Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord (Lev. 10:1-2).

In my youth these two texts were preached upon with enough frequency that its lessons were familiar to us. However, in recent years, perhaps these texts have been neglected, if not absolutely perverted and misinterpreted. Because of possible neglect, this text must be included in a list of texts to put brethren “in remembrance of these things.”

The Historical Context of Nadab and Abihu’s Death

After the children of Israel left Egypt by a miraculous deliverance, they journeyed to Mt. Sinai where by stayed for one and one-half years. During this time, they were given the Law of Moses which included detailed instructions for the erection of the Tabernacle and the installation of the priesthood. After the items for the Tabernacle were constructed, soon it was assembled. The clothing for the priests was prepared and finally the day to consecrate the priests arrived.

Leviticus 8 details the consecration of the priests — Aaron and his four sons (Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar). The congregation was gathered, the priests were washed and clothed with their ceremonial clothing. Then they were anointed to serve. Sacrifices were offered for Aaron and his sons. Aaron and his sons were instructed to abide at the door of the Tabernacle for seven days.

On the eighth day, Aaron and his sons officially entered the office as priests (Lev. 9). The congregation assembled and the sacrifices commanded by God were offered. Aaron offered a sin offering for himself and a burnt offering was presented. He made atonement for himself and for the people. After Aaron and his sons completed the offering, the text records:

And Moses and Aaron went into the tabernacle of the congregation, and came out, and blessed the people: and the glory of the Lord appeared unto all the people. And there came a fire out from before the Lord, and consumed upon the altar the burnt offering and the fat: which when all the people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces (Lev. 9:23-24).

Witnessing the glory of the Lord and the miraculous fire, Nadab and Abihu took their censers and put fire therein, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he did not command. As a judgment from God, fire came out and destroyed them before the Lord.

Of What Did the Sin Consist?

There is some discussion with regard to the nature of Nadab and Abihu’s offense. Here are several ideas which have been expressed:

The sin consisted in bringing fire from some source other than the burnt offering altar. The Law specified that fire for the incense was to be taken from the burnt offering altar. Leviticus 16:12 commanded that fire from the burnt offering be used for incense on the Day of Atonement. When Moses stayed the plague that broke out at the rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram, he used fire from the burnt offering altar to burn incense (Num. 16:46). The fire from the burnt offering altar was miraculously kindled (Lev. 9:24) and was to be kept burning (Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature VI:821). Nadab and Abihu sinned in offering incense with unauthorized fire.

The sin consisted in offering the incense at the wrong time of the day. Kell and Delitzsch suggest that the incenseoffering was offered at the wrong time of the day — between the morning and evening offerings. Later texts do not affirm that the sin consisted in offering incense at the wrong time of day.

The sin consisted in intruding into the Holy of Holies. The text mentions that they offered “strange fire before the Lord.” The High Priest alone was allowed to enter the Holy of Holies and that only on the Day of Atonement. However, the phrase “before the Lord” can be used of the Tabernacle generally or entering into the Holy of Holies. Based solely on this phrase, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that Nadab and Abihu entered the Holy of Holies. Later texts do not charge them with this sin.

Some have suggested that Nadab and Abihu were drunk. Leviticus 10:8-11 contains a prohibition against priests partaking of any wine or strong drink when they ad-ministered worship. Some have connected this prohibition with Nadab and Abihu’s sin to reach the conclusion that they were drunk when they sinned. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says that this is an erroneous conclusion (IV:2108; cf. also Keil and Delitzsch 354). J.A. Selbie wrote in Dictionary of the Bible (James Hastings, ed.), “There is not the slightest warrant for the idea. . . that the prohibition (v. 8f) against the use of wine or strong drink by priests on duty implies that Nadab and Abihu were intoxicated when they committed their fatal offence” (III:471). Even if the sons of Aaron were drunk, they compounded their sin in offering “strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not.” Whereas later texts emphasize that Nadab and Abihu sinned in offering “strange fire,” not once is there any evidence that they were guilty of drunkenness (cf. Num. 3:2-4; 26:60-61). The effort to find Nadab and Abihu guilty of drunkenness in connection with their worship stems from an unwillingness to believe that God would punish Nadab and Abihu with death for the relatively small offense of taking fire from an unauthorized source!

