In the latest issue of Christian History, Issue 80 (Vol. XXII, No.4, p. 42) is an article about one of the greatest writers of the early Christian Church, Augustine.  It does mention a critical error, however:
"Unfortunately, Augustine's Greek was not very good either, and he struggled with the biblical text.  Sometimes he got it wrong, as in Romans 5:12, which he translated to say that the human race sinned in Adam, and not merely because of Adam.  Augustine took the verse to mean that every human being was spiritually present in Adam himself, and therefore directly responsible for Adam's sin, whereas the apostle Paul was merely saying that, as a result of Adam's sin, death came into the world and we have all suffered as a result.  The mistranslation had an unfortunate effect on Augustine's doctrine of original sin, making it harsher than it should have been and leading some modern critics to reject it altogether.  It just goes to show how important a correct understanding of the text can be!"

Translating it right is of utmost importance.

There is always a danger of 'word studies' that critics bring up, that is, the tendency for one to get the text to say whatever the interpreter wants the text to say.  It is the Amplified Bible approach, in which you pick your favorite translation.

Understanding context and having great resources for its content are absolutely necessary to find the correct meaning. 

I must add a disclaimer.  I am not a Greek scholar.  I took Greek for three years in Graduate school while going to seminary.  I can read my Greek New Testament and use Greek words regularly in sermons and sermon preparation.  But I know enough to know that I am not a Greek scholar. I would not be asked to be part of a translation team for a new translation of the Bible.  But I also have learned what the best resources are, what are the "definitive" word studies and lexicons.

Let us consider several points:
I. Word Study
Much attention has of late been given to the meaning of the phrase tekna echon pista
found in Titus 1:6.  What does the word pistos mean, how should it be translated.?  We have what English translations have done:  NIV -- "whose children believe", NAS -- "having children who believe", KJV -- "Having faithful children", RSV -- "and his children are believers", ESV -- "and his children are believers".

The two most acknowledged lexicons and word studies are TDNT (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament) and the Lexicon -- A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament by Bauer, Ardnt, Gingrich.  How do they deal with this verse?

The TDNT makes a specific reference to Titus 1:6 under its definition of pistos: "The adj. πιστός simply means "Christian,"311 the noun "the Christian."312  (TDNT v.6 p. 214). Please note that the relevant footnote "311" in the TDNT includes the following scriptures which are cited to support its rendering of pistos as a "Believing" or a "Christian": 1st Corinthians 7:14 (...and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband); 1st Timothy 6:2 (Those who have believers as their masters must not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but must serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved.); Titus 1:6 (namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion.); Acts 16:1 (...Timothy, the son of a  Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek). (Scriptures cited from the NAS).

The BDAG likewise employs Titus 1:6 to support its assertion that pistos must at times be taken to mean believing: "The absolute πιστός also means believing (in Christ) , a (Christian) believer and is used both as adjective and as substantive Ac 16:1; 2 Cor 6:15; 1 Ti 4:10; 5:16; 6:2a, b; Tit 1:6" (BDAG p. 670).

Both the TDNT and the BDAG consider "trustworthy" as one aspect of meaning for pistos. However, neither references Titus 1:6 to either support this meaning. They only reference it with "believing."

There is commentary interpretation:
The Pastoral Epistles by J.N.D. Kelly:  "Their children, too, provide a useful test of their suitability.  They should be believers sharing their father's faith in Christ, and in their daily conduct they should not be chargeable with loose living or insubordinate.  For the latter quality, cf. I Tim. iii.4; a man who cannot bring up his children to be well behaved must lack the combination of sympathy and firmness called for in an elder." (Black's NT Commentary v. 14, p. 231).
The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Vol. 11, Titus: D. Edmond Hiebert, p. 430:
"Since older men would be chosen for leadership, it is assumed that the elder would have children.  The latter must "believe," share their father's Christian faith.  The original (tekna pista) may mean "faithful children" but "believing children," is intended here, referring to those who are old enough to have made a personal decision.  If they remained pagans, it would throw into question the father's ability to lead others to the faith.  As professed believers, the children must personally fulfill the ethical requirements of the Christian life.  They must not be chargeable as being "wild," self-indulgent and wasteful in their manner of life, like the prodigal son, nor "disobedient," refusing to bow to parental authority.  An elder's inability to train and govern his children would place in question his ability to train and govern the church."

