Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
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?
|
I disagree with your characterization here. I'm not discussing error in Paul's teaching based upon the errors of others. I'm considering whether the errors of others may have originated with Paul's error in light of Paul's scripturally documented affinity for various Jewish worship practices. But my overall goal is to ensure that such parts of scripture as establish those things are in fact NOT excised wholesale.
My journey actually began when a brother I regularly fellowship with expressed his consideration that many of the epistles I accept as genuinely Pauline in origin were instead pseudographic. While I'm generally inclined to agree with that analysis regarding Titus, I'm strongly advocating for the authenticity of the remaining epistles. There is much scholarly discussion about such matters. Regardless, we followers of the Lord shouldn't be interested in blind allegiance to application of Paul's doctrine in a prescriptive manner and, when viewing issues such as appointment of elders, silence of sisters and even maintenance of a widows' roll, I don't see how those matters can be addressed
other than in the same prescriptive fashion as the keeping from strangled meat and blood and the other matters put forth in Jerusalem's compromise compact.
So, perhaps I can express it this way: if we are told to do X and Y results, who is in error when Y is bad?
I'm not laying it certainly at the feet of the one who taught X, but there is certainly ground for suspicion that it should be placed there.