Truth Magazine

By Irvin Himmel

A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favor rather then silver and gold (Prov. 22:1).

We occasionally hear it said about someone, “He is out to make a name for himself.” We understand that to mean that he is seeking notoriety or fame. A big name is not necessarily a good name.

Value of Good Reputation

To have a good name is to possess a good reputation. The name which one earns for himself through righteous deeds is far more important than the name on his birth certificate.

It is said of Jesus during His youthful years, “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man” (Lk. 2:52). What a contrast that is with some of today’s youth who care not about being in good standing with either God or man!

Cornelius, the centurion, despite his being a Gentile, was “of good report among all the nation of the Jews” (Acts 10:22).

When seven men were about to be chosen to minister to the temporal needs of certain widows among the disciples in Jerusalem, it was recommended that they be men “of honest report,” or “of good reputation” (NASB).

One of the qualifications of a bishop is that “he must have a good report of them which are without” (1 Tim. 3:7). A man with a bad reputation cannot be expected to exert a good influence.

To have a truly good name is a genuine asset. One should guard his reputation against whatever might ruin it. A good past makes an excellent future reference.

Reputation and Riches

There are several reasons why a good reputation is to be chosen in preference to riches.

(1) A good name will secure what money cannot buy. Some who are loaded with wealth have a bad name, and no amount of money can purchase a good reputation for them. People trust someone who has a good name. The accumulation of wealth does not make one more trustworthy.

(2) A good name has a higher quality than material wealth. Riches may bring someone great fame, but there is a difference between great fame and a good name. A good name is “a name for good things with God and good people” (Matthew Henry).

(3) A good name enables one to do more good than riches without a good name can do. A good reputation opens doors of opportunity. Esteem and respect are worth more than silver and gold.

Abraham had a good name and great riches. God promised him, “I will bless thee, and make thy name great” (Gen. 12:2). And the Bible describes him as being “very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold” (Gen. 13:2). The point of our proverb is that if one must choose between a good reputation and riches, the former should be chosen. Moffatt translates Proverbs 22:1 as follows: “Reputation is a better choice than riches; esteem is more than money.”

Reputation and Character

Reputation refers to one’s overall qualities as judged by people in general; the estimation in which one is held. Of course, men sometimes err in their estimation of other people. It seems likely that the proverb is referring to a good name as one is judged in the eyes of others who are good and righteous people.

Character refers to the sum of distinctive qualities belonging to an individual. One’s reputation is not always a true measure of his character. However, a good name that is based on good character brings goodwill and admiration from all who value goodness.

Both character and reputation are important. Every child of God must endeavor to develop the best qualities of character, and he should try to keep a good name.

Many things can destroy a good reputation. Sometimes vicious people deliberately set out on a character assassination mission. The slanderer differs from a murderer only in that he kills the reputation rather than the body. A careless and foolish act can seriously damage one’s reputation. White lies often leave black marks on a reputation. It takes a very short time to lose a good reputation but a long, long time to regain it.

“A good name is better than precious ointment. . . ” (Eccl. 7:1). If you have a good reputation, be careful to protect and defend it. And do not be guilty of saying or doing anything that would damage the good name of someone else.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, p. 646
November 6, 1986

By Tom M. Roberts

Introduction: Christians, Elders, Preachers often miss out on fellowship, love and a close relationship with each other because they fail to extend themselves toward one another. What should be the most tender and fulfilling relationship on earth becomes empty and cold. We are cheating ourselves of life’s richest moments. The solution: “Be ye enlarged” (2 Cor. 6:11-13; 7:2a).

I. Background Study: Paul and the Corinthian Church.

A. Acts 18:1-11 – the beginning of the church with Paul’s labors.

1. 1 Cor. 6:9-11 – they had been sinners.

2. 1 Cor. 1: 1-2 – they became saints.

B. Paul had supported self with labor and received support from other churches so as not to burden the Corinthians.

1. 2 Cor. 4:7-15 – all things were for their sakes.

2. 1 Cor. 4:9-13 – he suffered for their sakes.

C. Now, after all this, some were turning away from Paul.

1. 2 Cor. 10:7-12 – “they say” indicated enemies of Paul in the church.

2. Some members had cut off their love of Paul “straitened” their affections; stingy in their love; pressured to cut him out of their heart.

D. His solution: “Be ye enlarged”; “Open your hearts to us” (Text).

1. The scarcity of love was not that Paul was stingy in giving it but that the Corinthians had cut off their ability to receive it.

