Amen. If you have your Bible with you, please try it in 1 Timothy chapter 5. Again, 1 Timothy 5 will be in verses 17 through 25. And as you're turning there, let me just remind you of what's going on in the text so far. Paul has written this letter to Timothy, and in this letter he's reminding Timothy of certain key ideas that he needs to keep alert of as a young pastor in a church that's already established in a city that is known for religious pluralism and false teaching. So, of course, there is a large portion of 1 Timothy that's really dedicated to this idea that Timothy really needs to be firm on truth. And he needs to be firm on stopping false teaching from being taught in the church. We're told of some qualifications that Timothy needs to look for in men who are going to serve as deacons or lead as elders. And then in between that section concerning qualifications and where we are today, We see some concerns being dealt with, such as when he caused the mystery of the gospel, which is really just the fact that at one time the gospel was hidden, and now it is revealed through Jesus. The fact that some people, no matter how much time they spend within the church, will ultimately end up rejecting the faith. And then we're reminded, or at least Timothy is reminded, that if he wants to be a good servant of Jesus, this is what he needs to do. He needs to teach the truth, He needs to live his life as an example to all, and he needs to keep the teaching within the church correct, accurate, and proper. Now last week, we started in on this section of the letter, the letter that we're in today. And this section has to do all about interpersonal relationships with the church. In particular, since Timothy, last week, last week's section, since Timothy was a young man, how should he act and react to men that are older than him or women that are older than him? Or how should he act and react to men and women that are the same age as him or younger than him? And it's very clear that the whole example that he's using there is that of family. You treat everyone like family. If the man's older than you, you treat him like you would treat your father. If the woman's older than you, you treat her like she is your mother, or as if she was your mother. And with the younger women and the younger men, it's always as brothers and sisters. There is a huge focus from last week's text devoted to those who are genuinely widows. And Paul is very clear He does not mean anyone who has lost their spouse. He means anyone who has lost their spouse is above the age of 60 and cannot fend for themselves, which is a little bit different than what we think of when we typically think of a widow. actually widows, then the church needs to step up and help them as much as the church can possibly help them. But this week's section continues that whole idea of interpersonal relationships. How do we act and how do we react with those within the church? And in this week's section, it's very particular. It's actually, how do you act and react with the elders of the church? So what do you look for when you're looking for an elder in your church? How should you treat your elders concerning three specific areas? And I'll dig deeper into that after we read it. So let's read 1 Timothy 5. We'll start in verse 17, if I can find it. And we'll go to the end of the chapter. 1 Timothy 5, 17 says this, Let the elders who roll well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain, and the laborer deserves his wages. Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels, I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing for impartiality. Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, nor take part in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure. No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments. The sins of some people are conspicuous, going before them to judgment, but the sins of others appear later, so also good works are conspicuous, and even those that are not cannot remain hidden. Now, as we study this passage, we're going to break it into three divisions. We're going to break it into these three parts. The first one has to do with compensation for elders. It's verses 17 and 18. The second part has to do with accusations against elders. That's 19 through 21. And the third part has to do with the ordination of elders, verses 22 through 25. And all of this stems, well, I mean, honestly, it stems from 1 Timothy 3, the previous section that talks about qualifications from elders. Paul's sort of building on that a little bit, except this time, instead of just telling us what we're supposed to look for in elders, Paul now tells us how we ought to act and how we should react concerning our elders. And just so that you remember, when we are speaking of elders in this context, we're speaking of pastors, so I'll use both words interchangeably. When it comes to interpersonal relationships with elders within our church, this is what Paul says that we should do as we respond. Now, note that this is not comprehensive. He's not telling you every little detail and nuance that you can even think of, and that's not his point. He's specifically dealing with issues in the church of Ephesus, so he hits up three main points. In this evening's passage, we're looking at three specific issues. How ought we view compensation for our elders? Or