Church

The Good Shepherd and Good Shepherding – 3

Posted on by Bob Mathews

Scripture describes an elder’s work as a multi-faceted ministry. It is basically set forth in terms of:

  1. Shepherding – John 10; Luke 15; Acts 20; I Peter 5. See our cursory treatment of that aspect.
  2. Modeling – I Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.
  3. Equipping – Ephesians 4:11-15.
  4. Overseeing – Acts 20:28; I Peter 5:2

Let’s look at the aspect of MODELING (It really would help if you would open to the above texts on that now. I will wait.):

In the biblical record, nothing takes place in a vacuum. A context, whether or not it is articulated, always exists. Context often is the key to ascertaining the proper meaning and application of a  text. Whereas, ignoring context can leave one short of a healthy understanding.  (Example: Matthew 18:20. Is its context about church worship? No, it is about conflict resolution and the matter of reconciliation. Then why do we only apply it to worship? Not that it cannot be so applied, but that, in doing so, we fail to see the weight it carries in the reconciliation process. We miss its intended purpose. “But what does it matter?” It matters in that a context ignored often leads to a meaning being missed. Other than that, I suppose it doesn’t really matter.)

Similarly, in our typical approach to I Timothy 3 and Titus 1, we have shorted ourselves by simply airdropping right into those elder texts without respecting their broader contexts. It is not that we have necessarily mistaught them but that we may have mishandled them. In doing so, we may have both missed the big picture and created unnecessary problems for ourselves in the elder selection process. (And, yes, there also is mention of deacons but that is not my focus.) Let’s take a look at the background of I Timothy.

Since Paul was taking off to Macedonia (his fourth missionary trip), he instructed preacher-apprentice Timothy about how to help the Ephesian church with some renegade teachers – 1:2f. (Remember that Paul had worked in Ephesus for three years – Acts 18, 19. The apostle knew the existing elders in this church, and that some would become bad actors – Acts 20:17f., esp. vv. 29f.) Later realizing that he would not soon return, Paul paused to say some things to Timothy about both that church and the young preacher’s current ministry with them. (I am sure Timothy profusely thanked Paul for sending him into the mouth of the lion! He would have a real fight on his hands – 1:18. By the way, Titus ran into similar characters in his church situation. You can read that.) Anyway, that is how we got I Timothy and I Timothy 3.

Now, we are in I Timothy 3 and its words about elders. But I Timothy does not start with I Timothy 3! CONTEXT! What was going on with that church? First, look at the bad guys in the picture. How are they described?

1:3-4: they were into strange myths and wild speculations

1:5: they had serious integrity and character problems

1:6-7: they wanted to be teachers but were dumb as a brick about it.

4:1-5: they spoke doctrines of demons, were hypocrites and liars, of no conscience, legalistic.

6:3-5: they spoke doctrines not of Christ, were conceited, into controversy, were envious and divisive and evil and greedy.

In the midst of his multiple warnings about these bad guys, Paul calls upon Timothy to stay with what he had been taught about Jesus and to confront the troublemakers. Is it hard to doubt that some were the elders to whom Paul referred in Acts 20:28,29? Remember: the church was basically brand new, without much teaching, and without bibles! It is easy to see how a church could have ended up with a rascal as an elder or preacher. Ephesus had elders, including some bad elders. There is such a thing, you know. (How did they ever get in? Politics? Money? Family? Cronyism? Deceit? Or was it a case of breaking bad? It happens.) Mark it: good shepherding begins with good shepherd selection.

And those texts are not all Paul said to Timothy about how to deal with that dangerous mess. Remember, there is an entire church witnessing all the turmoil and confusion: a church comprised by many whom the apostle himself had brought to Jesus. There is much at stake here. So, the other line of defense against these threats to the church was chapter 3. How so? Well, had the church seen an abundance of good role models, godly leaders, loving shepherds, mature examples? Maybe not! So, Paul helps them (and Timothy) by doing two things:

  1. Identifying the bad guys.
  2. Identifying the good guys.

Paul’s emphasis in 1 Timothy 3 is upon modeling Christ in life.

