When was the Book of Revelation Written? (Part 2 of 2)

Emperor Worship

Christians in the book of Revelation were being pressured to worship the secular ruling power (13:4, 15-16; 14:9-11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4). The seeds of emperor worship were to some degree evident in Julius Caesar, Augustus, and Caligula, but it was not until Domitian that the Imperial Cult was enforced.

When Domitian revived the Imperial Cult, he required his subjects to address him as dominus et dues noster (“our lord and god”).¹ The first Imperial Cult temple in Ephesus was established in the year 89 under Domitian’s rule. In fact, it was during this period that “in some areas – especially in Asia Minor – governors and other local officials demanded public participation in the cult as evidence of citizens’ loyalty and patriotism.”²

Condition of the Churches 

A Christian named Antipas had already suffered martyrdom in Pergamum (2:13) and members of the church at Smyrna were soon to face imprisonment and potentially the death penalty (2:10). Spiritual stagnation was a problem in many of the Asian congregations (2:4, 5; 3:1-3, 15-17), and the church of Laodicea was wealthy at the time (3:17). These conditions are more conducive to the period of Domitian’s reign.

If Revelation had been written during Nero’s reign (54-68) and prior to the Jewish war that led to Jerusalem’s destruction (66-70), it approximates the time period of Paul’s letters to Timothy (also sent to Ephesus). But the respective situations addressed by John and by Paul are very different. 

o   To Ephesus of Paul’s day: charge some not to teach any other doctrine (1 Tim. 1:3-4; 6:3-5); to Ephesus of John’s day: you are standing against evil, false apostles, and deeds of the Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:1-7). 

o   To Ephesus of Paul’s day: pray “for kings and all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life” (1 Tim. 2:1-2);³  to Ephesus of John’s day: governing authorities are disrupting our quiet and peaceable life (Rev. 1:9; 17:1-6; 18:21-24; 19:1-2; 20:4). 

o   To Ephesus of Paul’s day: perilous times are coming (2 Tim. 3:1); to Ephesus of John’s day: perilous times are here (Rev. 1:9; 6:9-11). 

o   To Ephesus of Paul’s day: “all desiring to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted [future tense]” (2 Tim. 3:12); to Ephesus of John’s day: persecution is now happening and will get worse (Rev. 1:9; 6:9-11; 16:6; 17:6; 20:4). 

o   To Ephesus of Paul’s day: “There will be a time [in the future] they will not endure sound teaching …” (2 Tim. 4:3a); to Ephesus of John’s day: you are resisting false teachings and practices (Rev. 2:1-7). 

o   To Ephesus of Paul’s day: only “some” [τινες] have turned away from apostolic instruction and purity of love [ἀγάπη] (1 Tim. 1:5-6); to Ephesus of John’s day: you (collectively) have abandoned your first love [ἀγάπη] (Rev. 2:4). 

At the end of 2 Timothy, Paul names seventeen coworkers that would have been known by Timothy and the Ephesian brethren, but he does not mention John. Polycarp of Smyrna (69-155) was personally acquainted with John⁴ but knew of Paul only through Paul’s writings. In Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians (dated ca. 110), he indicates that when Paul wrote his letter to the Philippi saints around 62, the church did not even exist in Smyrna as it did later in John’s day (11.3).

Laodicea was destroyed by an earthquake in 60 (cf. Tacitus, Annals 14.26-27), and a couple of years later, when Paul wrote his letter to the Colossians, the nearby Laodicea church appears to have been spiritually healthy and thriving (Col. 2:1-2; 4:13-16). But by the time Revelation was written, the Christians in Laodicea were financially prosperous with no financial needs, while spiritually lukewarm and in danger of divine expulsion (Rev. 3:14-22).

