A Grandfather Elder

Feb 08, 2025

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-11:30

One of the most ignored passages in Scripture (there is a lot of competition) are those speaking of the qualifications for elders, specifically the family qualifications for elders:

This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
I Timothy 3:1-7

For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;

Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

Titus 1:5-9

Outright Contradiction

The Catholic doctrine stands in outright contradiction to these passages. Where the Scriptures say ‘must be the husband of one wife’ their doctrine says ‘must not be the husband of any wife’. Where the Scriptures say ‘For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?’ they seem to say that if a man has his own house, he isn’t fit to rule in the church of God.

Outright Ignorance

Protestants are hardly any better, and with much less excuse. They will accept a young man, unmarried, right out of seminary, and slap the title ‘pastor’ on him without even a passing glance a the Biblical qualifications. If a man has a certain piece of paper, who cares what his other qualifications are?

Generational Limit

But neither of those are the subject of this post. This post is part of my series of Jonadab, the son of Rechab, and is focused on a certain attack made on God’s blessing of Jonadab. I cannot be true, it seems, that Jonadab should be praised for his great, great… grandchildren’s obedience, because that would mean… that we would have to take how a given man’s grandchildren were serving the Lord when considering him for the position of elder:

So allow me to make a few more observations to show the absurdity of what I’m arguing against.
1Ti_3:4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence
1Ti_3:12 Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
So, given the Extreme Patriarch view that we owe perpetual obedience to even our fathers fathers, like Jonadab, does this mean that we must inspect the households of all of prospective Elder’s Children as well? After all, if they are bound to obedience of the father generations after he’s dead, I would think that we ought to examine all of his Children’s households to see if they are all in submission as well?

The Meaning of ‘Children’ in Scripture

The passages above use the terms ‘children’ and ‘house’. It is important to note, at the very beginning of this discussion, that neither of these refer to anything like what the modern, American, English speaker thinks of when hearing these words. Especially in this context.

If I am asked, generally, how many ‘children’ I have, no one thinks it at all odd that I say ‘six’. They are all married and have children of their own but, even if they had grandchildren of their own, no one would find it at all odd, or ‘absurd’ that I would say I have ‘six’ children.

But put in the context of ‘ruling’ then, suddenly, I have no children. Zero. The average American English speaker would be shocked at the idea (is shocked at the idea, I have had these conversations) that I have any responsibility, let alone authority, over these ‘children’. “They aren’t children any more!” they will say.

But the situation is far, far worse when we look at the actual Greek words used in these passages. Because neither the Greek word translated ‘children’ nor the Greek word translated ‘house’ are at all limited to little children living in one building.

The Greek word translated ‘children’ is ‘technon’, and is used most often by someone like Christ to refer to a disciple. The Greek word translated ‘house’ is ‘oikos’ and is used both for a physical house and for a term such as ‘house of Israel’. Meaning, like, the entire nation.

Calling the historical position ‘absurd’ or ‘extreme’

A slight parenthetical here. One of the underlying issues that my good friend calls ‘absurd’ and ‘extreme’ is the idea that father’s have authority over those who have left their house. Not only does his position not work very well with the Greek, Hebrew, or Scriptural examples… it condemns some rather serious Biblical commentators.

Children, obey your parents in the Lord,.... The persons whose duty this is, "children", are such of every sex, male and female, and of every age, and of every state and condition; and though the true, legitimate, and immediate offspring of men may be chiefly respected, yet not exclusive of spurious children, and adopted ones, and of children-in-law; and the persons to whom obedience from them is due, are not only real and immediate parents, both father and mother, but such who are in the room of parents, as step-fathers, step-mothers, guardians, nurses, &c. and all who are in the ascending line, as grandfathers, grandmothers, &c. to these, children should be subject and obedient in all things lawful, just, and good; in everything that is not sinful and unlawful, by the word of God; and in things indifferent, as much as in them lies, and even in things which are difficult to perform: and this obedience should be hearty and sincere, and not merely verbal, and in show and appearance, nor mercenary; and should be joined with gratitude and thankfulness for past favours: and it should be "in the Lord"; which may be considered either as a limitation of the obedience, that it should be in things that are agreeable to the mind and will of the Lord; or as an argument to it, because it is the command of the Lord, and is wellpleasing in his sight, and makes for his glory, and therefore should be done for his sake:
for this is right; it appears to be right by the light of nature, by which the very Heathens have taught it; and it is equitable from reason that so it should be; and it is just by the law of God, which commands nothing but what is holy, just, and good.
John Gill on Ephesians 6:1

And thus this truth may stand, that the obedience of the Rechabites pleased God, because nature itself requires that children should obey their parents
John Calvin

Indeed he provides no example at all of any of the commentators who hold his view.

The Example of Christ

And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:

But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.

And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Mark 7:9-13

For those who think that the ‘children’ who are to obey their parents are little children still living in their father’s house, Christ serves as a counter example. The standard, and well attested, meaning of the ‘honour’ that is involved in ‘honour your father and mother’ is: obedience, respect, and care. Example after example in the law and the rest of the Scripture attest to this. And Christ, here, clearly speaks of that honour as extending to elderly parents in need of their children’s help.

A Medical Example

The whole point of the ‘household’ qualification for elder is, as I understand it, to see how well the prospective elder leads. Leads and teaches. So if you had a man who had 15 children and, while they were in his house, they were all rather well behaved and participated in church and all that but, the second they turned eighteen they left and were all involved in riotous living… as for myself I might wonder about how good a teacher that man was.

Let us take another example. Let us take a nursing instructor. She gets high marks for how her students behave while in nursing school. They get good grades and high marks from their various internships.

But then, the second they get their degree and lisence and leave nursing school and get a job… the complaints start piling up. They make med errors, don’t listen to the doctors, get the hospitals they work for sued…

Personally, if this nursing instructor came to me for a job, I might be reluctant.

Conclusion

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

Sometimes we are so immersed in our own culture that we see things as ‘extreme’ and ‘absurd’ that are simple common sense. Leaving aside the loaded language, yes, I think any church that was serious about actually implementing Paul’s qualifications for elders would, among other things, look to see how the grandchildren were doing. How the sons and daughters that had left the house were doing.

Indeed I believe that even now many elders step down if one of more of their older children has lapsed into rebellion and apostasy. There is nothing at all absurd or extreme in that view.

Thank you for reading Von’s Substack. I would love it if you commented! I love hearing from readers, especially critical comments. I would love to start more letter exchanges, so if there’s a subject you’re interested in, get writing and tag me!

Being ‘restacked’ and mentioned in ‘notes’ is very important for lesser-known stacks so… feel free! I’m semi-retired and write as a ministry (and for fun) so you don’t need to feel guilty you aren’t paying for anything, but if you enjoy my writing (even if you dramatically disagree with it), then restack, please! Or mention me in one of your own posts.

If I don’t write you back it is almost certain that I didn’t see it, so please feel free to comment and link to your post. Or if you just think I would be interested in your post!

If you get lost, check out my ‘Table of Contents’ which I try to keep up to date.

Von also writes as ‘Arthur Yeomans’. Under that name he writes children’s, YA, and adult fiction from a Christian perspective. His books are published by Wise Path Books and include the children’s/YA books:

The Bobtails meet the Preacher’s Kid

The Bobtails and the Cousins

The Bobtails go to France

and

No Ordinary School

As well as GK Chesterton’s wonderful book, “What’s Wrong with the World”, for which ‘Arthur’ wrote most of the annotations.

Arthur also has a substack, and a website.

Thanks again, God Bless, Soli Deo gloria,

Von