That is what seems to be going on here. Paul is determined to help Timothy protect both himself and those whom Jesus already had saved – 4:16. How does the apostle go about it? Among other important things, he profiles and contrasts the bad guys and the good guys. Characteristics of both types are scattered through this letter to the young but manly preacher. Paul is drawing a picture of the bad and the good among and around that church. All Timothy has to do is lay it out for them: “Here is what the bad guys look like and here is what the good guys look like. You know these people! Now, church, you can clearly see who you can and cannot trust to be your elders. Some are bad models; some are good models. I will help you to see the difference. Some are living for Christ; some are living for the devil. Get the bad models out (often easier said than done) and get the good models in!” If not, why does Paul follow his words about elders and deacons with 3:14,15:

“I am writing these things to you (Timothy – rp), hoping to come to you before long; but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.”

It seems that the apostle is zeroed in on how elders, deacons, wives, preachers are to conduct themselves. There, again, is the emphasis upon modeling Christ in life. That seems to be the focus. You may have a better idea of it. But it seems to be how Paul sets it up for Timothy to help the church in Ephesus get things together. (We may as well note that Titus’ situation bears considerable similarity.)

Too often we have treated I Timothy 3 and Titus 1 as if they just fell out of the blue. “Here is the list. Let’s see what it means, check it off, then, get some elders.” Well, that may be okay but maybe not. For one thing, the “lists” are not the same. I hope you looked at the texts. So, which list is the correct or best, if lists they are? And who decides that? Furthermore, there are qualities to being an elder not mentioned in either “list.” How do we deal with that? Third, some have manipulated the “lists” into a pretzel in order to squeeze candidates either in or out. You think not? Fourth, and perhaps most significantly, we often define, debate, nitpick these “lists” to the point of tedium, often discouraging good men who could have helped the flock of God. (How many have heard the endless slicing and dicing of minute nuances?) All while missing the forest for the trees! Yes, I agree, those qualities noted in the “lists” have to mean something. But what is Paul’s plan in it all? Does context mean something only when we want it?

Make of it what you will. I think it is all about MODELING. (Things reproduce after their own kind, right?True also among the people of God.) The church in Ephesus is already trouble. They are sick from the head down! (Have you seen the Ephesians’ condition in Revelation 2? Did they ever figure it out? Did they ever heed Paul or Timothy about this elder thing?) I think Paul is anxious for Timothy to teach so that the church can easily identify the right kind of men to lead them in Jesus. His approach is to profile two types. He is asking the church to look and listen to who is around, and identify which type can show them how to go about their lives: domestically, socially, personally, emotionally, relationally, so forth. (By the way, this comes with age and experience. That is why an elder is called an elder. He has been to the rodeo.) MODELING is the focus here, as one aspect of an elder’s ministry. Seek out and pray for a man who can show “how to.” And remember:  good shepherding begins with good shepherd selection. 

The Good Shepherd and Good Shepherding – 2

Posted on by Bob Mathews

JOHN 10

7 So Jesus said again, “I assure you: I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep didn’t listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved and will come in and go out and find pasture. 10 A thief comes only to steal and to kill and to destroy. I have come so that they may have life and have it in abundance.
11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired man, since he is not the shepherd and doesn’t own the sheep, leaves them and runs away when he sees a wolf coming. The wolf then snatches and scatters them. 13 This happens because he is a hired man and doesn’t care about the sheep. 14 “I am the good shepherd. I know My own sheep, and they know Me, 15 as the Father knows Me, and I know the Father. I lay down My life for the sheep.

As noticed in our first word on this, the thought of Jesus as shepherd flows out of the shepherding context of Israelite history and culture. Some of Israel’s earliest leaders were shepherds: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob. And you may remember how impulsive Moses was transplanted from the palace to the pastures that he might learn how to care for people by taking care of sheep. David is a sheep-tender from the time we first meet him. He later will rule as God’s king-shepherd for 40 years.

