The “Elder” in the Old and New Testaments

By David A. Mappes

[David Mappes is a staff pastor at Bethany Bible Church and professor of Bible at Southwestern College, both in Phoenix, Arizona.]

[This is article one in a four-part series, “Studies on the Role of the New Testament Elder.”]

For centuries churchmen and theologians have battled over the issue of church government in hope of supporting the kind of church order they advocate. Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Baptists, for example, hold widely differing views on church government. To some degree their differences stem from the way they understand the biblical term “elder.” Therefore a study of how the term is used in the Scriptures is an important step in understanding church government.

The “Elder” in the Old Testament

The Septuagint translators chose the terms πρεσβύτερος and cognates to represent several Hebrew words in the Old Testament.[1] Of these words זָן appears over 180 times.[2] The other terms are בְּכוֹר (“firstborn”), גָּדֹל (“great”), יָשׁ (“aged, old”), רִאשׁוֹן (“former, first, chief”), יבָת (“aged, old, hoary head”), and כַּבִּיר (“great, mighty, much”). The verb זָן means “to be old, to become old,”[3] and the noun זָקָן is “chin, beard.”[4] The terms are used to describe individuals who are advanced in age (Gen 15:15; 24:1; Josh 13:1; cf. 1 Sam 17:12), during which time the prospects of marriage (Ruth 1:12) and childbirth (Gen 18:12–13; 2 Kings 4:14) have passed. Gray hair appears (1 Sam 12:2) and there is failing of sight (Gen 27:1) and mobility (1 Kings 1:1, 15).

Hebrew society divided people into young and old (Gen 19:4; Ps 37:25). The word זָן and its cognate forms describe an individual who has entered old age or who is simply older than another.[5] The term also describes a leader or group of leaders who perform various functions.[6] The establishing of elders, as a distinct group of leaders, most likely originated in the patriarchal tribal settings of the Semitic peoples, where the family was the basic social unit.[7] Hoppe argues that elders are a remnant of the tribal, nomadic pattern of government.[8] Hillstrom postulates that the elders’ superior experience and knowledge qualified them for a place of leadership in the community or family.[9] “As parents wield authority in a family, so elders wield authority in the life of the clan, tribe, or local community.”[10] “The leadership of the elders was bound up with a social system based upon tribes, sub-tribal units and on a patriarchal way of life.”[11] While elders (especially city elders) did not function in precisely the same way when Israel became a monarchy, they continued to play an important role. The existence of elders throughout the history of Israel proves the importance and resiliency of this institution. Whether זָן is used of an older person or an institutional leader depends on the context in which it is used.[12]

Only a third of the more than 180 occurrences of זָן in the Old Testament refer strictly to age. Most often the noun refers to a member of a clearly defined social community.[13] “In all but a few instances, the elders in the OT appear as a distinct social grade or collegiate body with political and religious functions, and not merely as ‘old men.’ “[14] Early in the Pentateuch זָן describes this type of ruling body. While in Egypt, Moses spoke to the elders of Israel (Exod 3:16). Later the elders of Israel saw Moses strike the rock (17:5–6), witnessed the covenant ceremony (24:1, 9), and received the Spirit at the tabernacle (Num 11:24–25). The elders served as representatives of the people to witness the disaster that overtook Dathan and Abiram (Num 16:25). Elders continued to be influential through the Exile (Jer 29:1; Ezek 8:1; 14:1; 20:1), in the postexilic community (Ezra 10:8, 14), as well as in the synagogues. While the elders were a distinct social group, diversity existed between the types of elders. There were elders of an area (Judg 11:5–11), elders of a tribe (Deut 31:28), elders of the priests (2 Kings 19:2; Jer 19:1), elders of a house (i.e., palace, Gen 50:7; 2 Sam 12:17), elders of the people and of the city.[15] Elders served as national, political, and religious representatives and leaders. They also functioned as a kind of municipal council whose duties included acting as judges (Deut 19:12), conducting inquests (21:2) and settling matrimonial disputes (22:15; 25:7).[16] The elders maintained their important role even after Israel changed from a nomadic society to a state-monarchical society.[17] At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of different towns (1 Sam 30:26–31), Jezebel wrote to the elders of Jezreel (1 Kings 21:8), and Jehu addressed the elders of Samaria (2 Kings 10:1).