The first explanation of the sin given above properly emphasizes that the sin was in offering “strange fire.” The phrase “strange fire” (esh zarah) has been defined as follows:

“strange to the law” as also appears in the phrase “strange incense” in Exod. 30:9 (Brown,Driver, and Briggs, Lexicon 266).

“opp. to true, right, lawful, strange, unlawful. . .strange fire i.e. unlawful, profane, opp. to the sacred fire, Lev. 10:” (Gesenius, Lexicon 276).

“strange to the requirements of the law” (Dictionary of the Bible III:471).

“unauthorized by the Law” (ISBE IV:2108).

These definitions assert that what Nadab and Abihu offered was unauthorized worship, an unlawful act.

Putting this definition of “strange fire” together with the historical context, we can better understand what Nadab and Abihu’s sin was. On that important occasion of the entrance of Aaron and his sons into the service of the priesthood, the glory of the Lord appeared to the people and a fire came out from before the Lord that consumed the burnt offering. In their exuberance, Nadab and Abihu presumptuously offered incense to the Lord, using strange fire which the Lord had not commanded. Here are some descriptions of their sin:

They chose their own method of returning thanks and giving praise to God, a method unsanctioned by God’s command, unauthorized by their official superiors (F. Meyrick, The Pulpit Commentary 2:150).

Their crime was not in doing what was forbidden, but in doing what was not enjoined. Will-worship is offensive to God. No body of uninspired men has any business to “decree rites and ceremonies” (J.A. McDonald, The Pulpit Commentary 2:157).

For their essence of their sin was this, that it was will-worship; worship in which they consulted not the revealed will of God regarding the way in which He would be served, but their own fancies and inclinations. The directions for worship had been, as we have seen, exceedingly full and observed, “Doubtless it seemed to Nadab and Abihu a matter of no consequence at all that they should take fire from one altar rather than from another. To us it may seem a comparatively small thing, when viewed in connection with the terrible doom that immediately ensued. Obviously, however, it was a great thing in the sight of God” (The Pulpit Commentary 158).

4. God wishes to be worshipped as he wills, not as we will.

The modern concept about worship, that God will accept anything in worship so long as the person is sincere who offers it, is false. God will not accept any and every kind of worship (if he would, idolatry would be just as acceptable as any other worship). We can only know the kind of worship which pleases God by the revelation of his mind to us in the Bible. When men invent their own worship, they are guilty of the sin of Nadab and Abihu.

There are many things which have been introduced into Christian worship which stand on the same footing as the “strange fire” offered by Nadab and Abihu — they are things which God has not commanded. That is true with such things as the following: mechanical instruments of music in worship, choirs, solos, and quartets, contributions taken at times other than the first day of the week, burning incense and candles, holy days such as Christmas and Easter, a separate priesthood, observing the Lord’s supper on some day other than the first day of the week and with some frequency other than weekly, etc. We must be careful not to allow ourselves to think of these sinful perversions of worship as small and insignificant. Otherwise the lessons drawn from the death of Nadab and Abihu will have been of no benefit to us.

The Punishment

God’s punishment of Nadab and Abihu was immediate. He destroyed them with fire. Why did this occur? Obviously God did not immediately strike dead every other violator of his will for worship. The deaths of Nadab and Abihu correspond very closely with the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5). In the latter case, Ananias and Sapphira were smitten because they lied to God. Not every liar has been punished with the same fate. Both cases occurred very soon after the establishment of God’s worship (the tabernacle and the church). In both cases, a public display was made to teach men not to depart from God’s word. By so graphically demonstrating the seriousness of departing from the Lord’s commandment, the Lord emphasized the necessity of respect for his law and saved from eternal damnation many men who might not otherwise have abided within the commandments.

