Quote:
Originally Posted by jaamez
A few things:
1 - Why do we call these epistles (Titus, both Timothy) the "Pastoral Epistles"? The word "pastor" does not even occur in any of them. Are we making an assumption based on our current congregational model/paradigm that Titus and Timothy were lone, singular-rule pastors of congregations as we know them? Do we have either scriptural context or historical accounts that would verify such a statement?
2 - The word "pastor" does not occur in the New Testament canon. The plural form, "pastor s" does however - but only twice. We've allowed centuries of tradition to form our logic, and thus we just assume that the correct model for the church is for the main body (laity) be under the authority and leadership of a figurehead (minister), who serves as our vicar. He speaks for God to us, and we ask questions of him in God's stead. But is that the real NT model? There was one example of this in the scripture, but it wasn't referred to favorable. Diotrephes loved to have the pre-eminence... he had to be in charge... he spoke badly about the other ministers around him... wouldn't allow the saints to fellowship outside his congregation. Sound familiar? Check out 3 John.
3 - How can you say that a pastor's authority is evident without question in the NT? Can you show us? And it needs to be something more than Hebrews 13.17, because it takes a pretty impressive scriptural acrobatics to make the assumption that the writer of Hebrews was absolutely talking about single pastor rule. The entire book of Hebrews doesn't mention the pastor at all. Are we making an assumption based on our current model? Are we interpreting scripture through our 21st century understanding?
The church has ONE HEAD... Jesus Christ (not some earthly potentate)
There is ONE MEDIATOR between God and man... Jesus Christ (not a pastor/vicar) |
For the sake of having discussion, allow me to respond.
That they are called Pastoral epistles has been true for centuries. They were words given to men who were over particular churches, as well as instructions regarding how to pick elders and deacons. Any seminary class will be proof to this, and any serious scholars, without question, refer to Titus and 1/2 Timothy as the Pastoral Epistles. Please read these books. Then I ask you, who were Titus and who were Timothy? These evidently were sharing Paul's letters (as we do today) with the church -- including instructions that were intended to preserve the image of Christians as not of mean-spirited rebels, but of Christ. This is why he instructs women's role in the church, the relationship between slave and servant,
Perhaps the word "pastor" has taken by tradition, but understood what it was intended. NT uses the word overseer, elders, etc... Who, then, was the overseer? These young men were even instructed to put out troublemakers (kick them out!), but to others to work with in gentleness. Timothy is encouraged to take special attention to his learning, study and teaching, because "by doing this you will save yourself and your hearers." Timothy is told to "preach the word." He's given license to reprove, rebuke and exhort. He's told to do the work of an evangel.
Please read these (not that you never have), but again, and you will see how I can say there is clear pastoral authority granted in scripture... to reprove, rebuke, exhort, teach, preach, instruct in doctrine, kick out troublemakers, do the work of the evangelist...
Titus 2:15 says to "rebuke with all authority."
While Christ is the head and mediator on behalf of our salvation, there is an obvious model in the NT that we can't ignore that has been gifted to the church for our sake.
How do you explain
Heb 13? This can't be talking about the King, because he doesn't account for your soul. So what's your explanation?
Threaded Mode