in other words, should elders be paid? We're looking at what we're supposed to do when someone accuses an elder of sin. And we're reminded of the need to be slow and careful when we select new elders for the church. All issues that need to be considered, we need to think these things through so that we treat the elders of the church the way scripture tells us they ought to be treated. So let's pray for the Holy Spirit to illuminate the words of scripture as we jump in this evening. Our gracious Heavenly Father, again, we're thankful for you and for all that you've done. We are so thankful for your word. that you've made it available to us, that we can read it, that we can study it, that we can grow in it, that we can seek your truth in it. I pray that as we seek your truth this evening, that your spirit helps reveal that to us. We know that apart from your spirit's working within us, that we simply wouldn't understand your truth. So we pray that your spirit reveals your truth to us and helps us to apply it in a way that glorifies and honors you. Father God, I pray for me as I preach, that you give me every word that I need to speak, and hold back the words that I don't need to speak. We love you and pray this in Jesus' name. Amen. So our text starts by speaking of compensation for elders or pastors within the church. And honestly, this is my least favorite topic to ever talk about in a church setting. And the reason for that is simple. It seems awfully self-serving for me, doesn't it? sounds like something that you really shouldn't talk about, but that is what scripture is talking about now. So if we're going to accurately understand scripture, we have to talk about it. And in this case, the passage tells us that the elders or the pastors who rule well should be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. Now based on the idea that these people are to rule well and labor in preaching and teaching, it shows us that indeed these are people where the passage as pastors, not just regular, average person coming to church. It's those who are charged with leading. And really, in the way that this verse is worded, it actually informs us of certain details. So first off, all elders are required to rule the church or really lead the church. And I know that it's lead, and you can know that it's lead by reading it in another translation. If you read the Christian Standard Bible, it translates this verse like this. to be considered worthy of double honor. So all elders are required to lead the church, but what Paul is implying here is that not all elders are actually good at leading the church. Some elders are terrible at it, and I'm sure that we can all think of someone in our minds that we know that's a pastor in a church that really didn't lead that church well, What Paul is saying here is that when someone actually meets the qualifications to be an elder, according to 1 Timothy 3, and he actually wants to lead a church, and he does so in a way that is good, then he says that that person is worthy of double honor. It also tells us, just as a side note, that you can't just pick a random person to be an elder, because not every person who wants to be an elder is actually And not everyone who wants to be an elder or desires that office of eldership can actually lead, and that's a problem. Second, it tells us that though elders are required to be able to teach according to 1 Timothy 3, not every elder is required to preach and teach all the time. We see that laid out at the end of the verse, that those who labor in preaching and teaching are especially worth this double honor, You can be an elder and only preach and teach on occasion, and that's perfectly acceptable, according to Paul. Now, you might hear that idea of elders being worthy of double honor, and you might wonder what exactly that means. What does double honor mean? That's not a term we usually use today. That idea actually stems from the culture of the Jewish people, and really the ancient Near Eastern world as a whole. And the culture of the ancient Near Eastern world, whenever you had a family with multiple siblings, and you had parents that were older in years, and say, you know, imagine with me, the parents pass, and there's an inheritance for the kids. That's a normal thing that happens to this day. And in our modern culture, that inheritance is usually split evenly amongst all the siblings. But in the ancient Near Eastern culture, the oldest son received double what everybody else got. So that would look like this. If there were three kids, the inheritance would essentially be split into four. Two of the splits would be given to the oldest, and then the other two would be split between the middle and the youngest child. The reasoning for this is actually really simple. Part of the responsibility of being the oldest in their culture was perpetuating the family name, meaning the oldest has the responsibility to lead the household and thus is worthy of receiving extra from the inheritance because of the responsibilities that he takes up. He's not like his other siblings who can just enjoy the inheritance. He's responsible to keep the house going, and he's responsible to keep everything moving and flowing. He has a job to do. That's essentially what the idea is. Likewise, elders within the church have a responsibility of directing and leading the