For centuries to come, kings were considered to be shepherds over their nation-flocks. Some were good; too many were evil. You also can toss bad priests and prophets into that mix. Along with the king, it was their shepherding job to protect and feed and lead the people of God in the paths of righteousness and faithfulness. Their collective failure to do so is found in the accounts of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, so forth. Hear what Ezekiel preaches to these bad actors (chapter 34), noticing the stark contrast between bad shepherds and Jehovah, the good shepherd:

4 You have not strengthened the weak, healed the sick, bandaged the injured, brought back the strays, or sought the lost. Instead, you have ruled them with violence and cruelty. 5 They were scattered for lack of a shepherd…
7 “Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD. 8 As I live” — the declaration of the Lord GOD — “because My flock has become prey and food for every wild animal since they lack a shepherd, for My shepherds do not search for My flock, and because the shepherds feed themselves rather than My flock, 9 therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD!… I will rescue My flock from their mouths so that they will not be food for them…
11 “For this is what the Lord GOD says: See, I Myself will search for My flock and look for them… I will rescue them from all the places where they have been scattered on a cloudy and dark day…16 “I will seek the lost, bring back the strays, bandage the injured, and strengthen the weak, but I will destroy the fat and the strong. I will shepherd them with justice.

So? So, if we hear the Lord speak of Himself in shepherding terminology then, we should not be surprised to hear Him do it later. The circumstances in the Israel of Jesus’ day were tragically similar to the state of things in Ezekiel’s day! Remember Matthew 9:36? Hence, we have the stark words of Christ in John 10 about thieves, strangers, hired hands, wolves…and the GOOD shepherd Who has come upon the scene to face them and free the sheep. (Keep in mind the context: Jesus has deliberately gone into the lion’s den of Jerusalem. Why? Well, for things such as this. It is only a matter of months before His enemies will try to permanently do away with Him. What does He do before that event? He heads straight toward the eye of the hurricane. So, expect tension and conflict to come out of His time in the chief city.)

Scripture speaks of elders primarily in terms of function, not position or structure or hierarchy.

So? So, in John 10, try not to envision an idyllic setting of contented sheep gently grazing around their smiling shepherd. Instead, think of the danger and confusion brought by mere pretenders. Then, hear Jesus announce Himself as the new sheriff in town. He has come to right the wrongs which had scattered the sheep away from their great shepherd-God, saying, “I AM the real deal, and you will know it by the way I treat you in contrast to these self servers. I know you. Trust Me. Follow Me. Listen to Me. I will neither use nor hurt you. These other guys are bad. There is nothing good about them. I am good. There is nothing bad about me. They led you astray. I will lead you to God. They lied. I will tell you the truth.”

Then, He goes about proving that out, to the point of the cross! (Not to mention the scorn and hate suffered in events leading up to that scene.) Very little that is mild and gentle about that! Rather, it is the shepherd-God in the flesh Who has interposed Himself into the reality of their times. His words are a statement of strength. Just as He had promised through Ezekiel centuries ago, Jehovah has come to set things right. He has come, not just to the world, but into our real worlds, to deal with whoever or whatever is hurting us. Here I AM, states Jesus, as both the Lamb and Shepherd God of Israel. Feature that! Would they grasp it all that day? No, nor perhaps do I to this day. But He is telling them and me about Who He is.  He simply wants them and Me to trust that, and enjoy life more abundantly (10:10) because of it. Good shepherds bring safety and life to their sheep. It is what they do.

Perhaps John 10 is less a picture of sweet Jesus (Luke 15 may lean that way) than it is a strong Jesus. Sheep were weak and timid, but shepherds were anything but. They were strong and courageous. They had to be. The welfare of the sheep demanded it. The last thing a predator or thief wanted to face was a fearless shepherd in rescue of HIS sheep. (It is to this that Jesus refers in 10:15,17, is it not?) Let us keep in mind that the good Shepherd is more than good. He also is great, as in the great Shepherd of the sheep (Hebrews 13:20) whom even death could not destroy (another enemy He chose to face head on I Corinthians 15:25,26. By the way, when is death ever called a friend of the believer? Just asking. And I speak not of the Christian’s confidence in the face of death, so forth. I speak of what I asked.) Nothing gentle about the Lord’s locking horns with death, by the way. You may want to look at Hebrews 13:20 again. I think I will, again.

