|
Post by Really on Jun 22, 2006 15:31:40 GMT -5
I don't agree with the hierarchy among the shepherds in the 2x2 church. I do agree there is some room in the NT for the shepherds who were elders to guide the other shepherds. But the NT elders were elders because they fit the NT description of an elder; they were the husband of one wife, ruled their house well, etc. I believe the apostles who were elders, were on an equal level with the local church body of elders (always plural). An apostle who was not an elder would not have held authority over anyone.
|
|
|
Post by so on Jun 22, 2006 15:41:41 GMT -5
I don't agree with the hierarchy among the shepherds in the 2x2 church. I do agree there is some room in the NT for the shepherds who were elders to guide the other shepherds. But the NT elders were elders because they fit the NT description of an elder; they were the husband of one wife, ruled their house well, etc. I believe the apostles who were elders, were on an equal level with the local church body of elders (always plural). An apostle who was not an elder would not have held authority over anyone. i dont think anyone cares what you believe.
|
|
|
Post by picker on Jun 22, 2006 15:56:16 GMT -5
I do. I care.....why pick on this person. why don't you pick on someone your own size?
|
|
|
Post by 8GVKQL1 on Jun 22, 2006 17:43:34 GMT -5
I do. I care.....why pick on this person. why don't you pick on someone your own size? hey, a dumb post deserves a dumb response.
|
|
|
Post by DO on Jun 22, 2006 17:48:45 GMT -5
I don't agree with the hierarchy among the shepherds in the 2x2 church. I do agree there is some room in the NT for the shepherds who were elders to guide the other shepherds. But the NT elders were elders because they fit the NT description of an elder; they were the husband of one wife, ruled their house well, etc. I believe the apostles who were elders, were on an equal level with the local church body of elders (always plural). An apostle who was not an elder would not have held authority over anyone. do you think it matters if you don't agree? i don't agree with what you say, but do you think that matters? [An apostle who was not an elder would not have held authority over anyone. ] i think you had better read Pauls letters to see what authority he had and where that authority came from.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Lee unplugged on Jun 22, 2006 20:07:21 GMT -5
I don't agree with the hierarchy among the shepherds in the 2x2 church. I do agree there is some room in the NT for the shepherds who were elders to guide the other shepherds. But the NT elders were elders because they fit the NT description of an elder; they were the husband of one wife, ruled their house well, etc. I believe the apostles who were elders, were on an equal level with the local church body of elders (always plural). An apostle who was not an elder would not have held authority over anyone. Seems the elders in the New Testament had a greal deal of responsibilty. They were shapherds. Paul told at least one church that no one would come to take his place. Paul, as an apostle returned to visit his[/u] converts. He did send Timothy and Titus as evangelists to clarify some teaching and establish elders/bishops. I've read one account, though, that an elder and bishop were two separate offices/responsibilities in the ministry.
|
|
|
Post by Really on Jun 23, 2006 14:18:34 GMT -5
I have read Paul's letters. Maybe you could point out which one you are referring to?
Thanks, Really
|
|
|
Post by Really on Jun 23, 2006 14:26:18 GMT -5
Hi Greg,
Yes, I agree. Both the apostolic and non-apostolic elders had great responsibility as shepherds, fathers, brothers, etc.
Paul was definitely zealous toward his converts and yet at the same time wise enough to make sure they were not elevating him.
An elder apostle was different than a bishop, or an elder non-apostle was different than a bishop? I'd be interested in reading this account.
Thanks, Really
|
|
|
Post by Careful on Jun 23, 2006 14:29:27 GMT -5
I have read Paul's letters. Maybe you could point out which one you are referring to? Thanks, Really Be certain it was really Paul that wrote the letter. There is a growing amount of concern that he might not have written as many as were attributed to him. If the true source is found elsewhere I wonder how people thinking the Bible is inerrant will dismiss that error?
|
|