The Temple of God

John is called upon to measure “the temple of God and the altar and worshipers,” while the “holy city” is trampled for “forty-two months” (Rev. 11:1-2). If this is taken as a reference to the literal Jewish temple in Jerusalem, a date before mid-70 would be implied. However, since the book of Revelation is filled with signs and symbols, the most natural interpretation of this passage is metaphoric, not literal (note 3:12; cf. 1 Cor. 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21). If the physical temple in Jerusalem was still standing and was to be measured by John, how could he have accomplished this while banished on an island in the Aegean Sea over 600 miles away? Moreover, how else could worshipers be “measured” other than spiritually? This is a vision of the future. In the sixth century BC, when Ezekiel saw his vision of the temple being measured (Ezek. 40:1–42:20), the literal temple and city had already been destroyed by the Babylonians fourteen years earlier (Ezek. 40:1).

The Succession of Kings

In Revelation 17:9-11 eight kings are mentioned, and the one who appears to have been reigning at the time of writing was number six. If this passage is taken literally and the succession of kings begins with the first recognized emperor, an earlier date is then suggested. However, this argument is not decisive. Are the kings in this vision past, present, or future? Is the count to begin with Romulus (the first king), Julius Caesar (the first dictator), Augustus (the first emperor), or Caligula (the first persecutor)? Should the comparatively insignificant rulers, who were in power for only brief periods (68-69), be counted or not? [Note: Suetonius included Julius Caesar, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius in his Lives of the Caesars]. Should the respective numbers be interpreted literally or symbolically? Whatever position one wishes to take, it can be made to fit.

If the kings represent kingdoms (cf. Dan. 7:17, 23), this could be an overview of (1) Babylonian; (2) Medo-Persian; (3) Grecian, followed by four smaller kingdoms into which Alexander’s empire divided: (4) Macedon-Greece, (5) Pergamon-Asia Minor, (6) Ptolemaic-Egypt, (7) Seleucid-Syria; then (8) Rome. If Roman emperors: (1) Augustus (30 BC–AD 14); (2) Tiberius (14-37); (3) Caligula (37-41); (4) Claudius (41-54); (5) Nero (54-68); (a) Galba (7 months); (b) Otho (3 months); (c) Vitellius (8 months); (6) Vespasian (69-79); (7) Titus (79-81); and (8) Domitian (81-96).⁵

If the numbers are used symbolically, “seven kings” represent the totality of Roman emperors, the sixth indicates the empire has not yet reached its consummation (note 666 in 13:17-18),⁶ thus seven (completion) is “not yet come,” and eight (a divine number beyond perfection) represents a regime that parodies Christ as the supreme ruler of God’s kingdom (cp. 1:8; 17:8).⁷

CONCLUSION

Internal evidence places the most probable context of Revelation toward the end of the reign of Domitian, 95-96. This conclusion is supported by the weight of early testimonies,⁸ and the vast majority of modern scholars across the wide range of theological perspectives concurs. 

 

Why does it matter? The age-old promise of Christ’s return and future judgment offers reassurance to believers and sustains hope (Acts 23:6; 24:15; 26:6-8; 2 Cor. 4:14; Phil. 3:10-11; 1 John 3:2-3), “awaiting the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus” (Tit. 2:13). Teaching otherwise, claiming it has already happened (hyper-preterism compelled to reject the Domitianic date), causes unnecessary apprehension and discord (2 Thess. 2:1-2; 2 Tim. 2:15-18) and counters the persistent admonition to be prepared, watchful, and alert (Matt. 24:36, 44; 1 Thess. 1:10; 5:1-11; 2 Pet. 3:10-18). 

May we find comfort and motivation in the Lord’s abiding promise: “The one overcoming will thus be clothed in white garments, and I will not wipe out his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels” (Rev. 3:5).

When was the Book of Revelation Written? (Part 1 of 2)

Introduction

John wrote from the Mediterranean island of Patmos (Rev. 1:9), a rugged, rocky island about 40 miles (24 kms) southwest of Ephesus in the Aegean Sea, used by the Romans as a place of exile (see Pliny, Natural History 4.23). The document was written to the seven churches of the Roman province of Asia in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea (1:4, 11; 2:1–3:22).