FOR THOUGHT (The general idea of it all, right?) What has this to do with good (or bad) shepherding, eldering? Only everything! You may want to ask yourself:

  1. Which model do I want to imitate as an elder: Ezekiel 34 or John 10? Or, per John 10, do I treat God’s sheep as would a hired hand or a good shepherd?
  2. What could be some of the perils (or people) from which a good elder will seek to save the sheep on his watch?
  3. How did the Good shepherd describe his work – as one who served or one who supervised? (That a shepherd had authority, leadership is beyond question. But how he used his authority showed what kind of shepherd he was, right? And, by the way, an elder who feels he must constantly assert his power actually has little and deserves less. To be effective, he must rule by moral authority not fiat. Though God clearly has delegated authority to him (I Peter 5:2,3), he must not confuse that with lordship. He must continually earn followership by the way he handles leadership. Once again, eldering is defined more by practice than position. More on that later, perhaps.)
  4. Do you think Jesus looked at His shepherding position as being primarily relational or organizational?  We are so feverish about being “scripturally organized.” I know what we say and mean, but, again, scripture speaks of this elder thing primarily in terms of function, not position or structure. Look again at the concepts of shepherding, modeling, equipping,  and overseeing (which we are yet to examine), so forth.
  5. Along with that, where do you suppose the Good shepherd would have placed His title/name on one of our well-intended but often ill-designed church organizational flow charts: top or bottom? Yes, yes, He indeed is the Head of the church, has all authority, etc.(Colossians 1:18), but did He ever talk about how He chooses to exercise that inherent power? Do you think Mark 10:43-45 is instructive about this?
  6. Would the Good shepherd trust you with His sheep? Complete the following: “Jesus can trust me with His sheep because…”

What else is here that would help with good shepherding? More, for sure. Always is when Jesus is the discussion.

robert

The Good Shepherd and Good Shepherding

Posted on by Bob Mathews

JOHN 10 (The Good shepherd’s words about Himself)

11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired man, since he is not the shepherd and doesn’t own the sheep, leaves them and runs away when he sees a wolf coming. The wolf then snatches and scatters them. 13 This happens because he is a hired man and doesn’t care about the sheep… 14 I am the good shepherd. I know My own sheep, and they know Me, 15 as the Father knows Me, and I know the Father. I lay down My life for the sheep…27 My sheep hear My voice, I know them, and they follow Me.

(LUKE 15:3 So He told them this parable: 4 “What man among you, who has 100 sheep and loses one of them, does not leave the 99 in the open field and go after the lost one until he finds it? 5 When he has found it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders, 6 and coming home, he calls his friends and neighbors together, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, because I have found my lost sheep!'”)

ACTS 20 (Paul’s warning words to the Ephesian elders)

28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock that the Holy Spirit has appointed you to as overseers, to shepherd the church of God,8 which He purchased with His own blood. 29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 And men will rise up from your own number with deviant doctrines to lure the disciples into following them. 31 Therefore be on the alert…

I PETER 5 (Peter speaks AS an elder TO elders)

1 Therefore, as a fellow elder…I exhort the elders among you: 2 Shepherd God’s flock among you, not overseeing out of compulsion but freely, according to God’s will;2 not for the money but eagerly; 3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. 4 And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.

Shepherding is as old as dirt. Both Old Testament shepherding texts and contemporary shepherding form the context of the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd is the context of New Testament church-shepherding. All of that is the context for church-shepherding in our times. To our detriment, this concept is too often minimized in both elder selection and eldering itself. (Neither I Timothy 3 nor Titus 1 deal with it, so neither do we. Go figure.) Regardless, both the church and prospective elders should desire to know what shepherding means.