2. To be restored to previous fellowship required only an “opening of their heart.”

3. We also should be “enlarged” toward God and man.

II. Be enlarged toward God.

A. Many are unable to receive blessings from God due to their own “straitened” (narrowed, restricted) attitudes.

1. They think God’s way is too hard.

2. They believe God’s law too hard.

3. They think Christians have no joy in their lives.

B. When, in reality, their own attitude is the problem.

1. Matt. 13:10-16 – they have closed the eyes and ears and cannot receive.

2. Note v. 16: “Blessed” are those who see and hear.

3. Compare Psalms 23; Deut. 28:1-14; Mal. 3:10.

4. God has not quit loving and giving; we have stopped receiving.

III. Toward Man.

A. Churches become cold; brethren “bite and devour,” no real interest in work of the church; always blame someone else.

B. Problem often with self: “be ye enlarged.”

1. Use the seed principle: 2 Cor. 9:6 – don’t be stingy.

2. Lk. 6:38 – give and it shall be given.

3. Matt. 7:12 – the Golden Rule.

4. We are often robbing ourselves.

5. Don’t be stingy in giving or receiving the love of God or brethren.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, p. 654
November 6, 1986

By Norman Midgette

Accepting the responsibility to teach in a Bible Class is a very important and serious matter. One of the gifts Christ gave to the church along with apostles, prophets, evangelists and elders was “teachers” (Eph. 4:11). The gravity with which this duty should be faced is further emphasized in James 3:1. “Be not many of you teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive heavier judgment.”

There are two things that make this work so important. One is the nature of the book you are teaching. It is the only divine book in the world. Some of the words, though written in the book by man, were first written by the finger of God (Ex. 31:18; Dan. 5:5-28). All of it is inspired or “God breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). Peter said men spoke as they were “borne along by the ‘Holy Spirit'” (2 Pet. 1:21). When you hold in your hand before a class of students the Bible, you are holding the book God has revealed, protected, preserved and made available to us in our own language through His providence and the one, when obeyed, which will save us (Jas. 1:21). It is the last book each of your students will face and at that time the destiny of their souls will be determined by its content (Jn. 12:48). Are you a teacher of this book? If so, teach it with preparation, seriousness, and make sure what you are teaching from it is the Truth. A Bible classroom is no place for an unfaithful person as a teacher nor the place for an unprepared person as a teacher. Being “faithful” and “able” were the two qualities Paul told Timothy to look for in those who would teach others (2 Tim. 2:2).The other factor making teaching the Bible so important is the nature of the ones you are teaching. Their spirits and souls are as eternal as the Book from which you are teaching them. They will live forever and what you are teaching them has to do with doing that in the presence of God. You are not teaching them how to fix a car, teach history in school, punch data into a computer, fly an airplane or even fly into outer space. You are teaching them how to go much farther than that. And when they get there they are not there for a week or two but forever. Each student brings you a soul to instruct and help prepare for eternity. What an opportunity this is and what a responsibility!

A good teacher keeps his or her eye on eternity.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, p. 648
November 6, 1986

By Earl Kimbrough

After Paul and Barnabas established churches in Southern Galatia, they appointed elders in every church” (Acts 14:23). This and all other New Testament references to elders or bishops show their importance in the development and function of local churches. Faithful elders are worthy of honor (1 Tim. 5:17) and should be esteemed “very highly in love for their work’s sake” (1 Thess. 5:12,13). In view of this, it is distressing to hear men belittle the eldership almost as if it were a device of Satan foisted on the churches to hinder progress and hogtie preachers.

The fact that some elders abuse their oversight does not justify rejecting elders as an established order among God’s people. There may be times when it is best for a church to delay the appointment of elders, but to argue that as a rule a church is better off without elders is to argue against the will of God. Nor is there much improvement in attitude when brethren say we should have elders, but interpret the qualifications so as to prevent it. A preacher, who labored fifty years where churches under his influence had no elders, told me he had been falsely accused of not believing in elders. Then he said, “I just never have seen anybody qualified.” What’s the difference? A man may as well not believe in elders as to think God requires the impossible.

One of the errors prominently featured in The Examiner, official voice of the Truth and Freedom Ministry, Inc. of Chattanooga, Tennessee, concerns the work of elders. Among other things, Charles A. Holt, the editor, claims that elders are merely the older man in the church who become elders by seniority, not by appointment, and that the eldership carries no authority. Some of his teaching is in reply to the questions: “Do you believe in elders? What does the word ‘elder’ mean? Who is an elder? How are elders made?” Here are some responses.

“I Believe In Elders”

“Yes definitely, I believe in elders and always have. . . . I am an elder! I am a ‘Senior Citizen.’ The word ‘elder’ simply means ‘older’ or ‘elder . . . (The Examiner, Vol. 1, p. 11).

Brother Holt believes in elders about like a Methodist preacher believes in baptism. The Methodist might with equal sincerity say: “Yes, definitely, I believe in baptism and always have. . . . I am a baptizer! I am a sprinkler.” Both shift gears on the key words. The Methodist sees no difference between baptism and sprinkling. Brother Holt sees no difference between an elder and a senior citizen. But an “elder” of the church is not necessarily a “Senior Citizen.” The word “elder” has both a general and a special use, which is determined by the context.