Elders were common in other nations of the ancient Near East.[18] “In ancient days the institution of Elders [sic] was not peculiar to the Jewish people, and the word elder did not suggest…purely ecclesiastical and religious functions.”[19] The term “elders” is used of leaders among the Egyptians (Gen 50:7), the Moabites and Midianites (Num 22:4, 7), the Gibeonites (Josh 9:11), and the Babylonians[20] in the time of Hammurabi, and the Hittites.[21] Heltzer cites several Ugaritic texts from the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries that discuss the role of elders. While he acknowledges the paucity of information on elders in Ugarit, several texts, he notes, do discuss the council or city elders who preserved a kind of legal oral tradition.[22] Willis indicates there were no essential differences between the characteristics of elders in Israel and in other nations.[23] Hence the concept of eldership seems to have been widespread.

The most extensive description of an elder in the Old Testament is in the Book of Job. Both young and old showed Job respect and deference (Job 29:7–11). He successfully managed the affairs of his large family (31:31), and he was not greedy or arrogant because of his wealth (31:24–28). He provided for people who visited the city (31:32), and his reputation was without blemish in that he showed exemplary behavior in helping the needy (29:11–17; 31:13, 16–23).[24] Job was an upright elder, and his ethics and morality were above question (31:1–12, 33–34).[25] “The attribution of Job’s ‘elder-ly’ character to God’s blessing betrays the religious ideology undergirding an Israelite’s view of elders. The characteristics which naturally led one to serve as an elder in Israel were thought to result from a proper relationship between that individual and God.”26

Premonarchical elders were sought as repositories of their peoples’ religious history (Deut 32:7) and were expected to make and enforce decisions that required knowledge of the Mosaic Law. Some of the cases the elders adjudicated were unintentional or intentional murder (Deut 19:1–13), proper sacrificial provision for a city if a murder occurred (21:1–9), punishment of a rebellious son (21:18–21), and determination and conviction of sexual impurity (22:13–21).[27]

From this brief discussion it can be seen that desired moral qualities were generally associated with eldership in Israel, though these qualities may not have been codified. Willis cites several common qualities required of city elders in various Semitic communities, including wisdom, hospitality, financial prosperity (resulting from wise managerial skills), generosity, fairness, persuasive abilities to mediate disputes, extensive knowledge of history, and religio-ethical uprightness.[28] In the Old Testament the most distinctive characteristic of an elder was wisdom (Job 12:20; 32:9; Ps 119:100).[29]

The “Elder” in the New Testament

The New Testament Use of “Elder”

The principal New Testament word for “elder” is πρεσβύτερος.[30] Πρεσβύτερος and its cognate forms appear sixty-six times in the New Testament.[31] Πρεσβύτερος refers to age,[32] either an old person (man or woman; e.g., John 8:9; Acts 2:17; 1 Tim 5:1–2) or one who is older than another (e.g., Luke 15:25). Πρεσβύτερος also refers to forefathers (Matt 15:2; Mark 7:3, 5; Heb 11:2), city officials (Luke 7:3), and officials in both Judaism (Matt 15:2; Acts 6:12) and the church (Acts 11:30; 14:23; Titus 1:5).[33] Πρεσβύτερος refers to synagogue officials, members of the Sanhedrin (Matt 16:21; 26:3; Luke 22:66), and church officials (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 20:17; 1 Tim 5:17; Titus 1:5).[34]

Josephus used πρεσβύτεροι of old people, envoys, elders,[35] and ambassadors and deputies.[36] He used the word of the elderly[37] and more frequently of a ruling body. In one of the Essene sects the elders were a ruling court that evaluated candidates for readmittance who were previously removed for violation of the strict Essene code.[38] The community members as well as the guilty members were required to honor and obey this court. Consisting of no more than one hundred members, this elder court held to a stricter lifestyle than the other members of the sect.[39]

According to Philo πρεσβύτερος referred to the aged,[40] the eldest of a group,[41] ambassadors,[42] the elders of Israel,[43] the head or chief of a house,[44] and the ancients.[45]

When referring to a local church, πρεσβύτερος in the New Testament functions as a title for its spiritual leaders. There were elders in the churches of Jerusalem (Acts 11:30; 15:2–6, 22; 16:4), Galatia (Acts 14:23), Ephesus (Acts 20:17; 1 Tim 5:17), Crete (Titus 1:5), Asia Minor (1 Pet 5:1), and in Jewish Christian assemblies everywhere (James 5:14). In Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22; and 16:4 these men were grouped with the apostles, though they were distinct from them. In Acts 20:17, 28 and Titus 1:5, 7 the elders are the same as the ἐπίσκοποι.[46]

