Often times, it is not.
Paul also identified the church as the pillar (ζῶντος; stylos). A pillar is an upright shaft or structure used as a building support. “στῦλος is also used in speaking of the leaders of the Jerusalem church (Ga 2:9; see 36.7).
“In a number of languages pillars may be described as ‘those poles which support the house’ or ‘those logs which hold up the roof.’ Usually, however, there are rather specific terms to designate these important parts in the construction of houses or halls.”[1]
“στῦλος is also used in speaking of the leaders of the Jerusalem church (Gal. 2:9). In Ga 2:9 the focus is upon the important role of such persons in supporting and maintaining the church. In a number of languages such a figurative meaning may be expressed as ‘very important persons in the church.”’[2]
The church, and its leaders, are also metaphorically identified as a buttress (ἑδραίωμα; hedraioma). “It is that which provides the basis or foundation for belief or practice— ‘support, foundation, basis.’ στῦλος καὶ ἑδραίωμα τῆς ἀληθείας ‘pillar and support of the truth’ 1 Tm 3:15.”[3]
“The church, which met in homes, was modeled on the household, just as pagan political theorists compared the household to society in general (3:4–5). Paul’s prior admonitions to Timothy, especially in 3:1–13, thus serve a function analogous to the household codes of many ancient writers: providing a specific framework of wisdom for administrating the family unit and society. “Pillars” were used to uphold structures, and support for the truth was needed given its challenge by false teachers” (1:3–7).[4]
“Believers are God’s house or sanctuary (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16) because God dwells in them. Hence, Paul continues: which is the church of the living God (not the temple of dead idols! 1 Thess. 1:9, 10), the pillar and foundation of the truth. Having been called “God’s house,” we now note that the church is next compared to a pillar and foundation. As the pillar supports the roof, even better (note the climax!) as the foundation supports the entire super-structure, so the church supports the glorious truth of the gospel (2 Tim. 2:19; Matt. 16:18),” explains Dr. William Hendriksen
“It supports the truth by:
Hearing and Heeding it (Matt. 13:9)
Handling it rightly (2 Tim. 2:15)
Hiding it in the heart (Ps. 119:11), and
Holding it forth as the Word of Life (Phil. 2:16).
Or, if one prefers, by:
Digesting it (Rev. 10:9). That takes study and meditation.
Defending it (Phil. 1:16)
Disseminating it (Matt. 28:18–20)
Demonstrating its power in consecrated living (Col. 3:12–17).”[5]
Take the opportunity to evaluate your church, and yourself, by this biblical rubric. May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
[5] William Hendriksen and Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles, vol. 4, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953–2001), 136–137.
“Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.” (1 Timothy 3:11 (ESV)
Today’s text ushers in the frequently debated subject regarding whether the Apostle Paul was speaking just of the wives of deacons, or the possibility of women serving as deaconesses. God calls all believers in Christ into service (I Peter 4:10-11), but does I Timothy 3:11 allow for service in the office of deaconesses?
A key component to this discussion is the word Paul used in referring to these women (γυναῖκας; gynaikas). This plural noun means an unmarried adult women or an adult female wife of an adult male in the immediate context of I Timothy 3:8-10.
“In the requirements for those who would serve on the diaconate, Paul in today’s passage comments on the deacons’ “wives,” as the English Standard Version translates the Greek word gynaikas in 1 Timothy 3:11. But this word can also be rendered as “women,” which would make this passage have a significantly different meaning. If the passage is to be read as talking about the wives of male deacons, then the office of deacon, like the office of elder, is limited to men alone. Yet if gynaikas means “women,” then Paul is talking about female servants or deaconesses, opening up the diaconate to women as well as men. Unfortunately, it is hard to determine the apostle’s meaning because the contextual details provide little help in choosing the most appropriate translation,” explains one commentator.
What are the arguments “for” the office of deaconess? The following positive opinions are offered for consideration.
First, Paul gave no qualifications for elders’ wives (I Tim. 3:1-7). As such, there is no parallel for deacons’ wives. This at least suggests the office of deaconess is in view.
Second, an argument for deaconesses are the requirements given in verse 11, which will be examined later on in this essay. These requirements are the same as those mandated of male deacons (see vv. 8–10).
Third, supporters of deaconesses cite Romans 16:1. The Apostle Paul called Phoebe a diakonon, a version of the Greek word often translated as “deacon” (diakonos). Since Scripture interprets Scripture, this lends credence for the existence of deaconesses in the early church.