church, and thus, because of that responsibility, they're worth double honor. The implication being that they're worth honor or respect, but the double concept is taken to mean financial remuneration as well. Or in other words, elders who lead the church well ought to expect financial support from their church. particularly the elders who work to teach and preach. The idea being that because teaching and preaching takes a significant amount of effort, he uses the word those that labor. That's not the idea of, you know, Saturday morning you're sitting down and writing a couple notes. That's the idea that you're sweating and you're taking it seriously and you're trying to preach and teach well. According to Paul, they ought to be cared for financially by the church. And there's multiple reasons for this. just like everybody else, pastors have to survive. And in the world that we live in today, you kind of need financial aid to survive in the world that we live in today. Thus, Paul's thinking is that it's only right to provide for pastors within the church so that they can focus on meeting the spiritual needs of the people instead of having to go get another job to support their families. Or in other words, Though in the US, most pastors are what we call bivocational or co-vocational, meaning that they're pastoring and they're working a full-time job or a part-time job simultaneously, what Paul states here is that those who are focused on preaching and teaching really ought to be taken care of by the church so that they don't have to split their time between multiple jobs and they can just focus on leading the church well. Now, of course, there is some leniency to that because in some cases, churches just can't do it. And it takes someone called to be bivocational to handle those sorts of situations, but we can talk about that at another time. Paul gives us an illustration in verse 18 that drives home the point. And he's really, as he's giving these illustrations, he's really pulling them from the Old Testament. So he says, for the scripture says, you shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain, and the laborer deserves his wages. Now that first example or illustration, that comes from Deuteronomy chapter 25, verse 4. And the idea is actually rather simple. But in a culture like ours, You might read it and not understand it at all, because none of us have oxen sitting in our backyard, so we don't really know what this means. The idea is that oxen were utilized to tread or press out wheat. So wheat has an inner part and an outer part. You absolutely don't want to eat the outer part at all. It's not tasty. I mean, it's definitely fibrous if you need fiber. But other than that, you don't really want to eat it. And the inner part is what you actually eat, but it's really difficult for you to actually break all that down by hand, so they would use oxen. They would use animals that were heavy to just tread on them, to walk on them, and break it apart. So farmers in the ancient Near East realized that the easiest way to break all that apart was to really have their heavy animal stuff on it, and just have that heavy animal stuff being forced to walk around and stop on all this wheat, you're going to get hungry at some point. So the idea is, it's better for the person, the farmer, to let that ox eat some of that wheat, than to stop him from eating that wheat and making the ox go hungry all day. The second idea comes from multiple passages of scripture, and I'm not going to read them all, but I'll list them for you. We see the second idea that the laborer deserves his wages in Deuteronomy 24, 15, Leviticus 19, 13, Matthew 10, 10, Luke 10, verse 7, and 1 Corinthians 9, 4 through 14. And the idea is rather simple. If someone does the work, he deserves to be paid for his work. We have that mindset with anyone who works any job. that if someone does any sort of work, they deserve payment for that. And throughout the Bible, every time that that's brought up, that's primarily speaking about the employer and employee relationship, that if you hire someone to do something, and they actually do it, then you should pay them. In this instance, the idea is that those who lead the church are doing a hard job, and those who regularly preach and teach are doing an even harder job, thus they should be paid for it. Again, not my favorite topic to talk about in churches, but it is what scripture says. That's Paul's first statement concerning the treatment of elders and pastors within the local church. Elders do a hard job. Thus, they ought to be compensated for it. And then he continues, and it's almost like he's going like a completely different way. Like, he talks about compensation, and then he jumps somewhere completely different. Local churches can sometimes have interpersonal strife, because let's be abundantly clear, even as Christian people, we all sin, and we all still struggle with our sinful desire, and that interpersonal strife sometimes becomes explosive, because typically as people, we tend to not want to confront other people, so we just kind of, you know, we hold it in, and then eventually we explode, and that sometimes gets pulled into the church. Occasionally that explosive interpersonal strife gets directed at whoever's leading the church, because let's be honest, that's the easiest target in the room. The person