In scripture, the shepherd metaphor is no mere side issue, appearing more than 500 times…It is the dominant model for spiritual leadership.

If we want to know what it means, we need to know what it is. In scripture, the shepherd metaphor is no mere side issue. It shows up more than 500 times. In the Old Testament, Jehovah speaks of Himself as the Shepherd of His people. Israel’s leaders are called shepherds (and false shepherds). And, of course, Jesus self-describes Himself in shepherd terms. It is the DOMINANT model for spiritual leadership. Without it, I may supervise but will I serve? I may take care of money but will I take care of people? Will I focus on being over or with people? Huge difference!

Certain things are always true about good shepherds:

  1. They are NEAR the sheep. As much as possible, you want to be near the ones you love. No long distance shepherding. No Skype. No deliberate distancing akin to a corporate board. The shepherd is hands on – right there, all the time. Therefore, the sheep trust him. It is not an organizational but a relational thing. God’s people are no different. Time and closeness are signals that an elder really cares about the people whom God has entrusted to him. It also is the best way to detect any sickness, injury, or wandering away. Indeed, we don’t know what goes on behind closed doors. That is why an elder must get behind closed doors! A good shepherd will be NEAR the sheep.
  2. They are FOR the sheep. Sheep are skittish. Having many natural enemies, they are easily scared. But the shepherd will never hurt or misuse them. Beyond that, he will stand between his sheep and danger, to the point of death. He is their protector. Furthermore, he nurtures and tends to the weak and the wounded. That is not just a Sunday job. Nor can it be done from a church office. No sheep is ignored, minimized, or lost in the shuffle. On a church organizational chart, a good shepherd-elder’s name will be at the bottom as a servant, not at the top as a superior. Think on that. A good shepherd will be FOR the sheep.
  3. They are AHEAD OF the sheep. That is Psalm 23, is it not? Read it in light of our focus. By nature, sheep are followers. They just assume the shepherd knows the best paths of protection and provision. As a good shepherd, an elder guides the people of God with sound judgment and clear biblical insight. Sheep cannot lead a shepherd. Likewise, the sheep of the Lord should not have to lead an elder. He knows the way to pray, think, walk by faith, study the Book, serve, love and conduct himself. These qualities are his right to lead fellow believers through the wilderness to the land of promise. He is no spiritual or emotional light weight. His leadership does not have to be constantly announced, but is cemented by what the Lord’s sheep see, hear, and feel. On that basis, the flock in his care readily follows. A good shepherd will be AHEAD OF the sheep.

A Safe Church

Posted on by Bob Mathews

In John 9, the Lord gave sight to a man born blind. A staggering feat! Changed the guy’s life in more ways than one. But the miracle was worked on a Sabbath. As in John 5, the Jewish leaders used that to condemn Jesus for His work of healing mercy. Back to John 9: the same bunch called the now-sighted man into the principal’s office and raked him over the coals. Later, they confronted his parents with the situation. Mom and dad were so afraid of the Pharisees that they refused to come to their own son’s defense. Why were people so afraid of the Jewish leaders? The answer is that those guys were not safe to be around. (This is the background for Jesus’ analogy in John 10 of shepherds, hired hands, and sheep. Notice the stark contrast between Jesus and the religious hierarchy of those times. Why did the lost and broken and bleeding turn to him and not to them? Why did they come to Him with their issues and questions and children? It was because He proved Himself to be a safe place for them. He did not exploit or hurt them. Is not Matthew 11:28-30 about that?)

In the Acts 10 account of Cornelius and Peter, we see that Peter was not safe for a pagan to be around. Notwithstanding the fruitfulness of his preaching in Jerusalem (Acts 2), his Jewishness bled over into how he handled the gospel. It took the direct intervention of God to persuade the apostle, for the gospel’s sake,  to look at some things differently. Don’t be too hard on Peter. He was just being true to his roots and conditioning. Thanks to the gracious intervention of the Lord, Peter ultimately was God’s instrument for bringing an entire family to Christ.

In a safe church, relationships are more important than “being right”.