Finally, there is no specific command for women not having authority. What Paul wrote preventing women serving as church elders (1 Tim. 2:12–15; 3:1-7), he does refer to in 1 Timothy 3:8–13 barring women from the diaconate.
“The Greek word gynē can mean either “wife” or “woman. Paul likely here refers not to deacons’ wives, but to the women who serve as deacons. The use of the word “likewise” (cf. v. 8) suggests a third group in addition to elders and deacons. Also, since Paul gave no requirements for elders’ wives, there is no reason to assume these would be qualifications for deacons’ wives,” explains Dr. John MacArthur.
What are the alternative arguments against women serving as deaconesses? Opponents of women serving as deaconesses give several reasons why Paul would give qualifications for deacons’ wives and not those of elders’ wives.
First, deacons serve in ministries of mercy. They often have close contact with people on occasions when a woman’s assistance is needed. It would be awkward for male deacons to aid sick women in many instances. However, their wives could help bathe, dress, or even care for women with such needs.
Second, those opposed to Paul allowing for female deacons do not think it is significant the apostle called Phoebe a diakonon. The term can simply mean “servant,” not an ordained office.
While the debate continues as to whether the Scriptures support deaconesses, the qualifications for these wives was clearly stated. There are four highlighted behavioral qualities these women were to possess.
First, they were to be dignified as their husbands (I Tim. 3:8). To be dignified (σεμνάς; semnas) means a woman who was serious and worthy of respect.
Third, they must be sober-minded (νηφαλίους; nephalious). To be sober-minded means temperate and not one associated with wine or alcohol.
Fourth, they must be faithful in all things. To be faithful (πιστὰς; pistas) means to be committed to, dependent upon, trusting in and honoring the Lord Jesus Christ. These women were to be trustworthy in their lives and ministries.
“Reformed Christians who affirm Scripture’s final authority continue to differ over whether women may be ordained as deacons. What is not up for debate is that the traits Paul lists in 1 Timothy 3:11 should be true of all Christian women, regardless of one’s position on deaconesses,” concludes Dr. R. C. Sproul.
If you are a Christian woman, are you making a concerted effort to be dignified, to avoid slander, to be seriously minded about godliness, and to be faithful? If you are a man, are you encouraging the women in your life in these qualities?
May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
8 Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. 9 They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless.” (1 Timothy 3:8–10 (ESV)
Today’s text strongly indicates deacons are to have the same character as elders (Acts 6:3; I Tim. 3:1-7). Deacons are also to evidence their godly character by their godly behavior. What is true for all believers in Christ (Gal. 5:22-23; Eph. 2:10) is especially so for these servant leaders. In carrying out their practical servant duties on behalf of believers in Christ, how are deacons to behave?
First, they must be dignified (σεμνούς; semnous). This means deacons are to be worthy of respect. In other words, they are to be honorable, gracious, and respectable men. They are to view their lives in Christ, as well as their deaconship before Christ on behalf of believers in Christ, as an honorable calling.
Second, deacons are not to be double-tongued (διλόγους; dilogous). To be double-tongued is to be insincere in what you say. It refers to saying one thing and meaning another. Or, it refers to saying something but not being truthful in what you said.
“To be dignified is to be serious in mind and character; not silly or flippant about important matters. To not be double-tongued means deacons must not say one thing to some people and something else to others; their speech must not be hypocritical, but honest and consistent,” explains Dr. John MacArthur.
Thirdly, deacons must not be addicted to much wine (οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας; oino pollo prosechontas). This phrase refers to being presently and actively attentive to drinking alcohol.
Fourth, they are not to be greedy for dishonest gain (αἰσχροκερδεῖς; aischrokerdeis). The Authorized Version translation uses the phrase “guilty of filthy lucre.” This means deacons are not to be men who have an insatiable appetite for wealth and ready to procure it by disgraceful means.[1]
“Like elders (see I Tim. 3:3), deacons must not abuse their office to make money. Such a qualification was especially important in the early church, where deacons routinely handled money, distributing it to those in need,” continues Dr. MacArthur.