standing up front is always going to be the easiest target. So they will be accused of all sorts of things. People will accuse pastors of being unloving or liars or They'll attempt to paint the leadership in a very negative light. Now don't get me wrong, if there is a sin problem in the leadership, that needs to be called out, and we'll talk about that later. But what Paul's referring to here isn't sin within the leadership, but sinful accusations being thrown at the leadership. And the reason why people do this is because they're hoping that people believe them. so that they can oust whoever's in leadership. Because remember, elders are to be above reproach. So if there is an accusation of sin, and they can convince enough people to believe that, then the church is supposed to remove them. So what Paul's teaching in verses 19 through 21 is rather simple. Elders are going to have accusations lobbed against them. What should we do about it? Well, let's look at those verses again. This is verse 19. Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. Ask for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels, I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality. Verse 19 starts with a very simple principle. Don't admit any charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. And that might sound unique to you, but it really isn't. That's exactly what the law in the Old Testament says about any sort of accusation against anybody. That if there's an accusation against anybody, it has to be given with two or three witnesses. It can't just be a he said, she said sort of deal. There has to be more than one witness. It's simple as a principle, but it's often not taken seriously. Meaning, most churches work more off hearsay and slander when it comes to ousting a pastor than they do with truth and evidence. And we all know situations like this. For instance, I currently have a friend who's in Louisiana. He pastors a Korean church there. He's been there for 30 years. He planted the church with him and his wife and a few families in the local area. He preaches the gospel. He cares for the people. But there is a very loud minority within his church that has decided that they no longer want him there. But since he hasn't, they can rile up enough people to vote him out. What's the problem with all that? It's rather simple. Gossip and slander are sins. And the people within the church are resorting to sin to try and oust their pastor. Now, to prevent this, Paul makes a simple principle. When elders are accused, there has to be evidence, and there has to be at least two or three witnesses to it. And what Paul asserts is simple. Any accusation against an elder really ought to be thrown out and ignored, unless there's actual proof. or if there are multiple reliable people who saw the proof. So basically, or practically, what this would look like is this, and I'm intentionally using an absolutely absurd example. If someone comes into our church and they claim that they saw me beating up a homeless guy so that I could steal his drugs, this is how the church should think through that. First off, the church should be like, well, is there any evidence for this? For instance, is there an actual homeless guy who was beaten up? Is there any physical proof that I beat him up? Do I have his drugs? Do I have his drugs at home or in my car? Is it in my coat pockets? Something along those lines. Is there any evidence that any of this actually happened? You might say, well, maybe it's been a few weeks. So the homeless man has healed from his injuries. And maybe the drugs are no longer gone, because, you know, well, if I stole drugs, I'd probably use them. So then the next question would be, are there any reliable witnesses to this? And I'm using that word reliable on purpose, because it really doesn't matter if the person who witnessed it was also on drugs at the time. or was completely drunk or stoned out of their mind because he probably doesn't actually remember everything, exactly how it happened. Or if that person has a reputation of being a compulsive liar, we probably shouldn't take him seriously either. He's not that trustworthy. But did someone who can be trusted, did someone who is actually reliable see the event happen? How did they describe the event? If they saw it happen, and I just sort of nonchalantly walked up to this homeless guy and started beating him for no reason whatsoever, okay, then there's something that the church has to do about that. But if the situation's different, say perhaps the homeless guy attacked me, and I just defended myself, then the church has to consider that. Again, I used an absolutely absurd illustration. but it applies to every accusation you can throw against an elder. If an elder is accused of sin, then the first question has to be, is there any proof? The second question has to be, are there any other witnesses? Then obviously, when you consider other passages of scripture, scripture makes it abundantly clear that if you're gonna accuse someone of anything, and that's not an elder, that's anyone of anything, there is a proper way of doing it. So I would add a third question. Did the person making the accusations attempt to follow Matthew 18? Did he actually talk with that person first, before making the accusation? Or in other words, did that person at least try to sit down with the