The Appearance Game
Let’s be honest: We’ve all played it.
You know what I’m talking about—the Sunday morning rush where you threaten your children into good behavior just long enough to get through the church door. The carefully curated social media presence that shows happy family moments but never the argument that happened five minutes before the photo. The way we describe our marriages in glowing terms to other men while avoiding any mention of the conflict we’re not addressing.
We measure ourselves—and others—by how things look rather than how things are.
But here’s what’s interesting: There’s a more subtle version of this trap, and it’s the one that disqualifies good men from leadership and elevates the wrong ones.
We evaluate a man’s qualification for leadership by how perfectly his family acts.
Two Fathers, Two Failures, Two Verdicts
Let me show you why measuring leadership by family outcomes is wrong by examining two devastating biblical examples—with radically different verdicts from God.
Case 1: Eli
1 Samuel 2 and 3 tell the story of Eli, the high priest and judge over Israel. His sons, Hophni and Phinehas, were priests serving in the tabernacle. They were also corrupt, immoral, and blasphemous.
Read 1 Samuel 2:12-17, 22-25, and 3:11-14.
What we observe:
- Eli’s sons are described as “worthless men” who “did not know the Lord” (2:12)
- They committed serious sins: stealing from offerings, sexual immorality at the tabernacle entrance (2:12-17, 22)
- Eli knew about their behavior (2:22-23)
- Eli confronted them verbally (2:23-25)
- But here’s the key: Eli “did not restrain them” (3:13)
God’s verdict: Judgment on Eli’s house. His sons would die. His family line would be cut off from the priesthood.
You see, Eli knew. Eli spoke. But Eli didn’t act. He didn’t remove them from office. He didn’t enforce consequences. His rebuke was weak: “Why do you do such things?” (2:23).
Eli’s failure wasn’t that his sons were sinful. His failure was that he abdicated leadership responsibility.
Case 2: Samuel
Now here’s where it gets really interesting. Read 1 Samuel 8:1-3.
When Samuel became old, he made his sons judges over Israel. The name of his firstborn son was Joel, and the name of his second, Abijah; they were judges in Beersheba. Yet his sons did not walk in his ways but turned aside after gain. They took bribes and perverted justice.
Wait. Samuel—the faithful prophet, the man who anointed kings, who served God his entire life—his sons were corrupt too?
Yes. Joel and Abijah “did not walk in his ways.” They were greedy, took bribes, and perverted justice. Sound familiar? Different sins than Hophni and Phinehas, but corrupt sons nonetheless.
God’s verdict: Silence. No condemnation of Samuel. No judgment on his house. No removal from ministry.
In fact, when the elders of Israel came to Samuel requesting a king because his sons were unfit (8:4-5), God told Samuel: “Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them” (8:7).
Did you catch that? “They have not rejected you.”
God didn’t say, “Samuel, your sons’ corruption disqualifies you.” He said the people were rejecting God, not Samuel.
Samuel continued in faithful ministry. He anointed Saul. He anointed David. He served as prophet until his death. His corrupt sons didn’t end his qualification.
The Critical Difference
Two faithful leaders. Both with corrupt sons. Only one condemned.
Why?
Eli: Knew about the sin, spoke against it weakly, but failed to restrain his sons. Passive. Abdicated responsibility. Let them continue in positions of spiritual authority despite their corruption.
Samuel: His sons were corrupt, but there’s no indication Samuel failed to address it. He appointed them as judges (perhaps hoping they’d rise to the responsibility), but when they proved unworthy, the issue became succession planning—not Samuel’s disqualification.
The difference wasn’t the outcome. Both had rebellious sons.
The difference was the father’s faithful leadership response.
The Principle:
Here’s what I want you to see: Faithful parenting doesn’t guarantee perfect children, but faithful leadership is still required and recognized.
Think about this: You cannot control whether your children embrace the faith. You cannot guarantee they’ll make wise choices. You cannot force their hearts toward God.
But you are responsible for:
- Teaching them truth
- Establishing boundaries
- Enforcing appropriate consequences
- Modeling godliness
- Restraining obvious sin
- Maintaining engagement, not withdrawal
Where We Get This Wrong
Wrong Evaluation: “His teenage son is rebellious, therefore he cannot lead.”
Right Evaluation: “How is he responding to his son’s rebellion? Is he engaging wisely? Seeking counsel? Maintaining appropriate boundaries? Or is he passive, absent, or controlling?”
Wrong Evaluation: “Their family looks perfect on Sunday, so he’d make a great elder.”
Right Evaluation: “What’s his reputation over time for how he leads his household? What do people who know him well observe about his character?”
Wrong Evaluation: “He has young children who are well-behaved, so he’s qualified.”
Right Evaluation: “How does he manage them? What’s his pattern when they disobey? Is his home characterized by godly discipline and grace?”
The Dangerous Implications
When we measure leadership qualification by family outcomes:
- We disqualify faithful men facing difficult circumstances (child with special needs, prodigal teenager, spouse’s health crisis)
- We elevate men who are good at managing appearances (controlling behavior through fear, creating performance-based home, hiding problems)
- We create incentive for deception (can’t admit struggles, can’t ask for help, must maintain image)
- We miss the point entirely (character matters more than circumstances)
Your Challenge This Week
Examine your own heart:
Where are you managing appearances rather than leading faithfully?
Are you more concerned with how your family looks to others, or how you’re actually shepherding them?
What issues are you avoiding because addressing them might reveal imperfection?
Specific action:
Identify one area where you’ve been passive in household leadership—something you know needs to be addressed but you’ve been avoiding.
This week, take one faithful step to address it. Not to guarantee a perfect outcome. But because faithful leadership is your responsibility, regardless of results.
Remember:
Here’s the point: The standard is being known for striving toward godly solutions, not achieving controlled outcomes.
Your family’s struggles don’t disqualify you. Your unfaithful response to those struggles does.
Eli and Samuel both had corrupt sons. Only Eli was condemned—because his failure wasn’t his sons’ sin, but his abdication of leadership responsibility.
Samuel’s sons didn’t walk in his ways. Yet God said the people hadn’t rejected Samuel.
Your children’s choices don’t define your qualification. Your faithful leadership does.