Paul’s instruction to Titus is that a man must have “believing children” as a qualification to serve in a local work’s eldership.1 He adds that they must not be guilty of loose living or being insubordinate to his authority over them (as a father). At the same time, churches formed with newly converted, first generation christians can have elders appointed in “every” location.6
How Scripture answers "Top 3: Why “believing children” shouldn’t be interpreted as a baptized Christian (Titus 1:6)?"
The statement by Paul to Titus that elders must have “believing children” should not be interpreted to mean the children are actually “baptized Christians” based on these top three scriptural facts:
- “Believing” isn’t necessarily (or even often) synonymous with “Christian”. This is an important, fundamental reality in scripture. Demons believed,2 who obviously were not baptized Christians. King Agrippa also believed,3 but he stopped short of becoming a Christian. From this we understand that “believing children” doesn’t necessarily mean “believing Christian”.
- In Paul’s only other statement about this specific elder qualification,4 it confirms that “faithful” is the more accurate translation for Titus. In his letter to Timothy, Paul doesn’t say “believing” at all. Rather, this context makes the direct, sole point about submissiveness in the household — which is also the crux of Paul’s point to Titus regarding children.1 His children should be “faithful” to him as the head of the household. This also necessarily implies that they are older — still “under his roof” (eg a part of his “household”, but old enough to be their own person and make decisions (similar to the “age of accountability”).
- Requiring that “believing children” must mean — or even could mean — “believing Christian” would also require a rejection of the fundamental principle of an individual’s free moral agency.5 Elevating “believing children” to being baptized Christians would be the only place in Scripture where someone’s disobedience and/or rejection of Christ is held to another’s account.
Answer built on scripture-blocks below
This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
I left you in Crete to put things in order and appoint elders in every town as I directed. They should be above reproach, the husband of one wife and believing children who don’t indulge in excessive sensual pleasure and respect authority. This is because an overseer is God’s steward, therefore he must have an impeccable reputation. He cannot be arrogant, quick-tempered, a drunkard, violent, or looking out for material gain. Instead, he should be hospitable, always looking to do good, self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must be true to the gospel, so that he can teach sound doctrine and oppose those that distort it.
Paul is writing to a young preacher, Titus. After giving these qualifications for a church elder, he continues to give instruction regarding behavior to certain segments/groups within the church: older men (2:2), older women (2:3), younger women (2:4), younger men (2:6) and finally slaves (2:9). With all of these, their behavior is to be exhibited as would “accord with sound doctrine” (1:9, 2:1, 2:10).
Applying Titus 1:5-9 to this question...
Paul lays down three requirements of a man’s children to be qualified for the office of elder: “believers” (in ESV, “faithful” in KJV), who would not be found guilty of loose living (eg “debauchery”) or acting outside of the order of his authority as their parent (eg “insubordination”).
But someone will say, You have faith and I have works. Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!
Someone may say some have faith and others works. Show me your faith apart from your actions, and I will show you my faith by my actions. A belief that God is one is good, but even the demons believe and fear Him.
James has just stated that “faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” (vs 17). He goes further to call it foolish to believe they are separate and uses the example of Abraham offering Isaac and Rahab’s deception (vss 20-26).
Applying James 2:18-19 to this question...
Demons can “believe”.
King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe. And Agrippa said to Paul, In a short time would you persuade me to be a Christian? And Paul said, Whether short or long, I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am—except for these chains.
Paul rhetorically asks King Agrippa if he believes the prophets, and then says that he does. King Agrippa doesn't deny it, but asks Paul if he is quickly trying to get him to be a Christian. Paul answers that whether quickly or over a long time his desire is, but rather that King Agrippa, or anyone else who can hear him, would become like him - a Christian who isn't imprisoned.
Paul has been arrested (21:33) upon his return to Jerusalem after his third missionary journey. He is giving his defense to King Agrippa and recounting his conversion story after appealing to Caesar as a Roman citizen, before being taken to Rome.
Applying Acts 26:27-29 to this question...
Someone who “believes” isn’t necessarily a Christian, but a Christian is someone who also believes.
The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.
It’s a true statement that anyone reaching for the office of elder is a noble pursuit since an elder must be above any charge, a one woman man, serious, self-controlled, respected, gracious, able to teach, not given to wine or violent but gentle, not argumentative or in love with material things. He must manage his household well with honor, keeping his children under control because how else would he know how or be able to care for God’s household? He must not be new to the faith, otherwise he might become arrogant and become condemned. Finally, he must be well-respected in the community so as not to bring shame and be entrapped by the devil.
Paul is writing to a young preacher, Timothy. After giving these qualifications for elders, he also gives the qualifications for deacons in order that “you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.” (3:15)
Applying 1 Timothy 3:1-7 to this question...
Paul charges that the children of a man who would qualify for the office of elder must be “submissive” as a part of his “household”.
The mention of “children” is specifically in reference to “managing his own household”.
The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
The soul (individual) that sins will die. Punishment or guilt for sin is not passed from one generation to the next. Each person's righteousness or wickedness will be their own.
Ezekiel is speaking God’s words and, throughout the entire chapter, illustrates the point of individual responsibility and accountability before God. He further illustrates the point with an example covering three generations – father, son, and grandson. In vs 2, God says their proverb, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge?” will no longer be spoken. Apparently, it was a well-known expression and philosophy during Ezekiel’s time.
Jeremiah 31:29-30, “In those days they shall no longer say: ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. But everyone shall die for his own sin. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge.'”
Applying Ezekiel 18:20 to this question...
The father does not bear the consequences of a child’s sin, and vice versa.
And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
And having appointed elders for the saints in each church with prayer and fasting, they committed them to the Lord in whom they had put their faith.
Paul, with Barnabas, is completing his first missionary journey throughout the region of Galatia (covering chapters 13-14). Having converted many in Derbe (vs 20), “they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch, strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.”
Applying Acts 14:23 to this question...
Elders are appointed in “every” church.
Given the ‘newness’ of the gospel and these converts, it’s not very reasonable to believe these men also unanimously had children who were all old enough/all baptized.
related to 'Top 3: Why “believing children” shouldn’t be interpreted as a baptized Christian (Titus 1:6)?'
lend your own study to the discussion
PUBLIC COMMENT POLICY: While your email is required, it will not be posted publically.
All comments are vetted for potential spam before being published, but will not be restricted otherwise.
