Survey of the Letters of Paul:  1 Timothy 5:19

Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.

It is to be noted what kind of elders are to be especially honoured and rewarded. It is those who toil in preaching and teaching. The elder whose service consisted only in words and discussion and argument is not in question here. Those whom the Church really honoured were the ones who worked to edify and build it up by preaching the truth and by educating the young and the new converts in the Christian way.

(2) It was Jewish law that no one should be condemned on the evidence of a single witness: ‘A single witness shall not suffice to convict a person of any crime or wrongdoing in connection with any offence that may be committed. Only on the evidence of two or three witnesses shall a charge be sustained’ (Deuteronomy 19:15). The Mishnah, the codified Rabbinic law, in describing the process of trial, says: ‘The second witness was likewise brought in and examined. If the testimony of the two was found to agree, the case for the defence was opened.’ If a charge was supported by the evidence of only one witness, it was held that there was no case to answer.

Quoted verse:
Deuteronomy 19:15 but I will read verses 15 through 21.  These scriptures are linked clearly to the instructions in Matthew 18 or the "offending brother resolution instructions."  The God-given concepts are equal.

Deuteronomy 19:15-21
15 One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
16 If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;
17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;
18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
21 And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

In later times, church regulations laid it down that the two witnesses must be Christian [Spirit-holding firstfruits], for it would have been easy for a malicious non-Christian to make up a false charge against a Christian elder in order to discredit him, and through him to discredit the Church. In the early days, the Church authorities did not hesitate to apply discipline; and Theodore of Mopseuestia, one of the early fathers who lived in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, points out how necessary this regulation was, because the elders were always liable to be disliked and were especially open to malicious attack ‘due to the retaliation by some who had been rebuked by them for sin’. Those who had been disciplined might well seek to get their own back by maliciously charging an elder with some irregularity or some sin.

The fact remains that this would be a happier world – and the Church, too, would be happier – if people would realize that it is nothing less than sin to spread stories of whose truth they are not sure. Irresponsible, slanderous and malicious talk does infinite damage and causes infinite heartbreak, and such talk will not go unpunished by God.

(3) Those who persist in sin are to be publicly rebuked [meaning within the congregation of firstfruits]. That public rebuke had a double value. It sobered sinners into a consideration of their ways, and it made others take care that they did not involve themselves in a similar humiliation. The threat of publicity is no bad thing if it keeps people on the right path, even through fear. A wise leader will know the time to keep things quiet and the time for public rebuke. But, whatever happens, the Church must never give the impression that it is condoning sin.

(4) Timothy is urged to administer his office without favoritism or prejudice. The biblical scholar B. S. Easton writes: ‘The well-being of every community depends on impartial discipline.’ Nothing does more harm than when some people are treated as if they could do no wrong and others as if they could do no right. Justice is a universal virtue, and the Church must surely never fall below the impartial standards which even the world demands.

(5) Timothy is warned not to be too hasty ‘in laying hands on any man’. That may mean one of two things.

(a) It may mean that he is not to be too quick in laying hands on any man to ordain him to office in the Church. Before people gain promotion in business, or in teaching, or in the army or the navy or the air force, they must prove that they deserve it. No one should ever start at the top. This is doubly important in the Church, for those who are raised to high office and then fail in it bring dishonour, not only on themselves, but also on the Church. In a critical world, the Church cannot be too careful in regard to the kind of men and women whom it chooses as its leaders.

(b) In the early Church, it was the custom to lay hands on a sinner who repented, who had given proof of repentance and who had returned to the fold of the Church. It is laid down: ‘As each sinner repents, and shows the fruits of repentance, lay hands on him, while all pray for him.’ The early Church historian Eusebius tells us that it was the ancient custom that repentant sinners should be received back with the laying on of hands and with prayer. If that is the meaning here, it will be a warning to Timothy not to be too quick to receive back anyone who has brought disgrace on the Church, to wait until the individual has shown genuine [repentance and invoking of Godly principles-fruit] and a true determination to live according to that declaration of repentance. That is not for a moment to say that such a person is to be held at arm’s length and treated with suspicion, but rather to be treated with all sympathy and with all help and guidance in the period of probation. But it is to say that membership of the Church is never to be treated lightly, and that people must show their [repentance] for the past and their determination for the future before they are received not into the fellowship of the Church but into its membership. The fellowship of the Church exists to help such people redeem themselves, but its membership is for those who have truly pledged their lives to Christ. ~Barclay Commentary

Now to the commentaries.

This verse is in three phrases:

1] Against an elder.
2] Receive not an accusation.
3] But before two or three witnesses.

1] Against an elder
Against an elder — a presbyter of the Church. ~Jamieson, Fausset, Brown

Against an elder - The word “elder” here seems to be used in the sense in which it is in the previous verse as relating to “office,” and not in the sense of an aged man. ~Barnes Notes

Against an elder - Be very cautious of receiving evil reports against those whose business it is to preach to others, and correct their vices. Do not consider an elder as guilty of any alleged crime, unless it be proved by two or three witnesses. This the law of Moses required in respect to all. Among the Romans, a plebeian might be condemned on the deposition of one credible witness; but it required two to convict a senator. The reason of this difference is evident: those whose business it is to correct others will usually have many enemies; great caution, therefore, should be used in admitting accusations against such persons. ~Adam Clarke

2] Receive not an accusation.
Against an elder receive not an accusation - A charge of any crime: ~John Gill

Receive not — “entertain not” [Alford]. ~Jamieson, Fausset, Brown

Receive not an accusation - He was not to regard such a charge as well founded unless sustained by two or three witnesses. It is clear from this, that Paul supposed that Timothy would be called on to hear charges against others who were in the ministerial office, and to express his judgment on such cases. There is no reason, however, to suppose that he meant that he should hear them alone, or as a “bishop,” for this direction does not make the supposition improper that others would be associated with him. ~Barnes Notes


3] But before two or three witnesses.
But before two or three witnesses - Margin, “under.” The meaning is, unless supported by the testimony of two or three persons. He was not to regard an accusation against a presbyter as proved, if there was but one witness in the case, however positive he might be in his testimony. The reasons for this direction were probably such as these:

(1) This was the requirement of the Jewish law in all cases, which had thus settled a principle which the apostle seems to have regarded as important, if not obligatory, under the Christian dispensation.