Conclusion

The lessons drawn from the sin of Nadab and Abihu should be taught to our children and our children’s children. Otherwise, the generations which follow will stray into unrevealed worship and make a denomination of the Lord’s church as has been done in other apostasies. One generation going untaught is all that is necessary for this apostasy to occur. For this reason, we need to keep our brethren “in remembrance of these things.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 3, p. 6
February 4, 1993

By J. Wiley Adams

Kings 5 is a classic account of man’s wisdom versus the wisdom of God. In Isaiah 55:8,9 we learn that God’s thoughts and ways are not man’s thoughts and ways. His thoughts and ways are higher than ours as the heavens are higher than the earth. What may seem right to man is not the criterion for pleasing God (Prov. 14:12).

In the earlier days of this century, gospel meetings used to include such basic topics as why we sing but do not play, strange fire, the comparison of the Old and New Testaments, morality, and nearly every preacher had a sermon on Naaman, the leper. Under such preaching the stories of the Bible came alive. Brethren were well-taught. Even the children sat speechless at the Bible accounts of Noah and the ark, David and Goliath, as well as the wise man and the foolish man. It has changed but it needs to be revived.

Such a subject has been assigned to this writer for this special issue. It is about Naaman, the leper reported in 2 Kings 5. No one ever preached it better than the late Fred Dennis of the upper Ohio Valley. I can hear him now as he preached the plain and simple story of the need to let God have his way — the need to obey him rather than man.

Naaman was the captain of the Syrian host. He was the Syrian king’s chief-of-staff. He was a great, honorable and brave man. At times he fought against Israel and took captives from among them. One of these captives was a little maid who waited on Naaman’s wife.

It was discovered that Naaman had the dread disease called leprosy. He was a leper. He sought desperately to find a cure. He was willing to try anything to get well. When the little maid from Israel knew that her master had leprosy, she told her mistress there was a prophet in Samaria (Elisha) who could heal him. The king of Syria heard of this possibility and told him to go with a letter from him to the king of Israel. He sent many gifts to get on the good side of him and he in effect demanded that he be healed. This nearly scared the king of Israel to death. He thought the king of Syria was trying to pick a fight with him. He tore his clothes in frustration. He said, “Am I God to kill and make alive?” No one had ever been healed of leprosy before (see Lk. 4:27).

But when Elisha, the man of God, heard the king of Israel had torn his clothes in despair he said, “Let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel.”

So, this important man and all his company came to Elisha’s door. Normal courtesy was not extended. After all, this man was an enemy of Israel. Instead of asking him into his house or going out to roll out the red carpet for him, the prophet sent a messenger with the simple message to dip seven times in the Jordan river and he would be healed of his leprosy. Sometimes we tell people we don’t like to go jump in the lake. It may have sounded like that to Naaman. He was outraged. He said in his wrath, “Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.”

What a simple thing the prophet had required of him to do. He took issue about the superiority of the rivers of Syria over the muddy Jordan. His pride was badly injured. He either had to get rid of his pride orhis leprosy. In a rage he turned away. One of his servants was a wise man and appealed to him to try this simple procedure — wash and be clean. He decided to swallow his pride and obey the prophet of God. When he had dipped seven times in Jordan he was cleansed “and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.”

The lessons we learn from this Bible account are several. First, we must go to the right source for help

7 the prophet and not the king. Second, one must then have faith enough to do what is required — not argue the point. Third, we must not challenge God’s will at any point — we must yield. And fourth, we must obey God to obtain the desired end

7 salvation. Sin is worse than leprosy. Only the blood of Christ will take it away when we obey the gospel (Rom. 1:16).

As long as Naaman fought the will of God, he remained a leper. What a lesson for those of us who live on this side of the cross. God requires the hearing of his word to gain faith (Rom. 10:17), confessing the deity of Christ (Rom. 10:10), repenting of sins (Acts 2:38), and being baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). This is plain and simple. Many like Naaman are outraged at its simplicity and turn away but they are still in their sins. Those who submit and turn to God will go away with sins removed — saved.

Are you like Naaman? Many are. Why not be like the three thousand on Pentecost (Acts 2) or the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8)?

“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 3, p. 5
February 4, 1993

By Olen Holderby

Many years ago I took a few notes from a presentation of N.B. Hardeman (to the best of my recollection it was he) on the above subject. Those notes form the basis of this article. I felt then, and I feel now, that the points made needed to be repeated over and over. To me, the need appears to be more urgent now than in days gone by. In any case, dear reader, I solicit your attention and honest consideration of these things.

