Paul wrote 1-2 Timothy and Titus to two preachers. For a long time many scholars have referred to these letters as the “pastoral epistles,” which is weird, since Timothy and Titus were evangelists—not pastors. And though they contain the qualifications for pastors (elders or bishops), they are not addressed to those men. They are full of advice to men who preach the gospel. It would be more appropriate to refer to the letters as the Epistles to Evangelists.
This article, however, will discuss one of the qualifications given for a man to be an overseer / pastor / elder. He must be able to “hold fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). This is actually an obligation that all Christians have—to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).
These admonitions to all members and especially for the shepherds of the flock must be taken to heart. Paul warned the elders / overseers / shepherds that after his departure “savage wolves” would come in among them—not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29). If the wolves howled in the first century while apostles like Paul were still around, how is it that so many elderships today are clearly blasé about their being any dangers?
Recently a missionary that this congregation supported for a number of years announced that he was going to be “partnering” with a particular “school.” I thought he would be interested in knowing that this particular institution had some problems. I wrote, providing proof of four areas in which they were far afield from the Scriptures. He did not write back, thanking me for the information. He did not ask any questions for clarification concerning the matter. He did not express any concern about the issues that were raised. He ignored everything and merely thanked us for our previous support. It was as if Acts 20:29, 2 John 9-11, and Jude 3 did not exist.
His overseeing congregation continued to write, saying that they hoped they could count on our support for 2016; so I sent them the same information, and they answered in precisely the same way. They sent a note on official letterhead thanking us for our past support while ignoring the problems of the school in question. How is that possible? The information sent to them was brief; so they did not need to wade through pages of material. None of it was speculation or hearsay; it was documented. Nevertheless, they chose to disregard it. Is it any wonder the wolves are being invited to hold gospel meetings, appear on various lectureships, and have their books and various materials promoted? Where is the vigilance that once existed?
Some in the first century needed to be taught sound doctrine because they were insubordinate, idle talkers, and deceivers—especially those of the circumcision (Titus 1:10). Paul declares that their mouths needed to be stopped. Would anyone get excited about this problem today? They should because these men were subverting whole households, teaching things which ought not to have been taught, and they were doing it for the sake of dishonest gain (Titus 1:11). This is what happens to congregations—sometimes in the absence of elders—but today even in their presence (if they remain silent). God gave shepherds for a reason—to keep the wolves away.
One of the prophets belonging to the wolf faction declared, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons” (Titus 1:12). Anyone reading this verse for the first time may be thinking that Paul is going to say that generalizations such as this one should not be made, but no. Surprisingly, he comments: “This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith” (Titus 1:13).
So what is the explanation for our current flirtation with those of the lupus persuasion (lupus is the Latin word for “wolf”)? Apparently, some who were once sound in the faith have taken on the personality of the Cretans—at least part of it. Many have proven themselves to be lazy. Someone may protest that such a description seems rather harsh. Okay, is there a better word to describe brethren when they refuse to check on certain men? Sometimes, congregations who are challenged for whom they invite to speak respond by saying, “You’re the only one who has registered a complaint.”
That is a form of the logical fallacy known as ad populum, which means that if someone or something is popular, that settles the issue. In this approach, the merits of the case are not considered because everyone agrees or disagrees. Most everyone agreed that Jesus should be crucified. Did that justify what was done? Of course not. The fact that only one individual may question a speaker is irrelevant. The major concern should be, “Does the objection have validity?”
Furthermore, the majority is not always right, as per the above example, as well as other important considerations. Most people reject God’s grace, as well as the salvation that accompanies it (Titus 2:11) and will be lost (Matt. 7:13-14; John 1:10-11). The majority is not a safe guide; the question ought always to be, “What are the facts? What is the truth?” The majority accepts what is popular and current—often without even a cursory examination. Those who are saved have investigated and discovered the truth. So why are not brethren applying this principle to fellowship?
