Questions about Elders

[anochria]

I'm listening through Steve's Some Assembly Required and thought I'd post a related question.

Steve made the statement that the ability to teach was a requirement for elders (in fact, the only requirement in addition to the other scriptural requirements that would actually apply to all believers).

However, doesn't this verse seem to indicate that not all elders must be able to teach?

1 Timothy 5: 17

The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.

This verse seems to leave room for elders who serve in other roles such as sheperds or administrators.

If this is true (that not all elders must be able to teach) although I agree that the terms overseers and elders are used almost interchangeably in Scripture, doesn't 1 Timothy 3:2 seem to indicate that all overseers must teach?

1 Timothy 3:2

Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,...

How should we reconcile this apparent discrepancy in 1 Timothy?

A couple options come to mind:

Resolution #1
a) Not all elders teach
b) All overseers must be able to teach
c) Elders and Overseers must not be completely interchangeable terms
d) To be considered an Overseer, one must be an elder who can also teach

Resolution #2
a) Not all elders teach regularly or exceptionally well, but are able to teach
b) All overseers are able to teach
c) Elders and Overseers are then completely interchangeable

[mikew]

It seems that the term "elder" is a bit broader than overseer. But I have had a hard time finding clarification on how much broader.

The overseer, though, has a role of both representing the Church before the public, being a bit of an apologist in that sense. He also mainly is supposed to manage affairs of the local Church. The skills listed are essentially about management rather than about spiritual gifts --I mainly including the charismatic gifts in the phrase "spiritual gifts." Therefore the overseer would be mainly in charge of tasks to insure that the body maintains harmony and peace. He may then handle issues of reconciliation among the members as well as corrections of rampant false doctrine.

In many cases, the doctrinal issues could be handled through various teachers in the community (community of believers). There may be some situations though where he would have had to teach the teachers. I think that in most cities that the Church met in groups no larger than 30 people in the same room/location. So if there were more than 30 believers in the city, they would have to meet at different times (and maybe different locations).

I have felt that modern churches might do a bit better if they were led by an overseer rather than a pastor. If we think in terms of the pastor as including new young believers out of seminary, such guys don't even qualify as being an overseer. And if the teaching of a pastor gets stale, the overseer could have someone else teach. Or he could teach for awhile.

[lee]

resolution #2.
continue listening for the entire argument establishing the interchangeability of pastor/shepherd (poimen), elder (presbuteros), and overseer/bishop (episcopos).

[darinhouston]

Consider the fact that one might be equipped/able to teach if called upon yet not have teaching as their primary vocation in the service of the church.

[anochria]

mikew,

Your description of the subtle differences between "overseer" and "elder" is basically how the system of our church is set up, with the exception that I use the term "pastor" rather than "overseer"*.

When we wrote our bylaws/ constitution we defined the pastor (overseer) as "one of the elders" in many senses of the word, but the with some additional expectations/ responsibilities; administration, shepherding and teaching are not considered optional as they are with the role of elder.

So, I'm re-analyzing our set-up as I'm listening along with Steve.

It sounds like the others who have commented, along with Steve, don't see that subtle distinction.

Thanks for the input- more is definitely welcome!

*The term overseer doesn't translate well into English, imo. It actually sounds more authoritarian than pastor to me!

[anochria]

On another note (and this may be stuff that is going to be addressed as I listen further), but if, as Steve sees it, "elder" isn't really an "office" but more of a "role", why does Scripture speak of "appointing" or "ordaining" elders, as if a title is being bestowed. Furthermore, according to his view, who would be deciding who is an Elder in a given local assembly?

[darinhouston]

Why must someone "appoint" or "designate" them today? Do families appoint their "elders"? or are they simply recognized by each other and the others as they mature and show leadership and influence? Qualifications in Scripture seem to me to be descriptive of those who are in that role. Yes, Scripture show the apostles and their legates appointing elders, but that was necessary in the beginning of the movement.

[anochria]

Why was it necessary then and not now?

[mikew]

I'm listening through Steve's Some Assembly Required and thought I'd post a related question.

Steve made the statement that the ability to teach was a requirement for elders (in fact, the only requirement in addition to the other scriptural requirements that would actually apply to all believers).

//snip//

1 Timothy 3:2

Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,...

I hope I matched the right verse with the above quote.
This is a bit off topic but ...
I don't know that these requirements would be needed to qualify one as a believer. Of course the list represents the preferred condition after we come to Christ. There were believers who were stealing things from households, and some guys were freeloading at the meals, others were getting drunk. So the list represents at least minimally that these common problems weren't among those appointed as elders.

[anochria]

I don't know that these requirements would be needed to qualify one as a believer. Of course the list represents the preferred condition after we come to Christ. There were believers who were stealing things from households, and some guys were freeloading at the meals, others were getting drunk. So the list represents at least minimally that these common problems weren't among those appointed as elders.

Yep- my bad- I shouldn't have used the word "requirements". It would be more like "ideals". Steve pointed this out well.

BTW, I'm thoroughly enjoying the series. Much of it echoes thoughts and perspectives I have already come to share, some of it is appealing to me in a fresh way, and just a small minority of things raise some doubts or questions in my mind.