In my humble opinion, shared with the most acknowledged scholars, is that "believing" is the correct translation.  No committee translating the New Testament would be motivated by their church doctrines to translate pistos as "believing" since that is usually not the standard of most denominations.  We must make sure our doctrines are not driven by our desire to have a looser definition of elders to meet a shortage of qualified men in our churches.  The solution is not to change the text but to work at raising up faithful men with faithful families.  Does believing really mean believing? Does elder really mean older?  There are plain sense and scholarly answers.

In the New Testament, elders were appointed early in Acts 14:23.  I believe the early elderships were drawn from the conversions of Jewish believers who had godly families and faithful children.  As the synagogue doors closed to the church, there was no longer the availability of these mature Jewish brothers.  Thus there are fewer examples of elders being appointed quickly as the Church moved into the Gentile world with a hostile synagogue shutting the door for these kinds of conversions. 

II. Crucial Qualification -- Believing Children
Why did Paul regard this as an important qualification?  Paul's statement in I Timothy 3:4-5 gives us the reason: "He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?)"

God wants proven men to hold this most important office.  Men who have proven that they can keep their marriage together, and men who have raised their children to faith.  There is no greater responsibility we feel as parents than the stewardship to bring our children to faith.  The church's ongoing counseling needs mostly revolve around marriage and family.  If a man does not have a good marriage and faithful children, his credibility is damaged.  How often do we dismiss or disregard singles and marrieds-without-children as counselors, because they do not understand marriage and parenting?

I have the privilege of working with my fellow elder Clayton.  He is a good teacher, hospitable, respectable, etc.  But the overwhelming power of his life comes from the faithfulness of his family - his supportive wife and his believing, faithful children.

III. Possible Objections
What are some objections to the thoughts given above?

1. If believing children are essential, then why does Titus mention it while I Timothy 3 does not?  If it is not mentioned in both, is it binding? There may be many possible explanations.  Perhaps there was already an existing eldership in Ephesus (there was in the past, at least, Acts 20) which was naturally assumed, in comparison to the churches in Crete which needed more specific instruction.  Deacons weren't mentioned in Titus, but that does not mean they are not biblical.  There are so many biblical doctrines that require us to put passages together to get the full definition or requirements.  Salvation is like that.  Some passages mention faith and make no mention of baptism or repentance.  Does that mean they aren't required?  We hear that argument often when someone disagrees about baptism: "If it is important, why isn't it mentioned in John 3:16?"  The answer is that God expects us to put passages together that talk of salvation including all the essential elements of the process of salvation.  It is equally true of the eldership.

2. What does it mean to have "children that must obey him with proper respect," I Tim. 3:4 and "A man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient," Titus 1:6?  I am the father of three daughters.  Are they respectful, obedient, and not wild?  If they do not respect my faith, if they do not obey the Gospel, I do not consider myself respected nor obeyed.  Do they sit at home and not come to church?  Do they leave the home and have nothing to do with God?  Do they believe yet are open to the charge of being wild?  There are plenty of children who leave the church and God yet they still believe it is the truth.  Paul says they must believe and live out the life for the message to have credibility.  We all know we may fool people at church while being totally different at home.  The true self comes out at home.  That is where our lives are revealed in a deeper way.  I am not saying that if someone's child leaves God, it is because they were hypocrites at home.  Nevertheless, there is a connection to our home life and the faithfulness of our children. 

                   
Lastly, in conclusion, there is the experience of living under elders whose families were not faithful.  As a young campus minister serving under an eldership, there were many battles about the expectations of discipleship.  It would almost always divide amongst the elders along the lines of whose children were faithful versus those whose children were not.  Those, whose children were not faithful, were regularly unable to take strong stands on any issue of discipleship.  Those, whose children were faithful, were able to maintain high expectations for discipleship.  So the impact of what this verse means can have major implications both for the future of the church and for our definition of the Christian life. 

Just as Augustine's translation of one word affected so many, so the translation of this word has greater implications for the future of Christ's church.  Let us not strive to be conservative but biblical; let us not modify God's standard but guard it; let us not entertain shortcuts but trust Him to raise up the necessary leaders for His Kingdom.
Mike Fontenot, Hampton Roads Church of Christ
[A couple of thoughts: Some (i.e. Boston) may argue "We parents do not convert our children, God does (true point). Therefore, why should pistos be a deterministic qualification for eldership?" Perhaps we should better understand the security from the fact that God alone has the power to convert our children, for that also means God plays the deterministic role in establishing an eldership. God, not man, has the power to convert our children. Thus, God, not man, has the power to establish our eldership. By reframing pistos into a trait (trustworthy, loyal) rather than a transformation, we unwittingly usurp God's role in church leadership.]