When Johnny Carson hosted the Tonight Show, he would make a statement, such as, “It was so hot in Los Angeles today,” whereupon Ed McMahon (and sometimes the audience would join in) asked, “How hot was it?” Then would come the punchline, “It was so hot that the birds were using potholders to take worms from the ground.” Although the answers are spread out throughout the book of Proverbs, it is almost as if Solomon made the statement, “I saw a man so lazy today.” “How lazy was he?” people want to know. And according to this format, Solomon answers, “I’ll tell you how lazy he was.” He was so lazy that:
1. He did not want to get up out of bed. His favorite saying is, “A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep” (Pr. 6:9-11).
2. He refused to go outside—for safety’s sake. “The slothful man says, ‘There is a lion in the road! A fierce lion is in the streets!’” (Pr. 26:13).
3. He would not work or plow. “The sluggard will not plow because of winter; therefore he will beg during the harvest and have nothing” (Pr. 20:4).
4. He did not take care of his property (Pr. 24:30-34).
5. He would not work. “The desire of the slothful kills him, for his hands refuse to labor” (Pr. 21: 25).
6. He could not do any assigned job well. “As vinegar to the teeth and smoke to the eyes, so is the sluggard to those who send him” (Pr. 10:26).
7. He would not even go out and hunt for food because of the possibility of being slain (Pr. 22: 13).
8. He refused to prepare food to eat. “The slothful man does not roast what he took in hunting, but diligence is man’s precious possession” (Pr. 12:27).
9. Once the food was prepared, he could not even complete the action of eating! “A slothful man buries his hand in the bowl, and will not so much as bring it to his mouth again” (Pr. 19:24).
10. He could only dream of possessing what honest toil would provide. As close to success as this idle soul ever gets is to imagine what it would be like. “The soul of the sluggard desires, and has nothing; but the soul of the diligent shall be made rich” (Pr. 13:4).
No one would want to be in the position of relying upon the lazy man. And while the extent of his slothfulness may provoke laughter at times, his way of life is not funny at all. In fact, he is a dangerous man, when consideration is given to the sins that are associated with him. Consider the following list that the Scriptures provide in order to reveal his true character. Think of these in connection with lazy elders.
1. Laziness is associated with being an excuse maker. If the streets are free from lions, some other problem will arise (Matt. 25:24-25). One can almost hear some elders saying, “We don’t have time to listen to everyone who has an objection to another brother or a particular program that we support.” Really? Why do some take the time to alert other brethren concerning such matters—because they don’t have anything else to do? Why did Jesus warn of the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Matt. 16:12)? Why did Paul warn of savage wolves and point out some false teachers by name (1 Tim. 1:18-20; 2 Tim. 2:16-18)? Why did Peter give a lengthy description of certain false teachers in 2 Peter 2—because he didn’t have anything else to write about?
2. Laziness brings shame upon others. As a son, he is an embarrassment. “He who gathers in the summer is a wise son, but he who sleeps in harvest is a son who causes shame” (Pr. 10:5). Does it glorify God or bring shame to Jesus to ignore warnings against false teachers?
3. Laziness is associated more with talking, not doing: “In all labor there is profit, but idle chatter leads only to poverty” (Pr. 14:23). Believe it or not, some preachers and elderships talk conservative and mouth sentiments about “standing for the truth,” but they are too lazy to practice it.
4. Laziness exercises a bad influence on others. “The way of a slothful man is like a hedge of thorns, but the way of the upright is a highway” (Pr. 15:19). Because some elderships do not consider carefully whom they invite, they allow some to exercise a bad influence on the congregation.
5. Laziness is associated with being a destroyer. “He who is slothful in his work is a brother to him who is a great destroyer” (Pr. 18:9). Yes, without checking after being warned, slothful elders risk the destruction of the flock, which means that some brethren will lose their souls.
There once was an eldership that was so lazy? “How lazy were they?” They were so lazy that:
1. They did not read or study the Scriptures sufficiently to be equipped to deal with those unsound in the faith, which is a fundamental qualification (Titus 1:9).
2. They did not apply the Scriptures they do know to follow Paul’s warning (Acts 20:29).
3. They refused to investigate alleged false teachers or ask other elders to find out the truth of the matter.
4. They neglected to hold men accountable for what they taught and whom they fellowshipped.
5. They are brothers of the destroyer (Ezek. 34:1-10).