Dear Michael,
Thanks for your thoughts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer  Titus was a Evangelist, |
Where does the Bible say that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer [An evangelist] which was an office connected with the Apostles. |
Where does the Bible say that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer We see that the Evangelist had special Apostolic Spiritual Gifts which ceased along with the office of the Evangelist. |
Where does the Bible say that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer Apostles, Evangelist, Prophets all ceased at the end of the Apostolic Era along with all the spiritual gifts and special privileges of those offices. |
I'm happy to agree that Apostles and Prophets ceased (a la Eph. 2:20), but I see nowhere in the Scriptures that evangelists did to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer So in Sum, I see Elders, Doctors, and Deacons as offices of the new covenant. |
Where does the Bible say that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer Acts 15 is not a isolated case..... But just taking Acts 15 in itself it said the Elders were involved.. The Apostles could have decided without the elders they were after all Apostles but they gathered the elders and the elders voiced. It was an a example for us today after the apostles were gone. |
Where does the Bible say that Acts 15 is an example for us today to follow? It's a description of something that happened (like Paul getting his head shaved later in Acts). But why is it a prescription? And how exact do we have to be with it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer But you must take into account Continuity... The Old Testament Sanhedrin was a God ordain Presbytery... How do we know? In Luke 22:66 The greek word for Sanhedrin was Presbytery. |
The use of a word like that doesn't prove your case at all. For example, the word for "church" (ekklesia) is used in Acts 19 for a riot. Moreover, elders could be a separate group from the chief priests and scribes.
The background to "elder" in the NT is either to be found in (i) the OT, which may well be unlikely because OT elders are rather different to that described in Titus 1 and 1 Tim. 3; or (ii) in the Graeco-Roman background, where they were distinguished seniors in well-known families. The family of course was not nuclear but extended. And we know that certain families hosted the early church gatherings. You can read more about this in:
R. A. Campbell,
The Elders: Seniority with Earliest Christianity. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1994. I don't agree with his final conclusions but his examination of the background to eldership is compelling.
My NT colleague Allan Chapple wrote a Ph.D. on this very topic back in the early 80s:
“Local Leadership in the Pauline Churches”. Unpublished Ph. D. The University of Durham, 1984.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunaer Also church discipline in Matthew 18 does not say local/nor does it say by the congregation... Yes, church discipline starts at the local church level but if need be it go further... Matthew 18 tell us to take it to the church.. Well a presbytery is the church made up of a plurality of congregations.. |
No, the NT never uses the word "church" (
ekklesia) to mean presbytery. The basic meaning of
ekklesia is "gathering" and the word is used in basically four ways: (i) the heavenly eschatological gathering (Heb. 12:22-24); (ii) the local church community (1 Cor. 1:2); (iii) an actual gathered group of believers itself (1 Cor. 14:19, 28. 34); and (iv) Christians generally (Gal. 1:13, Phil. 3:6; 1 Cor. 15:9).
The best fit meaning of "church" in Matthew 18 surely must be either (ii) the local church community or (iii) the gathered church. But it certainly can't be a presbytery.
God bless Michael.