elder for clarity concerning the issue, to seek to understand the whole situation, or did that person just start accusing the elder of sin through text messaging or phone calls and social media and absolutely refuse to actually talk to the elder? Or did the person just stop coming to the church and hasn't bothered to reach out and try to rectify the situation? And let me be abundantly clear, only the first of those three options is right. Only the first of those three options, to sit down with the person and talk it through, is the biblical thing to do. In any issue like this, the first and right thing to do is simply to sit down with the person, to talk with them, to ask for clarity, to seek to understand before making accusations. Only when that is done can a person then decide if their accusation is even true. Now don't misunderstand. If the person does all this, and they do follow Matthew 18, and they go and talk to the person, realize that the person is indeed in sin, and then have to pull in other people to confront that issue, if that's actually the case, and there is sin there, then the church needs to handle that. But if the person never even bothers to do any of this, then that person is actually the one in sin. Paul says that any accusation against an elder needs to be backed up with evidence and there needs to be more than one witness. And when we take that with Matthew 18 and the rest of the scriptures, the person making the accusation really needs to speak with the elder first to see if they can rectify the problem before making accusations. But if that's all done and they're still convinced that the elder is in sin and there are multiple witnesses accusing the elder of sin, then what is the next step? Paul tells us in verse 20. If there is genuine sin and they're choosing to persist in sin, then the church is required to rebuke that person in the presence of all so that the rest may stand in fear. If the accusation has evidence, if there are multiple witnesses, or in other words, there is proof and people actually saw it happen, and that accuser had actually tried to make things right with the elder first. Then the next step is to call the pastor or the elder out for his sin. Paul says that Timothy is to rebuke them, which is the concept of reprimanding or admonishing or to sharply criticize someone. And in this case, with an elder, this is supposed to be done publicly in front of the whole church. Why do you think this is the case? There's really two reasons for it. First off, an elder is in a position within the local church that's very public. Everybody in the local church knows who the elders are. So when an elder sins, everybody knows that the elder sinned. And thus, to rectify that situation, the best way to handle it is for him to publicly repent. for him to be publicly reviewed and for him to repent. Secondly, by calling out the pastor's sin publicly and officially, Paul says that it makes it abundantly clear to the people that no one is above being held accountable for their sins. We're all accountable for our sins. But again, this only happens if the accusations were done properly. If the individual sought to rectify the issue privately beforehand, if the elder's accusation has evidence and multiple witnesses, if the elder chooses not to repent from their sins, then the church steps in and rebukes him publicly. Only when all this is true does the church confront the pastor publicly and rebukes him publicly for his sin. And if and when this happens, Paul makes it abundantly clear that this is to be done purely without what he calls prejudging, or what we would call partiality, meaning these sorts of judgments need to be done without any sort of bias. They can't be done because you don't like him. They can't be done because you just want to replace him with someone that you like more. If this happens, it needs to happen with right judgment, no partiality, no bias. It needs to be done simply because the church thinks the pastor has sinned, and there's evidence of his sin, and there are witnesses to that extent. Anything less than this isn't what the church is supposed to do, and it's sinful and should be completely rejected. For instance, If the accuser never bothers to rectify the issue privately, then the church really shouldn't entertain the accusation at all. And the accuser is really the one in sin, because they're disobeying Matthew 18. If there is no evidence for the accusation, then the church really shouldn't entertain the accusation, because there is no evidence. There's no proof. If there aren't reliable witnesses for the accusation, then the church shouldn't entertain the accusation. If the church chooses to entertain the accusations without evidence and without reliable witnesses, then it is the church that is insane, and the church needs to repent. And if it becomes clear that the only reason any of this is done is because the accuser simply doesn't like the pastor, or the accuser doesn't like the way he smiles, then unless there's actual evidence or reliable witnesses, the whole issue needs to be thrown out or the church is in sin. The church can't just remove an elder because someone doesn't like him or because someone slandered him without evidence or without reliable witnesses. The church can't remove an elder based on someone's accusation if the person refuses to try to