Fifth, Paul stated deacons “must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.” In Paul’s epistles, mystery (μυστήριον; mysterion) refers to the mysteries of God, of his will, of Christ, of the gospel, of iniquity, the mystery kept secret or hidden away. To have a clear conscience (καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει; kithara syneidesei) means to have an ethically clean understanding and awareness of the Gospel. It is the Gospel for which the deacon must presently and actively hold (ἔχοντας; echontas). He can never depart from the truth of the Gospel of Christ.
“Although the deacon is tasked primarily not with teaching the people of God but with mercy ministries such as caring for widows and orphans (Acts 6:1–6), there are many occasions in which deacons will offer instruction. Assisting a family who is suffering a severe budget crisis involves the distribution of funds and advice in how to wisely use the family’s finances. In this case, the deacon will undoubtedly rely on the wisdom and principles of Scripture to help the family learn how to manage their money. When the opportunity comes to help non-Christians, the deacon may very well be called upon to explain the Christian faith and the motivation it provides for doing “good to everyone” (Gal. 6:10). These situations and many others that can possibly arise require deacons to be solidly grounded in the truths of the Bible,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.
“Deacons must hold the mystery of faith “with a clear conscience” (1 Tim. 3:9). In other words, their consciences should not accuse them of lying when they profess the Christian faith. A deacon’s confession must not be mere lip service but something that he embraces with both mind and heart. The deacon without a clear conscience lacks the integrity needed to do his job well. More importantly, he lacks saving knowledge of the One whom he claims to serve.”
Sixth, deacons must finally be tested (δοκιμαζέσθωσαν; dokimazesthosan). This means God commands elders to continually examine and approve active, and potential, deacons.
It should be clearly evident men who serve as deacons must meet these qualifications. If they do not, they cannot serve in this office.
May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
The following article is by Rev. Kevin Dr. Gardner. He is associate editor of Tabletalk magazine, resident adjunct professor at Reformation Bible College in Sanford, Fla., and a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America. This essay, entitled Defining our Terms, appeared in the March 2015 issue of Tabletalk.
The doctrine of Scripture is foundational to the Christian faith. But there is more to say about Scripture than simply, “The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it.” If you don’t grasp what the Bible is and how it came to be, you’ll never fully grasp its meaning. Since the meaning of the Bible is vitally important to our faith and life, we will here briefly define a few key terms that relate to the doctrine of Scripture as the study of God’s Word written.
Authority: The power the Bible possesses, having been issued from God, for which it “ought to be believed and obeyed” (Westminster Confession 1:4). Because of its divine author, the Bible is “the source and norm for such elements as belief, conduct, and the experience of God” (Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms).
Autographs: The original texts of the biblical books as they issued from the hands of the human authors.
Canon: The authoritative list of inspired biblical books. Within a short time after Jesus’ death, the New Testament canon was affirmed by evaluating the Apostolicity, reception, and teachings of books, but ultimately, the canon is self-authenticating, as the voice of Christ is heard in it (John 10:27; WCF 1:5).
Inerrancy: The position that the Bible affirms no falsehood of any sort; that is, “it is without fault or error in all that it teaches,” in matters of history and science as well as faith (Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy). Inerrancy allows for literary devices, such as metaphors, hyperbole, round numbers, and colloquial expressions.
Infallibility: The position that the Bible cannot err or make mistakes, and that it “is completely trustworthy as a guide to salvation and the life of faith and will not fail to accomplish its purpose” (Westminster Dictionary). As the Christian church has traditionally taught, this doctrine is based on the perfection of the divine author, who cannot speak error.
Inspiration: The process by which God worked through the human authors of the Bible to communicate His revelation. The term derives from the Greek theopneustos, meaning “God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16), and refers to God as the ultimate source of the Scriptures.
Organic inspiration: The process by which God guided the human authors of Scripture, working in and through their particular styles and life experiences, so that what they produced was exactly what He wanted them to produce. The text is truly the work of the human authors—God did not typically dictate to them as to a stenographer—and yet the Lord stands behind it as the ultimate source.
Necessity: Refers to mankind’s need for God’s special revelation in the Scriptures in order to obtain knowledge of the gospel and the plan of salvation, which cannot be learned through the general revelation of nature and conscience.
Perspicuity: The clarity of the Bible; that is, that which is necessary to know and believe regarding life and salvation is “so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or the other,” that anyone may understand them (WCF 1:7).
Scripture: From the Latin scriptura, meaning “writings”; refers to sacred texts, but more specifically, the Bible as the Word of God written.
