by Sam Waldron | Nov 21, 2018 | Ecclesiology
In our last post we looked at the reality that there is a diversity of spiritual gifts in true elders. I commented that this has important practical implications for the church and its elders. But there is also diversity in other respects, specifically there is diversity of financial support.
The New Testament teaches that there is diversity in the matter of financial support. Some elders may be fully supported by the church. Other elders may work at another vocation to support themselves. Let it be emphasized that this diversity is not the product of human sinfulness. It is ecclesiastically lawful for it to be so. The key text here is, of course, 1 Timothy 5:17-18.
The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”
Two questions must be answered with regard to this passage. First, what is double honor? Second, to whom is such double honor to be given?
(1) What is double honor?
Double honor in 1 Timothy 5:17 means generous financial support. How do we know this? Double honor in the context of 1 Timothy 5:17 is contrasted with the honor to be given to widows. Without any doubt this honor for widows consists in financial support (1 Tim. 5:3, 4, 8, 16). Widows are, then, to be honored, while well-ruling elders are to be given double honor—the generous financial support necessary to comfortably support a man in a leadership position who may also have a wife and children.
The financial character of this honor is confirmed by verse 18. Here Paul cites the same Old Testament text that he used in 1 Corinthians 9:9 to teach that ministers of the gospel should live of the gospel or be generously, financially supported. He also cites a saying of the Lord that in both Matt. 10:10 and Luke 10:7 had to do with the financial support of those who preach the gospel.
The term, double, used here is not intended literally. It is used figuratively in the New Testament to refer to a large or generous portion of something (Matthew 23:15; Rev. 18:6). Matthew 23:15 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.” Revelation 18:6 “Pay her back even as she has paid, and give back to her double according to her deeds; in the cup which she has mixed, mix twice as much for her.”
In accord with its usage in the New Testament, then, double here simply means or denotes that this financial support is to be ample or generous. The generosity with which elders should be financially supported is confirmed by the parallel passages (Galatians 6:6; 1 Corinthians 9:14).
(2) To whom is such double honor to be given?
This financial support of the elders—according to the Apostle Paul—is not to be indiscriminately divided among or necessarily given to all elders. Notice how the passage speaks of this matter. Timothy and the church at Ephesus under his leadership are to focus that financial support on the elders who rule well. Among those who rule well financial support is especially to be given to those who work hard at preaching and teaching.
I think of this passage as viewing the eldership in terms of three concentric circles. Financial support is focused on the innermost circle, may extend to the next circle outward, but does not extend to all elders in general.
The measure of a man’s spiritual gifts in ruling and especially teaching and preaching (as well as his experience, maturity, diligence, and godliness) is related to the matter of financial support. Of course, the church’s ability may in some cases prevent the church from doing all it should do with regard to the financial support of elders. In such cases the priorities set by 1 Timothy 5:17 should govern the distribution of financial support to elders.
We may draw from all this a clear conclusion. The Scriptures could not be more clear that there is diversity with regard to the financial support of elders.
Let me state plainly that voting a man in as a pastor or elder does not mean that the church has any necessary commitment to support that man financially. Nor does it mean that they are committed to financially supporting that man at the level that they may be supporting pastors already. Practically, all this means that a separate act of the church from the election of a pastor may be appropriate or even necessary to grant a pastor financial support. 1 Timothy 5:17 makes very clear that some elders or pastors may not be financially supported at all. This is, then, a different issue than recognizing that a man is a qualified elder.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Nov 16, 2018 | Ecclesiology
A few years ago a friend of mine mistakenly affirmed that I believed in the absolute parity of the eldership. I informed him, and let me now inform all of my readers, that I emphatically do not believe in such a view of parity. I believe, in fact, in three different kinds of diversity within the elders of the church. I will argue that there is diversity of spiritual gift, financial support, and actual influence. I believe that these three areas of diversity are much more than theoretical in their significance. They have important practical applications with regard to how the eldership and the church does its holy business.