Nature tells everyone, but fools, that God exists (Psa.14:1; 19:1-3). An observation of the natural world about us reveals something of the nature of God. It can be seen that God has intelligence, power, love and choice (free-will); these at-tributes can be identified from the arrangement of his creation, both as to being and function.

Man was created in the image of God (Gen.1:26-27); thus, man has the same traits of intelligence, power, love, and choice (free-will). The difference between God and man in these is to be found in the fact that man is limited in every one of them; while God is unlimited in every one of them. The creature cannot be greater than the Creator (Rom.9:20). The Creator has made provisions so that man may further and more wisely develop these characteristics.

In order for the creature (man) to know the Creator’s (God’s) plan or way for him, God must tell him. God did just that (2 Tim.3:16-17). God gave the Scriptures to educate and guide man in the way that he would have him go. These Scriptures were to be profitable to man for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness. They were all-sufficient to make the man of God complete for every good work to which his Creator assigned him.

And, man is told, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). Through these Scriptures man can learn where he came from, what he is doing here, and where he is going. It should be remembered that these Scriptures can be understood (Eph. 5:17; 3:4). Jesus thought that they could be understood (Jn. 8:31-32); and when he gave the “great commission,” he implies that every creature could understand the gospel (Mk.16:15-16). God is not responsible for those who are too lazy or too indifferent to apply themselves to know the teaching of the Scripture. This is God’s revelation to man! God created man; therefore, God well knew the needs of man. God was quite capable (all-wise) of giving a revelation which man could understand; and, he did give (his justice and mercy) a gospel that man could understand. It does take man’s effort, however! What, then, can we know about God’s way?

God’s way is the “one and only” way. This fact is not taught by many today; it is not believed or taught even by some of our own brethren. Through the prophet God said, I will give them, “one way”; and, he would do that for their good forever (Jer.32: 39). Jesus said, “Strait is the gate and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matt. 7:14). Did you get the singular “gate” and “way”? And, again, a careful reading of John 14:6 will show that, if there is to be more than one way, there will have to be more than one Lord. Our thinking, sometimes, just does not agree with the thinking of our Creator (Isa. 55:8-9). “O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps” (Jer. 10:23). If man could have designed a suitable way, at any time, God wasted his time; and, the very fact that God did design a way implies that man could not do so. Do you believe that God’s way is the one and only way?

God’s one and only way is the way of revelation — a revelation way. “But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal.1:11-12). There can be no doubt about it; whatever Paul had to say in the gospel, he received it by revelation of Jesus Christ. Paul makes the same points in Ephesians 3:3-5, only more extensively. Here he states twice (v. 3,5) that the apostolic message was a revealed message. Further, he shows (v. 4) that by reading what they have to say we can understand this revelation. The quibbles about not understanding is just someone wanting some one else to think that he cannot understand the Scripture, or so it seems to me. God either gave a revelation which

I can understand, or he made my salvation depend upon the understanding of others. Can you believe that?

The revelation itself plainly warns as to the consequences of a perversion of or a departure from the revelation (Gal. 1:8-9; 2 Jn.9). Such perversion or departure clearly separates us from God. There appears to have always been efforts to pervert the gospel; but the last few years has seen a flood of such efforts, especially efforts that would justify immorality whether intended or not! When Jesus said, “Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:20), he was speaking of the standard of life. Brethren and friends, we need to raise our standard, instead of lowering it. Whether the standard sounds “too hard” or “too easy,” it must be presented plainly and without efforts to cushion it for anyone. And, it must be respected, by all, in the same way (Phil. 1:27; Jude 3).

In the context of the above thoughts, all of us need to take a new look at the subject of “liberalism.” What is the difference in an individual being liberal in reference to the organization or work of the church and another individual being liberal in morals? If one is soul-destructive, so is the other; and, if one is acceptable to God, so is the other. If not, why not? We all need to learn the needed lesson of being guided solely by God’s one and only way of revelation. Do you believe that God’s one and only way is the way of revelation?