When referring to an office or official in the church, the concept of old age was not necessarily included in the word “elder.”[47] As Hillstrom writes, “Advanced age was not an absolute requirement for church eldership. The New Testament does not stress the age of the elder.”[48]

Both Hebrew and Greek literature used the term “πρεσβύτερος“ to also mean an older person, men of old, ancestors, traditions of the ancestors, or witness of events in the past. In addition to verifying the task of guarding the tradition, this imputed a kind of “wisdom of the ages” to the one who held the title. In fact, the elder was one who personified the discerning ability of an old man as well as ancient and sacred traditions. Consequently, the term “elder” also embodied deep respect.[49]

In summary πρεσβύτερος can refer to an old individual or one who is simply older than another. When πρεσβύτερος was used of an institutional leader, old age was not strictly required. However, the wisdom normally personified by an older man is understood as a basic character quality for functioning properly as an institutional leader.

The Relationship of New Testament Eldership to Synagogue Elders

Acts 11:30 refers to elders in the early church in Jerusalem, but does not define or describe them. Lightfoot and others argue that this absence of explanation is because of the counterpart of elders in synagogues, whereas the deacons in Acts 6 are explained at length because they had no synagogal counterpart.[50] Edersheim argues that church elders had functions almost identical to those of synagogue elders.[51] On the other hand Deissmann holds that the use of πρεσβύτερος in the church had no Jewish relationship and instead depicted civil community leaders.[52]

While Lightfoot’s comments about the origin of the diaconate in Acts 6:1–6 may be simplistic, his argument that church eldership was based on eldership in Jewish synagogues is valid.[53] As Davies explains, “The office of elder in the Christian Church was evidently suggested by the office of elder among the Jews, and was invested with similar authority.”[54] Rayburn observes,

A simple demonstration of the significance of the Old Testament materials for the determination of questions surrounding the nature and number of church offices is furnished by the fact that “elder” is an Old Testament title and office and is introduced without comment in the narrative of the apostolic church (Acts 11:30), strongly suggesting that the office being there referred to was simply the Old Testament office carried over into the new order.[55]

While most scholars agree that the church borrowed the concept of πρεσβύτερος from the Jewish synagogue,[56] they disagree on the similarities between the Jewish synagogal eldership and church eldership.[57] Some scholars, such as Rayburn, argue for a complete analogous relationship between the church and the synagogue, while others argue for a relationship in name only. The present writer concludes that while the church is distinct from the synagogue, there are enough similarities between them to substantiate the synagogal influence on the early church.[58]

The synagogue was the most central and enduring Jewish organization, though its origin is shrouded in mystery.[59] As a local center, it served the civil and religious needs of the local population throughout Palestine and the Diaspora. Most scholars say the synagogue originated during the Babylonian exile.[60] This is based on the assumption that the loss of the temple in 586 B.C. left a religious void that had to be filled while the Jews were in exile. Scholars theorize that the institution of the synagogue was firmly established after the exiles returned to Judea and built meeting places under Ezra’s leadership (during which time elders were indispensable).[61] During the time of Christ the synagogue (συναγωγή) referred primarily to a place of assembly (or the assembly itself)[62] used by Jewish communities for public prayer, reading of Scripture, and instruction,[63] as well as civil matters.

The New Testament indicates several officials functioned in the synagogue.[64] The synagogue ruler (ἀρχισυνάγωγος), mentioned nine times in the New Testament, was responsible for the conduct of the worship service (Acts 13:15) and the administration of various responsibilities such as determining who would read and pray, and he sought to ensure that nothing inappropriate took place in the synagogue (Luke 13:14).[65] =Αρχισυνάγωγος appears both in the singular (Luke 8:49; 13:14; Acts 18:8) and the plural (Mark 5:22; Acts 13:15). Another synagogue official, the attendant (ὑπηρέτς, Luke 4:20), was responsible for the care of the scrolls during synagogue worship. The elders themselves functioned as a collegium to oversee the well-being of the Jewish communities. They had community status socially and politically,[66] functioned with significant authority (Matt 21:23; 26:47), and were members of the high council (Mark 15:1; Luke 22:66; Acts 4:5). The New Testament gives no information on qualifications for synagogal eldership. The Mishnah, however, implies that the elders were to exhibit gentleness, humility, a knowledge of the Scriptures (which included wisdom and moral discernment), and absence of pride.[67]

Because of the paucity of information regarding synagogue elders, it is difficult to determine the extent of similarity that existed between them and the church elders. However, the following items become apparent: the plurality of the eldership, the responsibility of the elders for the well-being of the people; the authority of the elders within the community, the desired moral qualities of the elders, and the elders’ responsibility to communicate and take care of the Scriptures.