(2) there would be much greater reason to apprehend that one person might be deceived in the matter on which he bore witness, or might do it from malignant motives, or might be bribed to give false testimony, than that two or three would give such testimony; and the arrangement, therefore, furnished important security for the innocent.

(3) there might be reason to apprehend that evil-minded persons might be disposed to bring charges against the ministers of the gospel or other officers of the church, and it was important, therefore, that their rights should be guarded with anxious care. The ministers of religion often give offence to wicked people by their rebukes of sin; wicked people would rejoice to see an accusation against them sustained; the cause of religion would be liable to suffer much when its ministers were condemned as guilty of gross offences, and it is right, therefore, that the evidence in the case should be as free as possible from all suspicion that it is caused by malignity, by hatred of religion, or by conspiracy, or by a desire to see religion disgraced.

(4) the character of a minister of the gospel is of value, not only to himself and family, as is the case with that of other people, but is of special value to the church, and to the cause of religion. It is the property of the church. The interests of religion depend much on it, and it should not be wantonly assailed; and every precaution should be adopted that Christianity should not be deprived of the advantage which may be derived in its favor from the piety, experience, and talents of its public defenders. At the same time, however, the wicked, though in the ministry, should not be screened from the punishment which they deserve. The apostle gave no injunction to attempt to cover up their faults, or to save them from a fair trial. He only demanded such security as the nature of the case required, that the trial should be fair. If a minister of the gospel has been proved to be guilty of crime, the honor of religion, as well as simple justice, requires that he shall be punished as he deserves. He sins against great light; he prostitutes a holy office, and makes use of the very reputation which his office gives him, that he may betray the confidence of others; and such a man should not escape. ~Barnes Notes

But before two or three witnesses - good sufficient ones, who are capable of well attesting the fact: a charge against a pastor of a church is not to be easily received; it should not be listened to privately, unless it clearly appears by such a number of witnesses; nor should it be brought publicly before the church, until it is privately and previously proved, by a sufficient number of credible witnesses, that it is really fact. The sense is, not that judgment shall not pass against him but by such a number of witnesses, or that the evidence upon his trial shall consist of such a number; for this is no other than what ought to be in the case of a private member, and of every man, according to Deuteronomy 19:15. But the sense is, that the affair of an elder shall not be put upon a trial, much less sentence pass, until it has been privately proved against him, by proper testimonies, beyond all exception; only in such a case, should a church admit a charge against its elder. The reason of this rule is, because of his high office and the honour of the church, which is concerned in his, as well as of religion; for it carries in it some degree of scandal for such a person to be charged, even though he may be cleared; as also because of his many enemies, who through envy, malice, and the instigation of Satan, would be continually pestering the church with charges, could they be easily admitted. ~John Gill.

Quoted verse:
Deuteronomy 19:15
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

But before two or three witnesses — A judicial conviction was not permitted in Deuteronomy 17:6; Deuteronomy 19:15, except on the testimony of at least two or three witnesses. But Timothy’s entertaining an accusation against anyone is a different case, where the object was not judicially to punish, but to admonish: here he might ordinarily entertain it without the need of two or three witnesses; but not in the case of an elder, since the more earnest an elder was to convince gainsayers (Titus 1:9), the more exposed would he be to vexatious and false accusations. How important then was it that Timothy should not, without strong testimony, entertain a charge against presbyters, who should, in order to be efficient, be “blameless” imply that Timothy had the power of judging in the Church. Doubtless he would not condemn any save on the testimony of two or three witnesses, but in ordinary cases he would cite them, as the law of Moses also allowed, though there were only one witness. But in the case of elders, he would require two or three witnesses before even citing them; for their character for innocence stands higher, and they are exposed to envy and calumny (kăl'əm-nē) [a false statement maliciously made to injure another's reputation] more than others “Receive” does not, as Alford thinks, include both citation and conviction, but means only the former.

Quoted verses:
Deuteronomy 17:5-6
5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

Deuteronomy 19:15 is quoted above.

Titus 1:9 ...elders convincing the gainsayers
Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. ~~Jamieson, Fausset, Brown

Now from the Matthew Henry:

Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. - Here is the scripture-method of proceeding against an elder, when accused of any crime. Observe, 1. There must be an accusation; it must not be a flying uncertain report, but an accusation, containing a certain charge, must be drawn up. Further, He is not to be proceeded against by way of enquiry; this is according to the modern practice of the inquisition, which draws up articles for men to purge themselves of such crimes, or else to accuse themselves; but, according to the advice of Paul, there must be an accusation brought against an elder. 2. This accusation is not to be received unless supported by two or three credible witnesses; and the accusation must be received before them, that is, the accused must have the accusers face to face, because the reputation of a minister is, in a particular manner, a tender thing; and therefore, before any thing be done in the least to blemish that reputation, great care should be taken that the thing alleged against him be well proved, that he be not reproached upon an uncertain surmise. ~Matthew Henry

All of this is similar to the Matthew 18 Process that you can read about here.

back to main page