God’s one and only way of revelation is one of inspiration. For the Old Testament, Peter argues that “Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:21). Paul affirms the same for the New Testament, “It is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit” (Eph. 3:5). It is not only the ideas that are inspired, but the very words. Jesus promised the apostles that the Holy Spirit would teach them all things, bring to their remembrance the things he had said to them, and would guide them into all truth (Jn. 14:26; 16:13). Now, “Which things also we speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual words” (1 Cor. 2:13). Paul then proceeds to limit us to “that which is written” (1 Cor. 4:6). This is verbal inspiration! Ideas are important, but it takes words to express those ideas. Inspiration chose just the right words to have the writers say exactly what God wanted said. This is also affirmed in a passage which we already mentioned — 2 Timothy 3:16-17. A world or a people without revelation is lost! However, a world or a people that reject revelation is just as lost. Do you believe that God’s one and only way of revelation is one of inspiration — a revealed way?

God’s one and only way of revelation and inspiration is one of confirmation. That is, it is a proven way; proven by God. After the ascension of Jesus, those who went everywhere preaching were “confirming the word with signs following” (Mk. 16:20). These were the signs of an apostle (2 Cor. 12:12) that were used for this confirmation (proof). These words of salvation were, “first spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will” (Heb. 2:3-4). John tells us that the miracles of Jesus were performed and recorded as evidence that Jesus was who he claimed to be — the Son of God (Jn. 20:30-31). Herein is the difference between the gospel and the message of men — the gospel was confirmed by God to be right; then, the blood of his Son gave the gospel its eternal weight (Mat. 26:28). The Psalmist expressed it like this, “For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven” (Psa. 119:89). Do you believe that God’s one and only way of revelation and inspiration is also one of confirmation — has been proven by God to be right?

Some final points relating to God’s way. Anyone believing the above four points concerning God’s way, will be willing to accept whatever that revelation says on any subject. How may I know a thing is right? If it comes from heaven (God), it is right. That has always been the dividing line between right and wrong, between truth and error (Matt. 16:13-17; 21:23-25). However, how may I know if a thing is from God? The simple answer is — if it is in the written word, I know it is from God (2 Tim. 3:16-17; Rom. 1:17; Jn. 5:39; Rom. 10:1-3). This is a fact not accepted by a great many people today. When all is said and done, I still have no way on the face of this earth to know whether a thing is from God or not except to find it in the written word. If it is there, I know it is from him! If it is not there, it is not from him!

This revelation is God’s final message to man; it was to be preached until the end of the age (Matt. 28:20). Prophets, angels, or servants could not be trusted with this final message; only his Son was up to the task (Heb. 1:1-2a). He was the Word made flesh (Jn. 1:14), and to see him was to see the Father (Jn. 14:9). He shed the form of deity and took on the form of a servant (Phil. 2:6-7); yet, all the fullness of the Godhead, bodily, was in him (Col. 2:9). Think of this exalted Being, the Son of God Most High, taking upon himself the dirty and filthy task of cleansing you and me from our sins. This is the one whom God sent to deliver this revelation to man; he is the spokesman through whom God speaks to man, and no other. Don’t you think it is time that we all listen? What he had to say has now been written down and proven to be right (Heb. 2:3-4) by those who personally heard him. John simply said, “We are of God: he that knowth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error” (1 Jn. 4:6). Jesus had earlier said to his disciples, “He that heareth you heareth me” (Lk. 10:14). Then there is the question Jesus offered in Luke 6:46, “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” He has the words of eternal life (Jn. 6:66-68); and, we have no right to question his way for us (Rom. 9:20-21). There is no appeal from his word, it is forever settled in heaven (Psa. 119:89). We may reject or ignore God’s revelation. We may pervert or depart from it; and, we may do any or all these things in this life — we are creatures of choice. However, we cannot change the fact that we shall be judged by him and his word shall be the standard of that judgment (Jn. 12:48; Rom. 2:16).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 2, p. 22
January 21, 1993