Why does it matter when the book was written? It claims to be a book of prophecy  (1:1, 3, 11, 19; 22:6-10, 16, 18-20), foretelling future events, particularly “things to happen quickly” (1:1; cf. v. 19) [Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are the author's own translation]. The typical preterist proposal is that the Jewish War (66-70) fulfilled most if not all of these predictions. Therefore, in order for full-preterism to sustain itself, the book of Revelation must date before Jerusalem’s destruction in the summer of 70, and as predictive prophecy, somewhat earlier. For eschatological futurists, it does not really matter other than responding to false claims.¹

The two main proposals for dating Revelation center on the respective reigns of Nero (54-68) and Domitian (81-96). Nero began his reign at age 16 when his adopted father Claudius died 13th October 54, then Nero committed suicide 9th June 68 by stabbing himself in the throat at age 31. Domitian, the month before his 30th birthday, was inaugurated emperor 14th September 81, the day after his brother Titus died of illness, and Domitian was assassinated 18th September 96, stabbed to death by assailants at age 44.²

External Evidence

Irenaeus (ca. 130-202) was originally from Smyrna in the province of Asia, the location of one of the seven churches of Revelation. He was a disciple of Polycarp, also from Smyrna, who was discipled by the apostle John himself.³ Irenaeus’ literary work was originally in Greek under the title Ἔλεγχος καὶ ἀνατροπὴ τῆς ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως (“On the Detection and Overthrow of the So-Called Gnosis”), written around 180. It has been preserved in Latin translation under the title Adversus haereses (“Against Heresies”). In book 5, Irenaeus devotes chap. 30 to the number of the beast in Rev. 13:18, which Eusebius (ca. 260-339) has preserved in the original Greek in his Ecclesiastical History (3.18.1-3; 5.8.6). Eusebius reports: “In this persecution … the apostle and evangelist John … condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos. Irenaeus, in his fifth book against heresies [Adv. haer. 5.30.3] … in the above-mentioned revelation of John …. [quote] ‘declared by him who saw [ἑορακότος] the revelation, for it is not long since it was seen [ἑωράθη], but almost in our own generation, at the close of Domitian’s reign’” (Eccl. Hist. 3.18.1-3, trans. C. F. Cruse).

The question is whether Irenaeus’ use of the third person singular verb ἑωράθη is to be understood as masculine (“he was seen”) in reference to John, or neuter (“it was seen”) in reference to what John saw. If the former, nothing can be deduced either way about the dating of Revelation. However, contextually the preceding use of ὁράω (“he saw” - ἑορακότος) concerns what John saw, not John having been seen. In fact, the subject of the chapter is the revelation of John, and the verbal ὁράω is consistently used in Revelation of what John saw (cf. 1:2; 4:1; 5:1-2, 5-6, 11; 6:1-2, 5, 7-8, 12; 7:1-2; 12:1, 3; 17:6; et al.). Irenaeus had already reported that John lived into the reign of Trajan (98-117) (Adv. haer. 2.22.5; 3.3.4; cf. Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.23.3-4), so why point out that he was living at an earlier time? No reputable translation of Irenaeus’ words has rendered this as a reference to John having been seen, and the Latin version is not ambiguous at all. 

The Domitianic date was almost universally accepted throughout most of church history, and nothing in the book of Revelation contradicts it. No other tradition relevant to dating was proposed in the region where the document was originally sent. Significantly later, in the sixth and seventh centuries in different places, other traditions developed but not in Asia Minor.⁴

Internal Evidence

The key pieces of evidence involve (a) persecution of Christians; (b) emperor worship; (c) condition of the churches; (d) the temple of God; (e) succession of kings (7:9-11).

Persecution of Christians

The Christians to whom Revelation is addressed were apparently suffering severe and widespread persecution that would eventually worsen (1:9; 2:10, 13; 3:10; 6:9; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). Nero’s persecution is well documented and lasted from mid-64 to mid-68, but it was primarily confined to the city of Rome. In fact, there is no record of a Neronian persecution outside of Rome. 

Is there evidence that Domitian persecuted Christians? No extant secular writings of antiquity explicitly accuse Domitian of widespread hostilities against Christians, leading a number of modern critics to claim it never happened.⁵ Domitian’s persecutions, reportedly most intense near the end of his regime (95-96), are primarily attested by later Christian writers,⁶  although the imposition of emperor worship during this time (see next post) adds more credence to this potential setting than do the alternatives.