Differences between synagogue elders and church elders include the following: emphasis on the church elders’ teaching role, lists of significant moral requirements for eldership, the lack of New Testament analogy to the ἀρχισυνάγωγος, and the lack of civil or political power.[68]

The transcultural concept of eldership and differences between the New Testament elders and the synagogue leaders has led some scholars to argue that church eldership was instituted completely without synagogal influence.[69] These arguments might be plausible if the church had no connections with the synagogues, but such is not the case. In summary, while the synagogal eldership did influence church eldership, the influence was of a general nature.

Notes

1. Edwin Hatch and Henry A. Redpath, Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (including the Apocryphal Books) (Oxford: Clarendon, 1897; reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), s.v. “πρεσβύτερος.”
2. In the Septuagint זָן is rendered 127 times by πρεσβύτερος, 23 times by πρεσβύτης, and 26 times by γερουσία (mainly in Deuteronomy).
3. Conrad says זָן derives from the noun זָקָן (“beard”). “In its basic meaning, therefore, it refers to a man with a beard, originally, perhaps an adult in general” (J. Conrad, “זָן,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 4 [1980]: 122).
4. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1907), 278.
5. Jack P. Lewis, “זָן” in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 1:574.
6. Leslie Hoppe, “Elders and Deuteronomy: A Proposal,” Église et Théologie 14 (1983): 262-64.
7. Ibid., 264. Noth agrees when he writes, “The office of the elder probably had its roots and real home in the clan” (Martin Noth, The History of Israel, 2d ed. [New York: Harper & Row, 1960], 108).
8. Hoppe, “Elders and Deuteronomy: A Proposal,” 264–65. Also see Abraham Malamat, “Kingship and Council in Israel and Sumer: A Parallel,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 22 (October 1963): 247-53.
9. Leonard H. Hillstrom, “The New Testament Teaching on Church Elders” (Th.D. diss., Grace Theological Seminary, 1980), 9–10.
10. G. Henton Davies, “Elder in the OT,” in Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 2:72.
11. Hanoch Reviv, “Elders and Saviors,” Oriens Antiquus 16 (1977): 201-4. “The institution of elders at both the local and national levels reflects the tribal nature of Israelite society” (Timothy Mark Willis, “Elders in Pre-Exilic Israelite Society” [Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1990], 131).
12. “The latter meaning of ‘elders’ is used to describe people who belong to the leadership institution, regardless of age, although, there is generally a link between ‘elders’ and the older age group” (Hanoch Reviv, The Elders in Ancient Israel: A Study of a Biblical Institution, trans. Luci Plitmann [Jerusalem: Magnes, 1989], 7).
13. Lewis, “זָן,” 574.
14. McKenzie, “The Elders in the Old Testament,” Biblica 40 (1959): 523.
15. For a complete discussion of the various functions of these elders see Moshe Weinfeld, “Elder,” in Encyclopedia Judaica, 6:578–79.
16. John Rea, “Elder,” in Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, 2 vols. (Chicago: Moody, 1975), 1:509.
17. Willis, “Elders in Pre-Exilic Israelite Society,” 15–50.
18. Conrad, “זָן,” 126–27.
19. J. A. Selbie, “Elder (in OT),” in A Dictionary of the Bible, ed. James Hastings, 2 vols. (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1902), 1:676 (italics his).
20. McKenzie, “The Elders in the Old Testament,” 530. M. A. Dandamayev discusses the point that local eldership in Israel and in Neo-Babylonia were similar (“The Neo-Babylonian Elders,” in Societies and Languages of the Ancient Near East: Studies in Honor of I. M. Dakonoff, trans. Mark McHugh [Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1982], 38).
21. Roland de Vaux writes that elders functioned as the representatives and defenders of their people from Mari in the eighteenth century B.C. to the Sargon dynasty (Ancient Israel, 2 vols. [New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961], 1:138).
22. Michael Heltzer, The Rural Community in Ancient Ugarit (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1976), 79. Cf. Hanoch Reviv, “On Urban Representative Institutions and Self-Government in Syria-Palestine in the Second Half of the Second Millennium B.C.,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 12 (1969): 283-97.
23. Willis, “Elders in Pre-Exilic Israelite Society,” 158.
