I grew up with a pretty consistent exercise going on when our congregation was about to select elders. At some point, someone would pass around a list of “qualifications of elders,” compiled from 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. Any man wanting to be an elder had to meet all the qualifications on that list.

At that time, I knew amazingly little about what the Bible was. Such an exercise made perfect sense to me. It doesn’t anymore. When you’re holding a bound Bible in your hands, it seems logical to grab a verse from here, one from there, and a couple from there to address a subject. But the Bible didn’t exist in that form for years.

In all likelihood, Timothy didn’t have a copy of Titus. And Titus didn’t have a copy of 1 Timothy. If they needed to use both lists to have a complete list of elders’ qualifications, well, they were in trouble.

The lists are so similar that it almost seems a moot point. But let me give you one concrete example: when writing to Timothy, who was working with the church in Ephesus, Paul included the phrase “must not be a recent convert.” That made sense in Ephesus, where the church had been established decades before. But on Crete, where the congregations were fairly new, such a phrase would make no sense. And wasn’t included, when Paul wrote Titus. Different situations. Different needs.

So what do you think? Were we meant to cut and paste these lists together? Is it possible that churches in different places should look for different qualities in their leaders? What’s the best way to consider Paul’s words to these two men?