The diversity of elders is clearly taught in the Scriptures. It is not, as we have seen, a diversity with regard to office, authority, or title. But in what, then, does this diversity in the eldership consist? It consists, as I said, in a diversity of spiritual gift, financial support, and actual influence.
Consider, first, the diversity of spiritual gift.
Both the Bible and experience show that elders may have greatly varying gifts. To think through this matter systematically, let me ask you to consider several things. First, the New Testament emphasizes the sovereignty of God in imparting those gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:11 affirms: “But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.”
Second, the New Testament also emphasizes (and in the same passage) the variety of spiritual gifts which the Spirit in His sovereignty imparts, and the variation given to different members of the body of Christ. 1 Corinthians 12:4-7 says: “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.” This same emphasis is found in Romans 12:3-7 and 1 Pet. 4:10-11. What is true of the gifts of the Spirit to the church in general is, of course, true for the elders of the church as well. Here too there is variety of gift according to the sovereignty of the Spirit.
Third, there are several different gifts that are important specifically for the eldership. Romans 12:7-8 names the gifts of teaching, exhorting, and leading. 1 Corinthians 12:28 mentions the gifts of teaching and administration. 1 Peter 4:11 mentions the gift of speaking. But once more we must remember that God gives these spiritual gifts in varying degrees. The parable of Jesus emphasizes this in Matthew 25:14-15. The varying degrees of gift given to Christians and especially to ministers is also taught in Ephesians 4:7-11. What these passages clearly teach, church history and our own experience confirm. Great diversity exists in the mix and measure of spiritual gifts given to pastor-teachers.
Now this reality has very important practical implications. For one thing, this means that the qualifications for the eldership should not be measured in terms of the gifts of the outstanding preacher-pastor that we admire so much. There may be lesser degrees of gift which still qualify a man for the eldership. Similarly, we must also not limit the exercise of the highly gifted pastor by insisting on an artificial equality in the public ministry of the Word in the church. Equality of office does not mean equality in opportunities for public ministry in the church. This should make us accept men of more slender gifts as true elders, but also makes us feel that no artificial equality needs to be implemented in the public ministry of the church.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Nov 13, 2018 | Ecclesiology
We distribute a book as a Seminary that I helped to write and edit many years ago. It is entitled, In Defense of Parity. In that short volume, I with a few other men defend the notion (which many of us hold as Reformed Baptists) that there is no official distinction to be made between the different elders of the church. In other words, such a view of parity says that biblically all elders are pastors and all pastors are elders. This view is based on what seems to me to be an indisputable exegetical reality. That reality is that in the Bible the three words presbuteros, episkopos, and poimein refer to the same office in the church. This is a little confusing because each of these three Greek words has both an older and a newer. Presbuteros is translated presbyter in older English and elder in newer English. Episkopos is translated in older English as bishop and as overseer in newer English. Poimein is translated pastor in older English but shepherd in newer English. Parity simply asserts that all these words refer to the identical office in the church.
But to repeat myself, I am not going to spend a lot of time defending that conclusion or implication of the parity of the eldership and the equivalence of the terms shepherd, elder, and overseer with regard to referencing the same office in the church. The reason is that this conclusion is the assumption or presupposition of these blog posts rather than their thrust or focus. Here I want to speak of my growing conviction over the years that the parity of the eldership needs to be balanced by the biblical teaching regarding the diversity of the eldership.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Dec 27, 2016 | Interviews, Reformed Theology
Questions 4-8: (SW – Sam Waldron, CD – Curt Daniel)
SW: “I have talked with people who believe that in your dissertation you assume Amyraldianism or Four Point Calvinism as your own position. In reading your dissertation I could easily conclude the same. Is this assessment of your position true? If not, why not?”
CD: “I am neither 4 point Calvinist nor Amyraldian. At the time of my dissertation I bordered on those views but did not actually hold them.”
