Pastor-Teacher Series: 1 Timothy 3:3-5-Six More Qualifications Required for the Man with the Gift of Pastor-Teacher to Assume the Office of Overseer

1 Timothy 3:3 not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. (NASB95)

“Not addicted to wine” denies any idea of a man with the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher being promoted to the office of overseer if he is an alcoholic.

This expression is the first negative characteristic that appears in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, which means that this characteristic must not be manifested in the life of the man with the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher if he is to assume the office of overseer.

It is also one of two characteristics that address the pastor’s relationship to things.

The other is being free from the love of money, which is listed at the end of verse 3.

“Not pugnacious” denies any idea of a man with the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher being promoted to the office of overseer if he is violent.

He cannot be promoted to the office of overseer if he is a violent person.

This expression emphasizes that a pastor cannot succumb to anger and expresses that anger with violence.

1 Timothy 6:3-5 and 2 Timothy 2:23-24 indicate that those pastors in Ephesus who were teaching false doctrine and attempting to be teachers of the Law rather than the gospel were involved in angry disputes and abusive language.

There is a close connection with the first prohibition in verse 3 in that excessive alcohol consumption often leads to violent behavior.

“Gentle” denotes one who is magnanimous in their behavior since the word speaks of a wise man who remains meek in the face of insults and of a judge who is lenient in judgment, and the king who is kind in his rule.

It means magnanimous because the word speaks of someone who is considerate, thoughtful attitude in legal relationships and did not demand his own rights at all costs.

“Peaceable” indicates that the overseer must not be a contentious person.

1 Timothy 6:3-5 and 2 Timothy 2:22-26 indicate that the pastors who in Ephesus who were teaching false doctrine as a result of falling victim to the Judaizers’ teaching were often involved with quarrels and arguments and were contentious.

“Free from the love of money” indicates that the pastor can never be in the ministry for the money or because it pays well.

It also denotes that he is to serve in the ministry regardless even if he is not making a great salary.

Some don’t serve because the ministry does not pay well.

The pastor must be known for the love of his work for its own sake and not for the material wealth that his work can provide him.

This term indicates that the man with the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher must possess an attitude toward material wealth that is one of healthy detachment but of course not irresponsibility.

It refers to the fact that the man who aspires to the office of pastor-teacher must not be involved in always making “deals” outside of the church since these activities erode his character and hinder his ministry.

Also, many times pastors are woefully underpaid and at times at poverty level, thus there is a great temptation to attempt to supplement one’s salary by outside means or endeavors which take the pastor away from his duties of studying and teaching and prayer.

The sin of loving money is thus not relegated to the rich but the poor who don’t have it.

Paul warns of the consequences of loving money in 1 Timothy 6:7-11.

Peter also warns pastors about sordid gain in 1 Peter 5:2.

1 Timothy 3:3 Not an alcoholic, not violent but rather magnanimous, not contentious, not a lover of money. (Lecturer’s translation)

1 Timothy 3:4 He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity. (NASB95)

“He must be one who manages his own household well” is used with reference to the pastor’s authority over his own household and conveys a leadership style characterized by loving care.

It expresses the idea that the man’s children submit to his leadership out of respect for him and not out of fear.

The pastor’s wife and children must love, respect and follow his leadership and his children should have respect for authority in every area of life.

It also conveys the idea that the man who aspires to the office of overseer must be governing his own household according to the standards of God’s Word and specifically with regards to operating in God’s love by the power of the Spirit.

“Keeping his children under control” refers to the children of the overseer submitting to his parental authority.

“With all dignity” speaks of the overseer’s conduct as worthy of honor, reverence and respect by the Christian community in which he lives as a result of caring for his children and disciplining them to be submissive to him.

1 Timothy 3:4 It is, as an eternal spiritual truth absolutely imperative the overseer be managing his own household correctly for his own benefit by possessing submissive children with absolute dignity. (Lecturer’s translation)

The apostle Paul in verse 5 poses a rhetorical question that is a strong argument for the qualification mentioned by him in verse 4.

This verse is parenthetical since it does not depend on the δεῖ εἶναι that appears in verse 2 but intrinsically it is not parenthetical (Knight, page 162).

1 Timothy 3:5 (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?) (NASB95)

“But if a man does not know how to manage his own household” teaches that if the man with the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher desires to be promoted to the office of overseer in a local assembly, then he must manage it correctly according to the Word of God and he is to do this by possessing submissive children with absolute dignity.

In verse 5, the first class condition presents the assumption of the truth for the sake of argument and in the apodosis there is a rhetorical question that demands a negative answer.

In the protasis, Paul states for the sake of argument a hypothetical situation where a man does not know how to manage his own household.

Then, in the apodosis, he asks rhetorically how can that man take care of the church of God?

The answer is he cannot.

The contrast is between managing one’s own household correctly according to God’s Word by possessing submissive children with all dignity due to disciplining them to act properly with that of a man who does not know how to manage his own household.

The conditional particle ei introduces a protasis of a first class condition that indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument.

The idea behind the first class condition is not “since” but rather, “if-and let us assume that it is true for the sake of argument that, then...”

This would encourage Paul’s audience to respond and come to the conclusion of the apodosis since they already agreed with him on the protasis.

Therefore, Paul is employing the first class condition as a tool of persuasion with his audience.

Paul’s audience would respond to his protasis.

Here the protasis is “if and let assume that it is true for the sake argument that someone does not know how to manage his own household.”

The apodosis is “(then) how will he care for God’s church?”

The audience would respond that there is absolutely no possibility of this man being able to care for God’s church.

The basic relation that the protasis has to the apodosis is “cause and effect.”

If a man does not know how to manage his own household is the cause and the effect is that he will not be able to care for God’s church.

1 Timothy 3:5 However, if, and let us assume that it is true for the sake of argument that someone has absolutely no idea how to manage his own household then, how will he himself care for God’s church? (Lecturer’s translation)