Elder (Presbuteros) generally refers to age, sometimes meaning the older or oldest of two or more persons (Luke 15:25; John 8:9), and sometimes signifies those advanced in years (Acts 2:17). But the word also means: “of rank or positions of responsibility . . . in the Christian churches, those who, being raised up and qualified by the Holy Spirit, were appointed to have the spiritual care of, and to exercise oversight over, the churches” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary). In places where the word refers to overseers in the church, it signifies men “of rank or positions of responsibility.” Of course, “The term ‘elder’ indicates the mature spiritual experience and understanding of those so described” (Vine). But just being an older man does not carry such a meaning.

Elders Not Made By Appointment

“You do not, cannot, make someone an ‘elder’ by ordination or appointment” (The Examiner, Vol. 2, p. 11).

Here again is a misuse of the word “elder.” Certainly you cannot make one a “senior citizen” by appointment (although many good elders might agree that the work does age a person). But you can make one a person of rank or place him in a position of responsibility by appointment. This is what Paul and Barnabas did in Southern Galatia: they “appointed elders in every church” (Acts 14:23). This is why Titus remained in Crete: to “appoint elders in every city” (Titus 1:5). Titus could not appoint elders before they were qualified to be elders (Titus 1:5-9), but he could, and apparently did, appoint elders, contrary to the claims of The Examiner.

Men Are Elders Before Their Appointment “Men who are already elders were appointed, or placed, or arranged for doing the work of a bishop, shepherd, or pastor . . . . Any and all who are elders (older, mature, experienced) had better be up and about this business” (The Examiner, Vol. 2, p. 12).

The New Testament does not teach that elders were appointed “bishops,” but that qualified men were “appointed elders.” They were appointed elders at the same time they were made bishops by the Holy Spirit. The word , ‘elder” does not necessarily convey the idea of old age, maturity, or experience. The elder brother of the Prodigal Son may have been a young man and his conduct indicates that he lacked maturity. It is only in its special use that the word denotes maturity and experience. But age per se is not a requirement for an elder of the church, although experience and maturity are (Titus 1:5-9). A man may acquire all the qualifications for the eldership to a superlative degree without being a “senior citizen” or an “old man.”

The Examiner seems to encourage the older people in the church to just rise up and assume the oversight. This, of course, would necessarily preclude any appointment to the work. Notice that the editor gives no sexual limitation to the phrase, “Any and all who are elders. ” This might be insignificant were it not for other statements. He also says: “In the NT (New Testament) we read of elder or older men; and of elder or older women (Titus 2). The word means the same in both instances” (Vol. 2, p. 11). Then he adds: “even elder or senior women have been appointed or ordained by God . . . for certain kinds of service. Does this make them ‘church officers’? . . . The apostle appointed or ordained elder women to certain responsibilities just exactly like he did elder men (Acts 14:23; 20:20)” (Ibid).

Brother Holt does not say older women should join the older men in being “up and about this business” of shepherding the congregation, but on the basis of his reasoning, he could hardly object to women elders in the church. But neither “the older men” nor “the older women” in Titus 2 were appointed elders. The apostle simply instructs the older men and women to conduct themselves in a manner that conforms to sound teaching (Titus 2:1-5). The older women were taught to perform a specific service (to teach the younger women). They were not appointed to a place of rank or responsibility over the flock of God, and could not be (cf. 1 Tim. 2:12).

Elders Have No Authority in the Church

“The NT (New Testament) does not teach that elders had ‘authority,’ especially of the kind Jesus claimed for Himself in Matthew 28:18” (Ibid., p. 10).

Anyone who teaches that elders have the kind of authority Christ has, or that the apostles and other inspired men had, does not speak “as the oracles of God.” But elders do have authority from Christ to do what they are appointed to do. They have authority to oversee and shepherd the flock of God among them (cf. Acts 10:28; 1 Pet. 5:2; 1 Tim. 3:4,5; 5:17). Whatever this involves, when it is done according to the teaching of the Scriptures, those under the elders’ oversight are taught to obey and submit to them (Heb. 13:17). These instructions cannot be ignored without violating the teaching of Christ (cf. 2 John 9,10).

Furthermore, the authority of elders takes into account their fallibility and imperfection. They have no right to make laws for the church (Jas. 4:12), nor to modify Christ’s word or act as His “official” interpreters. Their decisions are not written on tables of stone. Their oversight is somewhat like that of a husband to his wife (Eph. 5:23-25). No Christian is obligated to obey elders who act contrary to God’s will, or when they operate outside the range of their authority (cf. Acts 5:29). Nor are Christians required to submit to elders who disregard their spiritual welfare (cf. Acts 20:28; Rom. 14:12), or who run roughshod over their conscience (1 Cor. 8:12). In emphasizing the authority of elders, we may fail to stress with equal vigor the limitations, we must be careful not to deny them the authority they have from the Lord to do what they are appointed to do.

The Examiner has not cornered the market on perversions concerning elders. Some of old have held erroneous views regarding certain aspects of the office, and there have been enough abusive elders to make brethren justifiably wary and cautious in choosing men for the work. But The Examiner makes a frontal attack on the whole concept of the eldership as set forth in the New Testament. This is why its teaching is more especially dangerous.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, pp. 656-657
November 6, 1986