Some people are not safe to be around. In their presence, people are made worse not better, weaker not stronger. They hurt people more than help them. That is true of life. Sadly, it also can be true of a church congregation. Say what? Yes, it is so. Some churches just are not safe places for either members or guests. On the other hand, there are those in which people are blessed and built up and equipped and empowered to joyfully serve both God and man. (And, yes, I know we have hammered the need to be a “scriptural church,” a point not to be argued. But, in our zeal to be “scriptural” have we ceased to be safe? Have we made it okay to hurt or hammer people in the name of “truth?”) That aside, what would you consider to be marks of a safe church? Here is what I have on it at this time:

Relationships. In a safe church, relationships are more important than “being right” – Romans 14:19. (Indeed, Ephesians 4:4-6 itemizes some essential truths which bring us together in Christ. But 4:1-3 gives us what will keep us together!) The church in Rome was becoming unsafe due to infighting and spats about nonessential matters. Know this: if we insist upon making every conviction or practice a test of fidelity to Christ, then unity in Christ will continue to elude us. The apostle lifts up the cross as the great peacekeeper in the great house of God. In the cross there is peace and safety in the presence of both God and man. The church should be a “no fire zone” in which brethren feel safe to work through their ideas without fear of being labeled and branded. My brother is my brother because we both belong to the same Christ. That relationship ought to be honored in all circumstances.  Matter of fact, how can I really be right if I am treating my brother wrongly? What matters most to me: the positions I hold or the people I behold? In a safe church, relationships are more important than “being right.”

Sound Doctrine – #1

Posted on by Bob Mathews

Titus 2:1

But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine. (KJV)

(Those exact two words are also found in I Tim. 1:8-11; II Tim. 4:1-4; and Titus 1:7-9.)

The church is founded, premised upon doctrine and teaching.

Sound doctrine is our English for two Greek words. The first means “healthy.”  The second is the word commonly translated “teaching” or “doctrine.”  So, if we want what PAUL meant when he taught others about how and what to preach, he meant healthy teaching. That is, TEACHING THAT PRODUCES OR MAINTAINS GOOD SPIRITUAL HEALTH. I suppose the opposite would be teaching which makes or keeps believers puny or sickly. (Is that not the case with one’s dietary habits?  What I consume affects my physical well being. Much more, the teachings I am fed can affect my spiritual, emotional, and relational vitality. Right?) We will revisit this.

Why bring this up? First, because of the chaos and destruction wrought upon our fellowship under the guise of “preaching sound doctrine,” “loving the truth,” etc. Indeed, the Bible is primarily a book of doctrine, teaching. And not just ABOUT God but FROM God! TRUTH from God! And, of course, the sinner must be saved on the basis of doctrine, teaching – about the Who, What, Why, and How of Jesus and the cross. And, of course, the church is founded, premised upon doctrine, teaching. Of course! All that I am and have in Christ is because of great scriptural truths, then, teachings which I trust and live out to the point of death, as do others to this hour.

So, the point of concern here surely is not the primacy and necessity of sound doctrine. Rather, my interest stems from that powerful thought being hijacked and abused, with dark repercussions among us. Perhaps we should allow it to have a say for itself, huh? Now, the bad news is that we have called some attitudes and teachings “sound” which have made us sicker. The good news is that a fearless look at the Book and ourselves is always a healthful endeavor. Not always painless, but always healthy.

robert

Let Your Difference Make a Difference

Posted on by

Thinking and acting differently than the world will make a world of difference. That’s what the church is all about. Paul and other Christians were brought before the city officials and accused of “upsetting the world” with their teaching. (Acts 17) Why? Because they were different in their thinking and acting. They were not into the idea of “What’s in it for me?” but how can I bless those around me. That is what the church is about. We are the called-out from the world.

We are to be in the world, but not of the world. The world will not like us and actually hate us as it did Jesus and those who followed Him. We will offend those who differ from us, not by being rude, but by following the teachings of Jesus, by going the second mile, by turning the cheek, by being good to all, regardless of their status in life.

Let your difference make a difference in the world.