24. By contrast the ironic account in Judges 19:15–21 illustrates the worthlessness of the Benjamite elders. An old man who was an alien (not a city elder) acted more “elderly” than the city elders, since he received the travelers into his home. The whole account substantiates the wickedness of the Benjamites (Willis, “Elders in Pre-Exilic Israelite Society,” 166). Lot was most likely a city elder. He is held in high regard because he sought to protect his guests and because of his attitude toward sin (Gen 19:1–2). It should be noted that Lot is considered a righteous man (18:23–33). Peter referred to Lot’s righteousness: “For by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day with their lawless deeds” (2 Pet 2:7–8).
25. Willis, “Elders in Pre-Exilic Israelite Society,” 165.
26. Ibid.
27. Willis provides a complete discussion on the premonarchical function of elders (ibid., 170–98).
28. Ibid., 158-62. “Elders assume responsibility which they do because they possess qualities deemed necessary for the effective fulfillment of those responsibilities. There are no elections. The men become elders simply because it is natural for them to do so. The fact that a plurality of elders exists in a community demonstrates the ever-present potential for segmentation or even absolute division. At the same time, a plurality symbolizes the community’s desire to avoid absolute division” (ibid., 162). Many of these qualities (almost qualifications) are presented in list form, when describing the functions and character of local town judges (וֹשׁפְטִים) and officers (וֹשׁטְרִים). Moses wrote, “You shall appoint for yourselves judges and officers in all your towns which the Lord your God is giving you, according to your tribes, and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. You shall not distort justice; you shall not be partial, and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and perverts the words of the righteous. Justice and only justice, you shall pursue, that you may live and possess the land which the Lord your God is giving you” (Deut 16:18–20). The relationship and distinct identity between the city elder, officer, and town judges is vague. “No clear distinction between the agents of the legislative, judicial, and executive power appears in the OT” (McKenzie, “The Elders in the Old Testament,” 526). Later McKenzie postulates that the elders were a larger group from which officials were chosen (ibid., 528). Davies also argues for a close identification between these functionaries (Davies, “Elder in the OT,” 73). If town elders, town judges, and town officers were closely linked, as suggested, then perhaps one could understand (by implication) the list of qualities in Deuteronomy 16:18–20 as referring to elders. Manley, McKenzie, and Reviv provide brief discussions of the relationship between town elders, judges, and officers, though they do not directly address issues of their origin, qualifications, or dependence on each other (G. T. Manley, “Officers in the Old Testament,” Evangelical Quarterly 29 [1957]: 149-56; Donald A. McKenzie, “The Judge of Israel,” Vetus Testamentum 17 [1967]: 118-21; and Reviv, “Elders and Saviors,” 201–4).
29. McKenzie, “The Elders in the Old Testament,” 527. Principles of wisdom inspired and governed the behavior of leaders. “The wise king is not greedy or susceptible to bribes (Prov 28:16; 29:4; cf. 15:27; 17:8, 23; 18:16)…. He is kind and fair to the poor (Prov 14:31; 29:13–14; 31:8–9)…. One who is wise will be upright (Prov 2:7; 14:2, 9; 15:8; 16:17; 21:8), sober (Prov 23:20–21, 29–35), orderly (Prov 22:29; 23:10–11; 24:27; 25:6–7, 15; 27:23; 29:7, 11), and a person of self-control (Prov 11:12–13; 12:16, 23; 13:3; 14:29; 17:27–28; 25:28; 29:11, 20 ” (Theodore Hamilton Coleman, “Interpretation of the Pastoral Epistles and Some Selected Old Testament Wisdom Literature” [Ph.D. diss., Duke University, 1977], 147–48). Coleman correctly suggests that an analysis of the influence of sapiential themes on various aspects of leadership may be a means of determining moral qualities associated with leadership. It may also provide insight into the lists of vices and virtues in the Pastoral Epistles.
30. Etymologically the word is the comparative form of πρεσβύς, which most scholars define as “old.” The origin of the meaning of πρεσβύς is not clear, however. Georg Curtius defines πρεσβύς as “one who is before” (Principles of Greek Etymology, trans. Augustus S. Wilken and Edwin B. England [London: Murray, 1875], 472; cf. Marvin E. Mayer, “An Exegetical Study on the New Testament Elder” [Th.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1970], 6–7).
31. Πρεσβεία is translated “delegation” in its only two occurrences in the New Testament (Luke 14:32; 19:14). Πρεσβυτέριον occurs three times in the New Testament, referring to a council of elders, whether in the church or Judaism (Luke 22:66; Acts 22:5; 1 Tim 4:14). Πρεσβύτιδας (“older women”) appears only once (Titus 2:3), while πρεσβύτης (“older man”) is used three times (Luke 1:18; Titus 2:2; Phile 9).
32. Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2d ed., rev. F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 706.
33. Ibid.
34. Adolf Deissmann shows that πρεσβύτερος was a technical term for members of a communal office in Egypt, as well as priests of pagan temples (Bible Studies: Contributions Chiefly from Papyri and Inscriptions to the History of the Language, the Literature, and the Religion of Hellenistic Judaism and Primitive Christianity, trans. Alexander Grieve [Edinburgh: Clark, 1901], 52–56, 233. James Hope Moulton and George Milligan cite many examples of the use of πρεσβύτερος in these contexts (The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament [1930; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974], 535).
35. Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, ed., A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus (Leiden: Brill, 1979), s.v. “πρέσβυς.”
36. Josephus, The Jewish Wars 1:45, 128, 378, 661; 2:80, 342; 4:218, 256.
37. Ibid., 1:517.
38. Ibid., 2:143, 146.
39. Ibid., 2:145–49.
40. Philo, On Joseph 223.
41. Ibid., 13, 16, 173, 217.
42. Philo, On the Life of Moses 1:258, 268, 281.
43. Philo, On Flight and Finding 186.
44. Philo, On the Life of Moses 2:59, 99; idem, On the Change of Name 15, 94.
45. Philo, On Special Laws 31.
46. Mayer gives an extensive discussion of πρεσβύτερος and associated terms (“An Exegetical Study on the New Testament Elder,” 21–25).
47. In several instances πρεσβύτερος is associated with moral virtue apart from the concept of age. Philo wrote, “But not only do the oracles attest his possession of the queen of virtues, faith in the existent, but he is also the first whom they speak of as an elder, though those who lived before him tripled or many times multiplied his years. Yet in none of them do we hear that he was held worthy of the title and rightly so, for the true elder is shown as such not by his length of days but by a laudable and perfect life…he who is enamored of sound sense and wisdom and faith in God may be justly called elder” (Philo, On Abraham 270-71). Elsewhere Philo wrote that “Moses in his laws gives the name of the ‘younger’ to those who are advanced in years, and the name of ‘elders’ on the other hand to those who have not yet reached the old age, for he does not consider whether the years of men are many or few, or whether a period of time is short or long, but he looks to the faculties of the soul whether its movements are good or ill” (On Sobriety 7). Ignatius wrote “not to take advantage of the youth of your bishop, but to show him all respect in accordance with the power of God the Father, just as I know that also your holy presbyters have not presumed on his apparent youthfulness” (Ignatius, 1 Magnesians 3:1–2, in The Epistles of Ignatius: Text for Students, No. 10, ed. T. W. Craft [London: S.P.C.K., 1919], 25–26). Also see Ignatius, “To the Magnesians,” in The Epistles of St. Clement of Rome and St. Ignatius of Antioch, trans. James A. Kleist [Westminster, MD: Newman Bookshop, 1946], 125–29). If πρεσβύτερος inherently meant “old age” when used of an official, then Philo could not have used this term to describe younger elders (not yet old). Further it can be argued that while Timothy was most likely in his early thirties, he was not considered old. While it cannot be proved that Timothy was an official elder of the church at Ephesus, it can be demonstrated that he was “eldering” or at least functioning as an apostolic representative in the sense that he was not in violation of the qualifications of an elder and thus served as an example to those who were elders. Hence if age were critical to the lexical meaning of πρεσβύτερος when depicting an office or official, then Timothy would have been in violation of the very office he sought to model to others. “The injunction, several times repeated, that elders who were not at all elderly should still command respect, testifies in another way that it was an office intended, not for time-servers, but for the exemplary, no matter what their age [1 Tim 4:12]” (James Tunstead Burtchaell, From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices in the Earliest Christian Communities [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992], 295).
48. Hillstrom, “The New Testament Teaching on Church Elders,” 44.
49. David A. Steele, Images of Leadership and Authority for the Church: Biblical Principles and Secular Models (New York: University Press of America, 1986), 29.