Special revelation: The things that God makes known about Himself apart from nature and conscience (general revelation; cf. Rom. 1:19–21). These things, having to do with Christ and the plan of salvation, are found only in the Bible.
Sufficiency: All that is needed to know and believe regarding salvation and what pleases God is found in the Bible.
Verbal, plenary inspiration: The extending of God’s superintendence of the writing of Scripture down to the very choice of words, not merely to overarching themes or concepts; that is, “the whole of Scripture and all of its parts, down to the very words of the original,” were inspired (Chicago Statement).
May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed Lord’s Day.
8 Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. 9 They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless.” (1 Timothy 3:8–10 (ESV)
As surprised as we might be by divisiveness in the church, and as uncomfortable and maddening as it may feel at times, such cracks in the walls have dogged us from the beginning.
The kinds of cracks have varied from age to age and culture to culture, but give any congregation enough time — even the best of them — and cracks will emerge. They’re side effects of making covenants with fellow sinners — as unpleasant as they are unavoidable. It’s just part of keeping a home in a fallen world.
Many have tried hard to diagnose and treat the current cracks in our walls — politics and elections, mask mandates and rebellions, racial disparity and superiority, men’s and women’s roles in the home and beyond, domestic abuse and other moral failures, and so on — but many of them have overlooked or marginalized a missing ingredient to harmony. In fact, I can’t help but wonder if the wildfires in some pews are as fierce and contagious as they are because this piece seems so small in many of our eyes.
When God planted the first churches, he knew the cracks he’d find. He wrote them into our stories, in fact, because he knew that cracked but loving churches served his purposes better than ones with brand-new walls and pristine floors. He had planned the cracks, and he had plans for the cracks, and one of those plans was called deacons.
Strong Enough to Help
We first encounter deacons during a meal (which, as any normal family knows, is when fights often break out). As the early church began to meet and grow, Greek-speaking Jews who had been scattered outside of Israel (“Hellenists”) returned to Jerusalem to join the church and follow Jesus. After a while, though, they came and complained to the Hebrew-speaking apostles because Greek widows were not receiving the food they needed (Acts 6:1).
Urgent needs like this, as any church knows, require time and attention, pastoral sensitivity, and careful follow-through. This meant the leaders would have less time and attention for teaching and prayer, and they knew the church would suffer even more if that were the case (Acts 6:2). So, the apostles called the church to appoint seven men to make sure all were fed well. And because they did, “the word of God continued to increase, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem” (Acts 6:7).
How much or little we think of diaconal ministry today rests, in significant measure, on what problem we think those first proto-deacons were solving. Was this merely a matter of entrées and sides for some lonely and vulnerable women, or was the church facing a deeper, more sensitive threat?
Matt Smethurst, in his introduction to deacons, draws our attention to the greater dangers hiding beneath the dining tables:
How our churches react to conflict can make all the difference in whether our gospel witness is obstructed or accelerated. Acts 6 is a story of church conflict handled well. The seven weren’t merely deployed to solve a food problem. Food was the occasion, sure, but it wasn’t the deepest problem. The deepest problem was a sudden threat to church unity. (Deacons, 44, 52)
“How could the church win the war for souls if there were wars within her walls?”
Cracks were suddenly surfacing and spreading. How could the church win the war for souls if there were wars within her walls? How could the word run if its people were mired in swamps of bitterness? The church didn’t merely need better waiters; it needed peace and healing. It needed men strong and wise enough to help mend fractures in the family.
Giants Bowing Low
Many might hear deacon and immediately think of dull or menial tasks that few people want to do — building maintaining, budget crunching, nursery cleaning, furnace repairing, meal serving. They might imagine a sort of junior-varsity team that relieves the pastors of lesser work. When the apostles saw those seven men, however, they saw something different in them — a stronger and more vibrant force for good, a noble and vital ministry.
We know how much they thought of diaconal work because of the kind of men they appointed: “Pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty” (Acts 6:3). They weren’t content with someone who was handy around the house or good with spreadsheets; they wanted men filled with the Spirit and abounding in wisdom. These were remarkable men doing difficult and precious work. “The apostles did not delegate this problem to others because it wasn’t important,” Smethurst observes, “but because it was” (53).