fix the problem first. Just keeping these principles in mind will eliminate a lot of interpersonal issues with the body of Christ. In particular, when it comes to people who try to accuse elders of sin. Again, don't misunderstand this and think that you should never make accusations against an elder at all. That's not what Paul is saying. The church simply needs to take seriously when accusations are brought forward, and they need to seriously consider if there is any evidence for it, if there are any witnesses of it, and whether or not the individual making the accusations actually followed the proper procedures when making the accusation. Now he has one last section of scripture, and he devotes this, well, devoted to the idea of how we should interact with elders. And it's really a reminder to Timothy that he has to be really careful when it comes to selecting new elders. So don't haphazardly select new elders. And it's this last reminder, or really even it's a warning, that ends our text for the day. Let's look at verses 22 through 25 again. Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands. nor take part in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure. No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments. The sins of some people are conspicuous, daring before them to judgment, but the sins of others appear later. So also good works are conspicuous, and even those that are not cannot remain hidden. The warning that Paul makes abundantly clear is found in verse 22. Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, nor take part in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure. And there are two implications here, or two ideas here. First off, don't be quick to ordain a new elder, and be aware that if you do, if you do, if you are too quick with ordaining another elder, then any sin that they commit, you're guilty of too. Of course, these two ideas are more geared toward current elders because it is the elders of the local church that selects new elders. But the warnings are important for all Christians. So let's look at those statements a little closer. So first, it is foolish to hastily ordain new elders. That's what it means to lay hands on someone, to ordain them. primarily a statement towards current elders that are looking to add more elders, but the warning ought to help the average congregant, the average churchgoer see that eldership is not something that we take lightly. You don't choose for yourself whether you ought to be an elder. It is a calling of God to be an elder that is then affirmed by those who are already elders, meaning you can't just wake up one day and decide that you're gonna be an elder. You can't just show up and be like, yeah, I'm the elder now, I'm the pastor. God will work within you to develop the desire and the calling to be a pastor if he has called you to be a pastor. And those that are already elders who already know you and have gotten to know you, they will confirm if they think you should be an elder or a pastor. And that's intentionally a very slow process, and the reason for that's made very clear in both 1 Timothy 3 and 1 Timothy 5. 1 Timothy 3 tells us that elders can't be new converts, and the reason for that is simple. New converts, if they're elevated into leadership too early, they will get puffed up, they'll get prideful, and they'll fall. In 1 Timothy 5, 24, and 25, we're given another reason, but we'll look at that in a few more minutes. Paul tells Timothy to be slow when it comes to selecting elders. And really what he means by this is simple. Timothy needs to be very careful with who he selects as a new elder for the church. And second, that if he does lay hands on a person too hastily, then he takes part in the sins that they might commit. This emphasizes the importance of selecting men for eldership because by selecting someone to be an elder, The then current elders are essentially saying that this man is trustworthy, that the church ought to follow him because he's trustworthy, that he is solid in his theology, that he is worth following. And the reason is really simple. Because the current elders trust him, thus the church should trust him. So if that person ends up being a false teacher and starts teaching false things immediately, right, that person commits atrocious sins right after the elders had just told everyone to trust him, well then they're to blame too. Verses 24 through 25 reiterate this by telling us of the reason for being so slow with selecting elders. The sins of some people are but the sins of others appear later. So also good works are conspicuous, and even those who are not cannot remain hidden." Meaning, and this is rather simple, people can hide who they are the first time you meet them. It isn't until you actually get to know them that you can see their sin. And you can see whether they do good works or not. So if you think of this clearly, Paul's encouragement, and again really his warning to Timothy, is that he needs to take his time when selecting new elders because you won't actually know if that person's suitable to be an elder until you get to know him a little more. He could be completely engulfed in sin and you might not even know because you don't really know him. Or he could be someone who is completely faithful and he has good words to back it up but you won't really know because you