50. J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians: A Revised Text with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations (London: Macmillan, 1913; reprint, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956), 191–94. Norbie echoes Lightfoot’s idea of church eldership evolving from synagogal eldership (Donald L. Norbie, New Testament Church Organization: Defined and Compared with the Major Ecclesiastical Systems [Chicago: Letters of Interest, 1955], 31–33).
51. Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 2 vols. (New York: E. R. Herrick, 1886; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 1:437–38.
52. Deissmann, Bible Studies, 156.
53. The origin of the office of the diaconate is not clear, though the office did exist in the early church, as Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8–10 demonstrate. Acts 6:1–6 may supply background information as to the origin of the diaconate, since the verb διακονεῖν in 6:2 describes the function of those individuals chosen and commissioned by the apostles to a specific task. These seven men commissioned by the apostles may have served as kind of “a protodiaconate,” which latter blossomed into a permanent and established office. However, the generic nature of the verb διακονεῖν prevents a dogmatic connection between the seven men chosen to serve in Acts 6:1–6 and the established diaconate in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8–10.
54. John D. Davies, “Elder,” in Westminster Dictionary of the Bible (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1944), 256.
55. Robert S. Rayburn, “Three Offices: Minister, Elder, Deacon,” Covenant Seminary Review 2 (1986): 108.
56. The following scholars believe church eldership was derived in some fashion from the concept of synagogue elders: W. D. Davies, Christian Origins and Judaism (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 216–17; Ed Glasscock, “The Biblical Concept of Elder,” Bibliotheca Sacra 144 (January-March 1987): 67-78; Adolf Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, trans. and ed. James Moffatt, 2 vols. (New York: Putnam’s Sons, 1908), 1:431–32; B. W. Powers, “Patterns of New Testament Ministry-Elders,” Churchman 87 (Autumn 1973): 166-81; Charles C. Ryrie, “The Pauline Doctrine of the Church,” Bibliotheca Sacra 115 (January-March 1958): 65; M. H. Shepherd Jr., “Elder in the NT,” in Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 2:73–74; and Nigel Turner, Christian Words (Nashville: Nelson, 1981), 125–26.
57. Since the Jews at the time of Christ believed that the synagogue and its disciplines were very ancient, dating from the time of Moses, and since they believed that the Sanhedrin began at the time of Moses, it is assumed that the synagogal elders would be expected to embody the desired moral qualities of Old Testament elders. Also since the Jews were given the right to conduct their own civil affairs, it would seem likely that the elders of a particular locality would also be elders within the synagogue (S. Safrai and M. Stern, eds., The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political, Historical, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions, 2 vols. [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987], 2:908–13; and Anthony J. Saldarini, “Sanhedrin,” in Anchor Bible Dictionary, 5:976–77). A. R. C. Leaney writes, “Consistently with their earlier history the elders eventually formed with other elements an aristocratic senate or γερουσία, which later developed into the Sanhedrin familiar to us in the NT (called πρεσβυτέριον in Luke 22:66 and Acts 22:5)” (The Rule of Qumran and Its Meaning: Introduction, Translation and Commentary [London: SCM, 1966], 186). Schürer also postulates this idea. “In purely Jewish districts, the elders of the locality will also have been elders of the synagogue” (Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 175 B.C.-A.D. 35, rev. and ed. Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar, and Matthew Black, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1973–87], 2:429). Similarly James Edward Gwatkin writes, “The authority of elders in religious affairs was probably analogous to the civil authority in places where Jews predominated” (“Early Church and Synagogue Officers” [Th.D. diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1899], 53). A. T. Pilgreen also agrees with this combined function of civil and religious eldership (“The Influence of the Jewish Synagogue upon the Organization of the Apostolic Church” [Ph.D. diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1936], 20–21).
