From: Steven Cox (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Feb 17 1998 - 09:21:01 EST
Of those two alternatives I may have misunderstood the first
but as KAQISTHMI is used for kings, governors, and priests
then it seems unlikely that it means to "ordain" those
who were already elders to some elderish function. Compare
also the double "ordaining" in Ro 5:19 which shows a change
in state. Also the following:
Moses: TIS SE KATESTHSEN ARCONTA KAI DIKASTHN EF' hHMWN?
Christ: TIS ME KATESTHSEN KRITHN H MERISTHN EF' hUMAS?
Presbyters surely weren't new, but each individual was
new to the job. Was this the answer to the question?
At 03:11 98/02/17 EST, BCxJCxAD@aol.com wrote:
>Peter exhorts the elders to be shepherds and then immediately addresses
>the younger ones. Paul speaks about certain older women who were to be
>honored and then addresses certain elders who were worthy of double
>honor. Similar examples could be cited.
>So, what did Paul mean when he told Titus to _ordain_ elders in every
>city? Could he have meant to appoint the older ones (elders) to a
>preconceived and mutually agreed task (shepherding) or did he mean for
>Titus to appoint certain ones to _become_ elders? A very small minority
>of fine commentators prefer the former view. I would be interested in
>knowing your own minds about this.
>If eldership, meaning something other than age, was indeed a new thing in
>the first churches, against the backdrop of thousands of years of Jewish
>culture and patriarchy, surely this would have received notice, it would
>seem to me. Elders appear in the NT without introduction.
>Thanks in advance. I know I'm just a stray dog thrown in with a pack of
>Great Danes. Latin 2 was as far as I made it. But always eager to learn...
>The Home Church Network
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:04 EDT