haven't taken the time to know him yet. The warning is to be very slow, to be very cautious, because the moment the local elders say that this person is also an elder, the whole church begins to trust that person. And if that person is an atrocious sin or is teaching false things, then the present elders who selected him will become responsible for it. Now, there is one other verse here, and the ESV is right to put it in parentheses, because it's really a side note. It's a side note to everything in the text, because it's really more of a personal statement to Timothy than it is to us. The idea here is that Timothy had abstained from alcohol. He wasn't drinking any sort of alcohol at all. But Paul's encouragement to him is to drink just a little bit of wine with his water to help his stomach and his frequent ailments. We're not really sure what he was struggling with. We really have no idea if he just had a chronic upset stomach that could be fixed with that. But Paul's statement is simple, you know, you've been abstaining from alcohol, just drink a little bit to help yourself. Now some have taken that verse and they've gone off the deep end, making huge theological points about that one verse, but let me just encourage you to read it as it is. It is a statement from Paul to Timothy that he needs to utilize a little alcohol for his own health. There is nothing more to be said there. That's it. It isn't a blanket statement that all people need to drink. It's not a statement that we should only drink if there are health benefits to it. It's nothing like that. It's simply Paul's encouragement as Timothy's friend, as his spiritual mentor, as his even spiritual father in a sense, that Timothy really needs to take care of himself physically. and that's one way that he can help himself with that. Now, we're a little short on time, and I've intentionally interweaved some application through little tags, but I do want to take just a few minutes to sum up the whole sermon into a bite-sized application. There are essentially three points being made by Paul concerning elders, and how the church should respond to elders and act around elders. And it's those three statements that make up the application. So let me tell you what those are before I look at them a little closer with you. First, when we choose elders, we need to be slow and careful. Second, when our elders serve, we need to do whatever we can to support them and provide for them. And third, when people accuse our elders, we need to take the accusation seriously and we have to use the principles that Paul gives us to determine the proper course of action. So let's break that down. So first, When we choose elders, we need to be slow and we need to be careful. Again, we can't just pick any random person who claims that he should be an elder to be an elder. That's not how it works. We can't just allow anyone who says, I'm going to be a pastor, be a pastor. That's not how it works. Now, you might hear all that and think, well, yeah, that makes sense. That's relatively obvious. Why would we think that it would be acceptable to do something else, something other than that? But let me just simply point out that most churches in the US mess this up all the time. Churches hire pastors that don't fit the qualifications listed in 1 Timothy 3, simply because the person has a degree, or multiple degrees, or that person is a really good speaker. So they overlook the fact that he is a contentious person, or he is not gentle and he's not gracious, or they overlook the fact that he's not actually qualified to lead the church according to 1 Timothy chapter 3. Or, churches will realize that they need a new pastor, but instead of taking their time finding someone that is suitable, they just hire whoever the first person that claims to know the Bible and can teach So instead of waiting and testing multiple people, they just take whoever applies first. There are plenty of people serving as pastors in plenty of churches that, quite frankly, should have never stepped behind a pulpit in the first place. And yet, their church hired them not just to preach and to teach, but to lead their church, despite not fitting the qualifications. Paul's statement to Timothy is that Timothy needs to be as careful as possible with selecting new elders because elders lead the church. That if the person isn't qualified, if the person isn't called, if the person is hiding sin, then they shouldn't be an elder. They shouldn't be leading a local church. And if that local church chooses to hire that person anyways, they're going to hurt their church a lot more than what they realize. And it's going to hurt their church and their community far more than what they ever will realize. Now, as a regular congregation member and not an elder, you might hear all this and think, OK, well, that's an elder's job to make sure any new elders are fit and qualified for it. And that's true. That is according to scripture. But there's still something that you're supposed to do as well. Anytime we mention that someone's training to be an elder, or someone's an elder candidate, you're supposed to be checking to make sure they actually fit all the qualifications too. You should be looking at First 753 and thinking, hmm, this person matches this. And here's why. You might notice something that all the elders miss. That's part of life. But