[OBW]

As usual, I come to be the fly in the ointment. Not because I think I have it right, but because I see something that I think is worthy of discussion.

First, while there is ample room to argue that the abandonment of Paul by Asia had something to do with the “error” that Paul fell into in Jerusalem, I do not see it delineated in anything that has been recorded for our consumption and consideration. Until someone can establish more than a correlative link, it is presumptive to say that one caused the other. This is the kind of illogic upon which so many snake-oil salesmen rely to hawk their lose-weight-quick pills. (“Yes. Your results are guaranteed.” Tell me what’s wrong with that one.)

Having said that, I do not disagree that a reasonable study in proper conduct of the Christian life might include a study of Paul’s “error,” an analysis of whether it was an error, and also of the abandonment by Asia under the assumption they are linked. There is much in the dynamics of what happened to both as a result of their success and or failure in fellowship, forgiveness, exhortation, and a number of the so-called “one anothers” that are found in the NT.

The other point is that if we are determined that everything in scripture is universally and for all time prescriptive, then there will be many problems with scripture. My studies indicate that Paul was not so absolute about women being silent. Others feel that he was absolute. And while it is true that some after the NT writers began to create a hierarchy, all the words written about elders, overseers, or whatever you want to call them seems to indicate that there was a desire to change the existing natural order of elders, patriarchs, etc., into one in which the role sprang from their life and not from their natural-born position or even selection by others. They effectively evidenced themselves by their lives. The acknowledgment of that by Paul, Timothy, Titus, or whoever, was probably not much more than a way to point the people in the right direction rather than a way for Paul to control the assembly. I cannot see this as the creation of positions, but rather as a way to underscore the servant leadership that Jesus required.

I also find it interesting that we are discussing error in Paul’s teachings about elders simply because others took the terms and created something not supported by anything in scripture. Are we trying to excise the part of scripture that we have seen used wrongly as the cure to that wrong? Is this a little like those who turn away from God and the church, and even religion of any kind because one particular preacher, priest, elder, etc., was evil and did them harm at some point in their lives?

Beware. Tossing scripture because of other’s misapplication is worse than tossing the baby with the bathwater. It is willful tossing of the baby. That is what Lee did with James. It didn’t fit his narrow construct of “God’s economy” and “Christ and the church” so he made it into an object lesson in errors. Too bad nothing in the scripture supports his view.