Domitian was far less popular than his father Vespasian and brother Titus, who ruled before him. He sought to establish himself as absolute monarch, which ultimately led to his assassination in September 96.⁷ After he was killed, the Senate immediately passed the motion of damnatio memoriae (“condemnation of memory”) to remove him from official accounts.⁸  Accordingly, the silence of secular historians provides no solid basis for what Domitian may or may not have done.

At the time Revelation was composed, John was exiled on the island of Patmos (Rev. 1:9). Nero’s reaction to Christians involved violent executions (Tacitus, Annals 15.44) that purportedly included the deaths of the apostles Paul and Peter.⁹ There is no evidence that Nero ever banished Christians, so if John’s punishment was under his rule, we have to wonder why John was exiled rather than killed? Banishment of alleged dissidents was much more common during Domitian’s reign.¹⁰

Both Tacitus (ca. 56-120) and Suetonius (ca. 69-122) describe Domitian’s final years as a reign of terror, and Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-215) calls him a “tyrant.”¹¹ Those who opposed Domitian were either exiled or executed and their properties confiscated; the names of at least twenty political foes who were killed by Domitian have been preserved.¹²

Not only did Domitian suppress political opponents, he condemned those charged with the crime of atheism, i.e., rejecting the Roman pantheon, including the Imperial Cult.¹³ Justin Martyr wrote, “Hence are we called atheists. And we confess that we are atheists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God …” (I Apology 6, trans. P. Schaff). In 110 Pliny the Younger examined those charged with being Christians in Asia Minor, some of whom had recanted their faith two decades earlier (Epistles 10.96.6), implying oppression during Domitian’s reign. 

Eusebius (ca. 260-399) more specifically reports the persecutions and martyrdoms of Christians in Domitian’s fifteenth year (96), having been documented by non-Christian writers known to Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. 3.18.4). Melito of Sardis (ca.100-180) speaks of persecutions in Asia in his day, then recounts Nero and Domitian having been “stimulated by certain malicious persons, showed a disposition to slander our faith” (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 4.26.3-9, trans. C. F. Cruse). Tertullian (ca. 155-220) compares Domitian’s cruelty, before he allegedly eased off, to what Nero had done to Christians (Apol. 5.4; cf. Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.20.7-9). Clement of Rome, a contemporary of Domitian, refers to “sudden and repeated misfortunes and calamities that have befallen us” (I Clement 1.1, trans. F. J. A. Hort). Paulus Orosius (ca. 375-420) later reported that Domitian issued edicts for a general and cruel persecution (Hist. adv. pag. 7.10.5). 

In our next post we will consider other evidences relevant to the dating of Revelation.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See K. L. Moore, “Preterism: What’s the Big Deal?” (Part 1), Moore Perspective (3 June 2020), <Link>.

     ² Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars: Nero 6.49, 57; Domitian 14.16.

     ³ Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 5.20.5-6; Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 3.3.4; Tertullian, De praes. haer. 32.2. 

     ⁴ “The first clear, accepted, unambiguous witness to the Neronic date is a one-line superscription in two Syriac versions of the New Testament in the sixth and seventh centuries. If the Neronic date were the original date of Revelation, one would expect a witness to this fact in Asia Minor, where the book of Revelation originated, and a witness much earlier than the sixth century” (M. Hitchcock, “A Defense of the Domitianic Date of the Book of Revelation,” Dissertation: Dallas Theological Seminary [Dec. 2005] 74).

     ⁵ E.g., F. G. Downing, “Pliny’s Prosecution of Christians,” JSNT 34 (1988): 105-123; E. T. Merrill, Essays in Early Christian History 148-73.

     ⁶ See Eusebius (ca. 260-339), Eccl. Hist. 3.18.4; Sulpicius Severus (ca. 363-425), Chronicle 2.31; Paulus Orosius (ca. 375-420), Book 7 of Historiarum lib. Vii, adv. paganos (“History Against the Pagans”). Even though the most definitive information comes from Orosius in the year 417, his history is substantially based on the much earlier works of Justin and Eutropius (see M’Clintock and Strong 7:455-56), and he also had access to other documentation that is no longer extant.