Because they knew how much food could poison fellowship, they set spiritual giants-in-the-making like Stephen over the tables. “And Stephen, full of grace and power, was doing great wonders and signs among the people” (Acts 6:8). The Jewish leaders “could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking” (Acts 6:10). And yet feeding widows was not beneath him. In fact, the faith and humility that freed him to quietly serve tables was the same faith and humility that freed him to boldly die for Jesus (Acts 7:58). Like Jesus, he knew that those who bow down lowest get to see more of God and his glory.
Diaconal ministry is not merely about checking boxes next to tasks, but about helping to maintain a home where a family not only lives but thrives.
Office of Tedious?
What do deacons do? In short, they assist the elders by meeting needs in the life of the church. They unleash the word of God by allowing the elders to focus on praying, teaching, and governing. And in doing so, the deacons guard and encourage the church’s love for one another. For the church of Acts 6, that meant making sure everyone was fed. In our day, it might still be feeding the hungry in our congregation, or it might be maintaining the church budget, or overseeing ministry to children, or taking care of the building, or leading a small group.
The tasks may seem tedious to the untrained eye, but imagine how much our churches would be crippled if no one stepped up to do them well. Imagine how horribly distracted and worn out our pastors would be, trying to cover all those bases themselves. Imagine how the preaching and teaching would inevitably suffer, leaving the church starving in far worse ways.
“The apostles recognize a fundamental truth,” Smethurst writes.
A church whose ministers are chained to the tyranny of the urgent — which so often shows up in “tangible problems” — is a church removing its heart to strengthen its arm. It’s a kind of slow-motion suicide. A church without deacons may lack health, but a church without biblical preaching cannot exist. There is, in fact, no such thing. (47)
Sent into the Cracks
What should churches look for in a deacon? I believe both men and women can serve as deacons (though I don’t have space to argue for that here). Scripture is not as clear on that question as we might like, so I understand why others come down differently. Whether we ordain women as deacons or not, though, Scripture does give us a clear picture of what marks a good deacon: dignity and honesty, self-control and generosity, conviction and faithfulness (1 Timothy 3:8–10). The men must also be devoted husbands and fathers, raising their families in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (1 Timothy 3:12; Ephesians 6:4).
“When they see something that needs to be done, deacons love to help see that it gets done.”
Beyond the biblical qualifications, Smethurst shares some practical counsel for recognizing good deacons in the wild: “Pastor, when eyeing future deacons, look for godly saints who see and meet needs discreetly (they don’t need or want credit), at their own expense (they sacrifice), and without being asked (they take the initiative to solve problems)” (76). These qualities prepare a man (or woman) to anticipate and heal cracks in the church by meeting practical needs.
Sincere Humility
First, good deacons serve discreetly because of their deep-seated humility. The public nature of preaching and teaching means pastors get greater amounts of attention and encouragement (and criticism, with it). Doing diaconal work well requires a kind of humility, ready to forfeit the attention and affirmation others may receive. By all means, we should regularly encourage our deacons, but the very nature of their ministry means that many will not see or fully appreciate what they do.
Generous Sacrifice
Second, good deacons are strangely quick to sacrifice. I say strangely because all Christians should be quick to sacrifice. To follow Jesus Christ at all is to lay down our lives and pick up a cross (Matthew 16:24). Deacons, however, are examples in cross-bearing. Sacrifice is not an occasional blip on the radar of their decisions, but woven deeply into their lifestyle. They rejoice to spend and be spent for the sake of others (2 Corinthians 12:15), and especially for the church (Galatians 6:10).
Creative Initiative
Third, good deacons are creative problem-solvers. They’re solution-initiators. While others in the church might walk past problems (or even fail to notice them), deacons are drawn to these opportunities. How might that need be met? What might resolve this tension? What would it take to repair that wall or appliance? What is keeping my pastors from their most important work? When they see something that needs to be done, deacons love to help see that it gets done. When possible, they resist the impulse to leave a need at someone else’s feet, and they’re especially sensitive to how much pastors already have on their plates.
Durable Happiness
Good deacons are humble, and sacrificial, and creatively constructive — and they’re also deeply happy. Their humility is a happy humility. Their sacrifices are glad sacrifices. Their initiative is not just willing, but cheerful and eager. They have found, like the Servant they follow, that joy not only fuels ministry to others, but blossoms from that ministry. Jesus, after all, was betrayed, mocked, beaten, and slaughtered “for the joy set before him” (Hebrews 12:2). Likewise, as 1 Timothy 3:13 promises, “Those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.”
May the Lord’s truth and grace be found here. Have a blessed day in the Lord.
His Word Today 