if you don't actually speak up about it, then the elders don't know about it, and then they end up hiring someone that you knew from the beginning shouldn't have been a pastor, but you didn't say anything about it. If you notice something in an elder candidate or a trainee, confront them. Try to rectify the problem. But if there is indeed a sin problem, then you need to let the other elders know, so that they can make a better decision concerning that candidate or that trainee. We as a church, as Grace and Peace, we really have to be careful when choosing new elders, because the elders are the ones that direct the church. Second, when our elders serve, we need to do whatever we can to support them and provide for them, and that includes financially. Now I know that sounds like something that ought to be really obvious, or at least it should sound like something that's really obvious, but let's look at it from a different perspective. You might claim that you support your elders in your local church, but do your actions actually support that claim? Meaning, your elders are trying to lead you and the whole church in a certain way, to follow Jesus. Are you actually following them to Jesus, or are you being dragged kicking and screaming? Are you actually submitting to their leadership, or are you the ones bickering and undermining and rebelling against the leadership? Now, obviously, you shouldn't follow your elders blindly. You need discernment. But once you determine that your elders are actually teaching you truth and leading you in the right direction, then the goal is for you to actually go, follow. Now, again, much like Paul's original meaning included the idea of financially supporting your elders, the same remains true today. Churches are supposed to financially support their pastors. And again, I hate talking about this. And you might hear that and you might think, yeah, okay, I absolutely 100% believe this, but the question is, do your actions actually support that claim? So at Grace and Peace, our church is a completely faith-based church when it comes to financial standing, meaning that unless God's people give, the church has no income. We don't do fundraising. This is why we don't do fundraising, because we're a completely faith-based church. That's also why we don't have stocks, and we don't have bonds, and that's why we don't have rental properties that we lease out to people. Every dollar that our church has is given by faith by those within the church, and some friends outside of the church. Thus, if you're not giving anything, then even if you absolutely think your elders and your pastors deserve to be financially supported, you're not actually supporting them financially. You're saying that you agree that your pastor should be supported, but your actions aren't in line with what you're saying. Not every pastor gets a salary from the church, by the way. Not every elder is supposed to. But the primary preachers and teachers, according to 1 Timothy 5, should be able to rely on the church. So you as a congregant of grace and peace ought to support your elder. including your soon-to-be elders, by submitting to their leadership and by giving to help meet their needs financially. Third and lastly, when people accuse our elders, we need to take the accusation absolutely seriously. But we also have to use the principles that Paul mentions to determine the proper course of action. Accusing an elder of a sin, that whole accusation process, is something that has to be taken seriously. Because if there's sin, sin has to be dealt with. But, we also have to follow the process that is laid out in scripture. So if an accusation comes against me, personally, or any other elders that we ever put in, this is what the church needs to do. The church needs to see if the accuser actually tried to privately rectify the situation first. If the person accuses an elder and hasn't actually tried to fix the problem in the first place, then you know that person's intentions probably aren't great. They need to try and fix the problem followed in Matthew 18 first. If the accuser did try to privately rectify the situation, then the accuser would need to have evidence. In other words, if he doesn't have proof, then don't pay any attention to him. He needs to have witnesses. If he doesn't have witnesses, then don't pay any attention to him. Only if the accuser has evidence and witnesses and has already sought to sort out the issue privately should the church then publicly step in. If the church finds that the person is indeed in sin, then the church needs to rebuke and reprimand the pastor for his sin in public. Because no one's above being held accountable, pastors included. So you as a member of Grace and Peace, you have an obligation to make sure that our elders aren't sinning. And when they sin, you have an obligation to call them out the right way. And if they refuse to repent, me included, you then have an obligation to oust me from the church. And I would recommend that, so be aware of that. Put simply, what we learned from 1st Timothy 5, 17-25, though it isn't comprehensive again, is that there are proper ways of acting and reacting towards the elders of the church. So first, you need to choose them carefully. Second, you need to support them with honor and financially. And three, you need to call them out for their sins.