     ⁷ Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars: Domitian 14.16.

     ⁸ B. W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian 160.

     ⁹ Cf. I Clement 5.4-5; Tertullian, De praes. haer. 36.3; Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 2.25.5-8 (citing second-century Dionysius as added confirmation).

     ¹⁰ Cassius Dio, Roman History 67.3, 13, 14; Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.20.7-8; 3.32.1; Jerome, Adv. Jovinianum 1.26; Victorinus, Comm. Apocalypse 10.11.

     ¹¹ Tacitus, Agricola 45; Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars: Domitian 8.10; Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.23.5-19.

     ¹² R. E. Brown, Introduction to the NT 806; B. W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian 169, 182-88; cf. Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars: Domitian 21.

     ¹³ Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars: Domitian 8.15; Cassius Dio, Roman History 67.14.2.

*Prepared for the 2024 FHU Lectures.

Related Posts: When was Revelation Written (Part 2), Introducing the Book of Revelation (Part 1), Ancient Dating Systems

Image credit: https://www.sciencephoto.com/media/1208739/view/emperor-nero-statue- and https://www.thecollector.com/misjudged-roman-emperors/

Congregational Leadership Without Elders

When Scriptural Organization is Lacking

Each congregating community of God’s people is autonomous, designed to be organized with a plurality of qualified men serving as the principal leaders (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-9). They are variously called ἐπισκόποι (“overseers” or “bishops” or “guardians”), πρεσβυτέροι (“elders” or “presbyters”), and ποιμένες (“shepherds” or “pastors”).¹ When a congregation exists without two or more biblically qualified men, it is lacking something that needs to be set in order (Titus 1:5). Until then, how is a local church to function as far as leadership is concerned?

Biblical Examples: Thessalonica and Corinth

From Corinth around winter of 50-51, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy wrote these words to the newly-planted church of the Thessalonians: “But we ask you, brothers, to appreciate those laboring among you and leading you in the Lord, and admonishing you, and to esteem them exceedingly in love, on account of their work. Be at peace among yourselves” (1 Thess. 5:12-13).² Local church leaders are alluded to here, even though the evangelistic efforts of Paul and his coworkers in Thessalonica appear to have been relatively brief and in the not-so-distant past (2:17).³ For recently-converted pagan idolaters (1:9), this hardly affords enough time to have developed the necessary requisites for a qualified eldership. Among other things, an elder (lit. “older one”) must not be a νεόφυτος (1 Tim. 3:6), a “novice” (ASV, NKJV) or “recent convert” (ESV). Even the potential impartation of miraculous gifts does not account for all the necessary character traits, moral attributes, abilities, and life circumstances. 

These leaders in Thessalonica are not referred to as “overseers” or “elders” or “shepherds” in any official sense. In addition to “leading” [προΐστημι] in the Lord and “admonishing” [νουθετέω], two key words describe their leadership: “laboring” [κοπιάω] (v. 12) and “work” [ἔργον] (v. 13). This is comparable to how Paul describes the de facto leadership in Corinth: “working with [συνεργέω] [us] and laboring [κοπιάω]” (1 Cor. 16:16b). The compound συνεργέω is a combination of συν- (“with”) and the verbal ἐργέω (to “work”), emphasizing the activity of work, while κοπιάω (“laboring”) highlights the strenuous toil involved.⁴

Although there is no indication that the Corinth church had an eldership at the time, Paul instructs his readers to “submit [ὑποτάσσω] to such” (1 Cor. 16:16a). While in a sense all Christians are to submit to one another (Eph. 5:21; 1 Pet. 5:5), here we find an example of unilateral submission similar to that expressed in Hebrews 13:17. 

Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus had “devoted themselves to the service of the saints” (1 Cor. 16:15). The word translated “devoted” (“addicted,” KJV) is the Greek ἔταξαν (from τάσσω), meaning to “arrange, put in place .... order, fix, determine, appoint” (BDAG 991; cf. Matt. 28:16; Acts 22:10; Rom. 13:1). It seems that these brethren had actually appointed themselves to this ministry – not that they usurped the wishes of the congregation, but they saw what needed to be done and got to work. Stephanas and his fellow-laborers were not self-appointed leaders but self-appointed workers, and Paul acknowledges this as a quality of true leadership.