58. Some of the similarities include the plurality of elders, the free spontaneity and participation in synagogue worship (Matt 4:23; Mark 1:21–28; 3:1–6; 6:2–4; Luke 4:15, 16–30; 6:6; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20), and the main elements of the service (praise, prayer, and proclamation). Such elements are particularly noted in the Pastoral Epistles. These elements include public prayers (1 Tim 2:8), Scripture reading (4:13), and proclamation (4:13; 2 Tim 4:2). Also see discussion of these issues by Robert A. Vogel (“An Analysis of Preaching with Emphasis on the Synagogue Pattern and Its Influence in the Early Church” [Th.M. thesis, Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1979], 95; Arthur L. Farstad (“Historical and Exegetical Consideration of New Testament Church Meetings” [Th.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1972], 41–48); Robert Banks (Paul’s Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980]; and Sylvan D. Schwartzman (“The Jewish Institutions of the Synagogue and Temple in the Synoptic Gospels” [Ph.D. diss., Vanderbilt University, 1952], 45–58).
59. Eldership survived the monarchical reigns, the Exile, and the second temple period. The elders were directly associated with the initial assemblies that were the seeds of the synagogue, and they remained involved within the synagogue. Even after the reconstruction of Jerusalem, in which the elders played a prominent part (Ezra 5:9; 6:7; 10:8, 14), they maintained influence well into the Maccabean period (Judith 4:8; 11:14; 15:8; 1 Macc 7:33; 11:23; 12:6, 35; 13:36; 2 Macc 1:10; 4:44; 11:27).
60. Joseph Gutmann, “The Origin of the Synagogue: The Current State of Research,” in The Synagogue: Studies in Origins, Archaeology and Architecture, ed. Harry M. Orlinsky (New York: KTAV, 1975), 72–76; and Hyam Maccoby, Judaism in the First Century, ed. Peter Baelz and Jean Holm, Issues in Religious Studies (London: Sheldon, 1989), 59.
61. Gutmann, “The Origin of the Synagogue,” 72–73.
62. Ibid., 74-76.
63. Safrai and Stern, The Jewish People in the First Century; and George Foot Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of Tannaim, 2 vols. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1944), 2:284–89.
64. The number of officials varied according to the location and size of the synagogues. Three other common officials not mentioned in the New Testament are the collector of alms, the messenger (who led in public prayer), and the herald of Shema (who recited the Shema) (Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 175 B.C.-A.D. 35, 2:427–39; and Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era, 1:289–91).
65. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 175 B.C.-A.D. 35, 2:427–39; and Bernadette J. Brotten, Women Leaders in the Ancient Synagogue: Inscriptional Evidence and Background Issues, Brown Judaic Studies (Chico, CA: Scholars, 1982), 5–33. The Mishnah refers to this person as the rosh hakeneset (Yoma 7:1; Sotah 7:7–8). Some scholars believe the ἀρχισυνάγωγος simply led the congregation in worship as a master of ceremonies (Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, 175 B.C.-A.D. 35, 2:427–39; Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era, 1:289), while others argue that the ἀρχισυνάγωγος was also an executive of the local community acting under the direct oversight of the elders (Burtchaell, From Synagogue to Church, 243-44).
66. Little information exists to explain how one became an elder in the first century. Burtchaell postulates that the stature of one’s family seems to have counted more than a career of shrewd judgment. As previously stated, Philo stated that age alone did not qualify one for eldership (Philo, On the Migration of Abraham 201; On Sobriety 7; On Abraham 270-74). Burtchaell extrapolates from Philo’s statements that Philo was making an apology for the system of eldership, since elders were predicated on the social position of one’s family (Burtchaell, From Synagogue to Church, 231). However, there is no evidence that Philo’s statement should be taken as an apology.
67. Sanhedrin, 92a.
68. Not only did the church lack this political power of enforcement, but it did not have authority to exercise enforcement outside its own spiritual community (1 Cor 5:12–13). While the church was to provide its own judiciary of sorts to adjudicate cases within its membership, this influence was much less than in the synagogal system (6:1–8).
69. David W. Miller, “The Uniqueness of New Testament Church Eldership,” Grace Theological Seminary 6 (1985): 315-27. Karl von Weizsacher was a strong proponent of the complete disassociation of the New Testament church office in relationship to synagogal or Jewish office (The Apostolic Age of the Christian Church, trans. James Millar, 3d ed., 2 vols. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1907), 2:315, 326.