1 Timothy 5:17 reads, “Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.” The word translated “especially” (malista) is the superlative of a word translated “very much” (mala). The word, malista may also be translated “most of all” or “particularly.” In modern Greek, it may translate into “of course,” “quite,” or “very”.[1] The word is used twelve times in the New Testament, three of which are found in 1 Timothy (4:10, 5:8, and 5:17).
1 Timothy 4:10 speaks of Jesus being the Savior of all men, especially believers. Surely, he is not saying that all will be saved and believers in a special way. If he sends all to heaven, how can it be especially true for believers? The typical response is that in one sense, Jesus is the Savior of all men because salvation is provided to all. It is explained, therefore, that He is the savior of all, potentially. Yet, salvation is limited to those who believe. This is about as good as one can do to provide an explanation that harmonizes with all the Bible teaches on the subject. To be consistent with the meaning of the word would force a person to conclude that God saves believers more than others.
However, a deeper study of the way malista is used reveals that Paul may have been modifying his broad statement that God is the Savior of all by telling us precisely who will be saved. With this understanding, malista carries the idea of “in other words.” Understanding 1 Tim.5:17 in this light would have Paul saying, “Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, I mean those who labor in preaching and teaching.” In light of the intensive labor involved in the shepherd’s work, Paul is emphasizing their worthiness. T.C. Skeat, in discussing 2 Timothy 4:13, believes that Paul is “defining or particularizing” the word translated “books” into an equivalent English idiom that would be translated, “the books – I mean the parchment notebooks.”[2] He also compares Titus 1:10 and 1 Timothy 4:10 where he again sees malista as introducing a definition. He offers several examples among Greek letters where this kind of writing style would be common in a letter that was dictated. During dictation, after a word is used that is too broad or vague or requires some qualification, there was an addition begun with the Greek malista to define, clarify, or correct any possible misunderstanding. Moule, Gasque, and Martin hold the same view.
If this is accurate, it would certainly shed some light on Galatians 6:10, and now 1 Timothy 5:17. Seeing that all elders must be “apt to teach,” and comparing it to other passages that emphasize their role as instructors, we hope that the reader will see that their essential work is that of teaching and there are no non-teaching elders.
Interestingly, these letters written to an unusual and unique age where gifted men continued the same work as apostles, prophets, and evangelists are applied to leaders of local churches. Few have the knowledge or skill in the word and justify their inability because they are the “non-teaching elders who oversee that whatever is done is performed correctly. First, this view fails to account for the fact that these were given for the same purpose as the other gifts, namely, teaching. Second, first-century elders taught and oversaw individual souls, not church organizations that do not require the specific task of teaching. Third, the implication of the word “teaching” in local churches requires the gift of public speaking. Consequently, a professional hireling is brought in to do the teaching. This makes it easy for today’s elders to excuse themselves. The practice of the majority in churches would hardly consider anything but a preacher standing behind the pulpit. For the majority, the very thought of not having a “preacher” is a step in the wrong direction. We have come to expect a polished speaker to occupy the work of preaching to captivate the attention of the audience. The places of assembly are arranged in theatre-like style complete with a stage as if performance was expected. Such expectations would exclude many modern-day elders from teaching in public assemblies. A modern-day elder once told me, “If you want a church to grow, build a nice accommodating church building, a great speaker, and well organized and equipped Bible classes, and they will come.” In many places, the complaint is that if elders were to teach instead of the preacher, the church would lose some members. One would never expect such a complaint in the first century because there were neither church buildings, local church elders over church organizations, nor professional hirelings to preach in one.
Further, if we should have all of this, we certainly cannot duplicate the spiritual gifts that accompanied such teaching. Any problem, therefore, that we may experience today is a creation of human wisdom. Therefore, any effort to fix or correct problems relating to elders and local churches is likened to repairs and modifications done on a poor and failing foundation. Taken together, there is an atrocious twisting of scriptures to validate a practice of an unauthorized rule, over an unauthorized organization, for a different purpose and time.
Furthermore, shepherding as a daily way of life is replaced with appointed days of the week for feeding that is commonplace in church institutions. First, church elders have their sheep located in some coral-like building or feed-lot to get what they can when poured in a trough. This job is hired out to another who has some oratory skills in delivering a speech. Here is a clear conceptual difference between the local church organization with its work and the ekklesia whose work is seen through the living sacrifices of saints. By contrast, the shepherd is with his sheep in the pastures and by the waters, while keeping vigil for any dangers through the day and night. In other words, the day to day needs of sheep becomes a lifestyle with the Shepherd. Rather than giving ten minutes to the memory of the “chief Shepherd” in the eating of the Lord’s Supper, forty-five minutes to an hour for the preacher to “stand before us” and preach, New Testament shepherds led throughout every day. The difference may compare to the difference between the loving care of a father’s daily guidance, and the attendance at a schoolroom, except for the amount of time children are at school. The Israelite father was responsible for teaching his child when “sitting in the house, and when walking by the way, and when lying down, and when rising up” (Deut. 6:7). The law is on the hand, and as frontlets between the eyes, and on the posts of the house and gates (vs. 8-9). Included in the difference is the relationship between the shepherd and sheep. The voices of hirelings, who are skilled in the art of speech, are heard among the sheep, but they do not know him. If pulpit preachers received a dollar for every time they were commended for stepping on the toes of the church membership, they would all be rich. “Stepping on toes” describes a moment’s recognition of guilt, but effects no lasting change. The application from the daily guidance and examples are missing. The shepherd, on the other hand, knows his sheep by name and they know his voice and follow him.
[1] Moulton & Milligan The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, 387.
[2] Skeat, T.C., 174.