No newly started church has qualified elders in the beginning (cf. Acts 14:21-23), but every congregation necessarily has some form of leadership.⁵ This fact, coupled with Timothy’s follow-up efforts in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 3:1-6), allows for congregational leaders in a new work within a reasonably brief period of time.⁶ So, what does leadership look like in a congregation without elders?

Stop-Gap Measures

Anything other than a scripturally organized local church, with a qualified eldership, is less than ideal. In the meantime, with the aim of developing men to serve in this capacity, how are leadership voids to be filled? The Bible does not provide explicit guidelines for this not-so-uncommon scenario (something with which most missionaries are familiar), probably because every situation is different in relation to membership, circumstances, cultural environment, and human resources. There is no one-size-fits-all approach that effectively works for every situation. How leadership is carried out in the absence of elders must therefore be determined and adapted accordingly on a case-by-case basis.

Congregational Meetings

Some have argued that Acts 6:1-5 provides a leadership model involving the whole congregation. The apostles summoned “the great number of the disciples” in Jerusalem and instructed, “you [all] select from among yourselves” qualified men to be in charge of the local benevolence ministry, and “they chose …” However, before we claim a biblical precedent here, we need to appreciate the special circumstances and what this group of disciples actually did and did not do. The apostles were already the recognized leaders, having set the criteria for the selection, and they did the appointing. The congregation simply identified those among them who demonstrated the predetermined qualifications, not for leaders per se but for deacon-like servants. No further decision-making was delegated to the entire body of believers.

While congregational meetings can be helpful, this alone is not a practical substitute for proficient leadership and conducting church business. If every member has an equal say, including the spiritually immature, weak in faith, and biblically ungrounded, poor decisions are likely and discord is inevitable. Not everyone in the body is a leader (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:11-14). 

Men’s Business Meetings

With the biblical pattern of male spiritual leadership understood (1 Tim. 2:8-12),⁷ it is not the case that simply being a biological male automatically qualifies one to be a leader, especially in the Lord’s church. In fact, some men ought not be leaders (e.g., 3 John 9-11). If every male Christian in a local church is invited to participate in the decision-making process, having equal say and an equal vote, is this really a practical and scriptural alternative? It depends. 

What if only a few of the men are spiritually mature and biblically sound but most are spiritually weak, hardly involved, and doctrinally unstable? How would a majority consensus be the best way to conduct the business of the church? Moreover, dominant personalities who speak the loudest and angriest tend to get their way, which surely does not reflect a healthy leadership model. The traditional men’s business meeting may work for some congregations but certainly not for all. 

Leadership Committees

Congregations often have committees to help coordinate various aspects of the local work, and in the absence of elders a leadership committee might be appointed. Depending on multivarious circumstances and variables, a congregation may choose some of the men to serve in this capacity for a limited time, then reevaluate, reappoint, or replace. Whether or not this is workable depends on the caliber and effectiveness of the men who serve and how unified the church is in making these assessments. Another option is to set basic criteria, such as the length of time one has been a Christian, faithfulness in attendance, involvement in the Lord’s work, and proven character.   

Recognizing Congregational Leaders

Before a man is appointed to serve as an elder, he is already exhibiting observable leadership qualities (1 Tim. 3:2 ff.). The “spiritual ones” within a Christian community (exhibiting the fruit of the Spirit) are recognizable (Gal. 5:22–6:1). This no doubt includes those considered “mature,” “strong,” and “faithful” (Rom. 15:1; 1 Cor. 2:6; 2 Tim. 2:2); “the good works [of some] are clearly evident” (1 Tim. 5:25; cf. 4:15). 