By Ron Daly

In 1 Timothy 5:1-2 God’s word says, “Rebuke not an elder, but exhort him as a father; the younger men as brethren: the elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, in all purity.” First, what does the word “elder” mean at this place? It translates the Greek presbutero, dative masculine singular of presbuteros. Presbuteros is used in a number of ways in the New Testament, e.g., members of the Sanhedrin (presbuterous ton Ioudaion, elders of the Jews); Luke 7:3, the 24 members of the heavenly court (hoi eikosi tessares presbuteroi); Revelation 5:8, men who were appointed to preside over and shepherd local assemblies of Christians (tous presbuterous tes ekklesias, the elders of the church), Acts 20:17; cf. 1 Timothy 5:17-19, and those who are advanced in life (hoi presbuteroi, old men), Acts 2:17. The meaning of “elder” in verse 1 is “old man.” We can be certain that this is correct because of the “contextual indicators.” There is an antithesis which exists between “an elder” who is to be exhorted “as a father,” and “younger men” who are to be exhorted “as brethren” (neoteras hos adelphous). So, “elder” (presbuteros) is used in contrast to “younger” (neos). Whatever “elder” means, “younger” is the opposite, and whatever “younger” means, “elder” is the opposite. Furthermore, Paul continues by contrasting “elder women as mothers” (presbuteras hos meteras), and exhorting “younger women as sisters” (neoteras hos adelphas). The “elder” of verse 1 denotes the same thing as “elder women” of verse 2, except for the distinction in gender. “Younger men” likewise denotes the same thing as “younger women” excepting the gender distinction. Also, there is a parallelism which exists between “elder” of 1 Timothy 5:1, and the language of the same apostle elsewhere. In Titus 2:2, Paul exhorts Titus that he, in speaking sound teaching, inform “aged men” (presbutas) of their duties, and “aged women” (presbutidas) of their duty to teach the “young women” (tas fleas, vv. 3,4). Here, again, Paul uses antithesis. We find the same use of “elder” by the apostle Peter. “Likewise, ye younger (neoteroi), be subject unto older ones (presbuterois)” (1 Pet. 5:5). Note again the antithesis between “younger” and “elder.”

Second, what is the significance of the injunction “rebuke not an elder” expressed by the negative imperative (me epiplexes)? May we not “rebuke” all who are in error, and who persist in sin or rebellion against God, whether young or old? According to other texts we may (Matt. 18:15-18; Lk. 17:3-4; 1 Tim. 5:20; 2 Tim. 4:2). So, why does the Holy Spirit through Paul, so emphatically say to Timothy particularly to “rebuke not an elder”? The key is in the word “rebuke.” It is not the same word used in 2 Timothy 4:2.

The word used in 2 Timothy is epitimao. Contextually, epitimao means “to censure and render a sharp rebuke” by the preaching of the word. “Rebuke” in 1 Timothy 5 is from the Greek epiplesso which means “to reprimand, to strike (verbally), to assault with abusive speech, to chastise with words, to reproach or denounce.” In the context, Paul in-formed Timothy of the proper conduct among believers, which he as an evangelist must practice. One of the charges given to Timothy was, “Let no man despise thy youth” (1 Tim. 4:12). That is, let no man look down on you because you are young; treat old men and women with respect. There is an Old Testament text which contains the same idea couched in similar language, “Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honor the face of the old man, and thou shalt fear thy God; I am Yahweh” (Lev. 19:32). One of the ways that Timothy would show respect for the elderly, is by not lashing out with harsh words, but by having this tongue tempered by love and gentleness.

Instead of the phrase “Rebuke not an elder,” the recent versions say, “Don’t criticize an older man” (Simple English Bible), “Never be harsh with an elder” (New English Bible), “Never censure an older man harshly” (James Moffatt Translation), “Do not sharply rebuke an older man” (NASV), “Do not speak harshly to an older man” (NRSV), “Do not reprimand an older man” (McCord’s New Testament Translation), “Do not rebuke an older man harshly” NIV.

The expression “Rebuke not an elder” does not restrict or forbid the younger from correcting the older brothers in the Lord who err, but it does teach that there is a proper way to do it. And, that the way is not by ridicule and harshness, but “as fathers and mothers,” that is, with genuine concern and kindness, attempting to win them by snatching them out of the devil’s grasp!

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 2, p. 19
January 21, 1993