SW: “Have your views of the atonement developed since you wrote your dissertation? To be specific, are you now more comfortable with identifying yourself with limited atonement or particular redemption? Please explain why?”
CD: “Since then I have continued to research the subject. I hold to particular redemption (also called definite atonement or limited atonement). As I have been researching a book I am writing on the extent of the atonement, I am amazed at how many biblical proofs there are in favor of particular redemption—more than one may realize.”
SW: “With the increasing support for and commitment to the 1689 Baptist Confession, it has become an important touchstone in terms of Reformed Baptist orthodoxy. Do you hold the Confessional view on the subjects related to the atonement and the free offer of the gospel?”
CD: “I agree with the 1689 Confession in upholding particular redemption and the free offer of the Gospel.”
SW: “In your view does the Confession teach limited atonement or particular redemption?”
CD: “The 1689, like the Westminster Confession, teaches particular redemption, though not as explicitly as the 1644 Baptist Confession. Particular redemption may be found in the 1689 in 3:6 and 8:5 and 8:8.”
1689:3:6 As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only
1689:8:5 The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of God, procured reconciliation, and purchased an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto Him.
1689:8:8 To all those for whom Christ hath obtained eternal redemption, he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same, making intercession for them; uniting them to himself by his Spirit, revealing unto them, in and by his Word, the mystery of salvation, persuading them to believe and obey, governing their hearts by his Word and Spirit, and overcoming all their enemies by his almighty power and wisdom, in such manner and ways as are most consonant to his wonderful and unsearchable dispensation; and all of free and absolute grace, without any condition foreseen in them to procure it.
SW: “What does the Confession mean when it affirms particular redemption in 3:6 and 8:5 and 8? Is there any way in which you would like to supplement or qualify the confessional statements of particular redemption?”
CD: “As I hope to show in a book I am writing on the extent of the atonement, I would agree with the old formula that Christ died sufficiently for all but efficiently only for the elect. I have discovered many leading Reformed scholars who taught that there is a universal dimension as well as a particular dimension to the atonement (Hodge, Shedd, Edwards, Iain Murray, many others). This is not Amyraldianism, for Amyraut taught that Christ died “equally” for all men. He does not seem to have placed any limitation in the atonement. I do. We need to delineate just what the universal dimension is without denying particular redemption.”
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
by Sam Waldron | Dec 22, 2016 | Interviews, Reformed Theology
Questions 1-3: (SW – Sam Waldron, CD – Curt Daniel)
SW: “You wrote your dissertation for the University of Edinburgh in 1983 on “Hyper-Calvinism and John Gill.” That’s an interesting choice–especially way back then at the beginnings of the Reformed Baptist movement. Why did you choose this subject?”
CD: “I chose the subject of Hyper-Calvinism for my dissertation because it would give me the opportunity to study pertinent issues that I was hammering out in my own theology. There was relatively little current literature on the subject at the time. Having been involved in evangelism as a young Christian (I was saved at 20 and began my doctoral studies at 24), I was curious as to how and why some Calvinists misused the doctrines of grace in order to stultify evangelism.”
SW: “Do you believe that Gill was a Hyper-Calvinist? On what basis? And exactly what do you mean by this?”
CD: “John Gill has been considered the main Hyper-Calvinist by many writers. I showed that he fit the definition—he denied the free offer, and duty faith, restricted common grace, and denied the universal saving will of God in the gospel. The purpose of my dissertation was not just to define Hyper-Calvinism, but also to investigate it and explain it. I was not allowed by my professors to refute Hyper-Calvinism, but I did show how Fuller and others did so. I plan to write a long book on Hyper-Calvinism in which I will refute it.”
SW: “Why is it important to understand correctly the issues you addressed in your dissertation?”
CD: “It is still important to consider these issues because Hyper-Calvinism is still with us. It has always been a tiny movement, but its proponents are quite vocal on the internet and in print. Some young Calvinists are attracted to it because of an over-reaction to Arminian abuses.”
Part 3 coming soon.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