The listed qualities of congregational leaders in Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus, relevant to character and observable behavior, serve as a commendable standard for all Christians and a compelling testimony to the world.⁸ When men demonstrate their commitment and faithfulness by their regularity, hard work, doctrinal soundness, integrity, and caring spirit (2 Tim. 2:24-26), their spiritual leadership ought to be recognized (1 Cor. 16:18; cf. 3 John 1-7, 12).

Conclusion

On the mission field, I have worked in situations where congregational meetings and men’s business meetings, with no restrictions on who participated, proved to be powder-keg environments for flaring tempers and disunity. In planting a new congregation, starting off with just my wife and me, decision-making was fairly simple. Eventually, as the church grew, four men reasonably mature in the faith would meet whenever decisions had to be made, and after discussion and prayer, almost always ended up on the same page. Obviously, the larger the group, the more complicated this becomes. I am now privileged to serve in a church with a good eldership, experiencing firsthand the wisdom of God’s design!

Having a biblically organized local church with a qualified eldership ought to be the aim of any group of Christians who are not yet there. Until then, we do the best we can with what we have. May our collective desire be to please the Lord, rely on his word as our guiding light, and stay faithful in the work he has commissioned us to do.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2-6, 23; 20:17, 28; 21:17-19; Eph. 4:11-12; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14; 1 Pet. 5:1-4; cf. Heb. 13:7, 17. The oversight exercised by these men is limited to the respective congregations in which each has membership (1 Pet. 5:2). There is no example in the NT of multiple churches overseen by one person or the same governing body, or of a Christian assembly governed by a lone pastor/ shepherd/ bishop/ overseer/ presbyter/ elder (cf. Acts 14:23; 20:17).

     ² Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ³ Luke records that “for three sabbaths” in Thessalonica Paul reasoned with them from the scriptures (Acts 17:2b). We are not told how many days prior to the first sabbath the team arrived in the city, or how many days after the third sabbath they departed, but it would appear that they were in Thessalonica about a month (give or take). This would explain why there were initially things “lacking in the faith” of these new converts (1 Thess. 3:10). The Thessalonian letters seem to have been composed within close proximity of one another, and 1 Thess. 2:17 indicates this was a reasonably short time after the missionaries had left these new converts. At the time of writing Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy were together, and Timothy had had time to revisit Thessalonica and rejoin his colleagues (1 Thess. 3:1-6; cf. Acts 18:5).

     ⁴ Cf. Luke 5:5; Acts 20:35; 1 Cor. 4:12; 15:10; 2 Tim. 2:6. This word is also used in reference to an elder’s work (1 Tim. 5:17). 

     ⁵ Years ago a congregation in New Zealand consisted of three widow ladies and a single mother. One of the women took the initiative to ensure they had a place to meet, communion was prepared, a preaching video was available, and collected funds were used for good works. There were no elders or other male leaders, but they were not without leadership.

     ⁶ The fact that elders were appointed in every church near the end of Paul and Barnabas’ first missionary campaign (Acts 14:23) is not at variance with scriptural requirements if the length of the campaign is estimated according to biblical data rather than the unfounded guesses of commentators. The first missionary journey, like those that followed, was an extensive church-planting mission involving approx. six years of preaching the gospel, making disciples (incl. households), and establishing autonomous churches in at least three cities where elders were appointed. See K. L. Moore, “The First Missionary Journey,” Moore Perspective (10 Feb. 2013), <Link>. It was about twelve years after the Philippi congregation had been started that reference is made to “overseers and deacons” (Phil. 1:1).

     ⁷ See F. LaGard Smith, Male Spiritual Leadership: Special Study Edition. Nashville, TN: 21st Century Christian, 1998. Also K. L. Moore, “The Bible’s Radical View on Women,” Moore Perspective (6 March 2019), <Link>.

     8 1 Tim. 1:16; 2:1-7; 4:15-16; 5:25; 6:1; also Matt. 5:13-16; Luke 2:52; John 13:35; 17:21; Acts 10:22; Rom. 2:24; 13:12-14; 1 Thess. 4:11-12; Tit. 2:5. 

Related Posts: Qualifications of Elders (Part 1)

Image credit: https://news.sky.com/story/more-sheep-deaths-investigated-after-occult-attacks-in-new-forest-11915358