Quote:
Originally Posted by countmeworthy
Thanks for your comments first and foremost.
I have another question for you and everyone here. But since you specifically said Christianity takes it heritage from Judaism that is why the terminology "elders" for presbuteros carried over from Old testament to New Testament.
Do you consider the LC/LSM as part of Christianity? I ask because by and large the denominations don't have elders on the pulpit. The only religious organization that has elders is LDS. I don't know if the LC/LSM still consider the 'leading brothers' elders as they did back in the 70s but that is what the leading brothers were called: ELDERS. And yes it is taken from the OT which is curious because the LC/LSM strongly supported Paul's teachings. In Ephesians Paul does not mention Elders in describing what the Pentecostals call the '5 fold ministry'.
It is my opinion and that is all that it is, that Paul opened up a can of worms when he mentions them in 4:11
I don't understand why he had to give them titles if as you said (and I also believe btw) they are merely types of persons.
I know for sure in the 70s Lee was considered the apostle of the age.
So Lee was ok with calling himself or having others call him 'the apostle of the age' and he was ok for the leading brothers to be called 'elders' but he threw out the window the words 'pastors (shepherds), prophets, evangelists, teachers.
Food for thought. Food for thought.
|
At this point I should explain that the bible reveals a distinction between God's work and church administration. The '5 fold ministry' is related to God's spiritual work. A person who operates in one of the 5 fold gifts is equipped for doing God's spiritual work. Not one of those 5-fold gifts is for practical administration. That is, there is no such thing as a spiritual gift for managing finances or running a church bank account.
The role of an elder is for practical administration of the church, e.g. finances, parking spaces, helping people deal with personal problems etc. This role requires spiritual maturity - wisdom etc rather than a spiritual gift. A person may be a gifted evangelist and save many people but they may be terrible at managing finances or listening to people's problems, so they are unsuited to be an elder. 1 Tim 3:1-2 describes the requirements of an elder.
In the bible we find the apostles appointed elders in each church:
Acts 14:23 "Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church"
No where does the bible say that an apostle, pastor, prophet, evangelist or teacher was appointed in each church. This is where some "5-fold" churches which focus on appointing Apostles, Prophets etc (capital letters) as positions in the church have got it wrong.
It is possible for a person to be involved in church administration as an elder only, or God's work only (as one of the 5-fold), or both church administration and God's work. For example, Peter was an apostle and also an elder in Jerusalem. If Peter was travelling and spreading the Good Word, then he was doing God's work as an apostle/evangelist. If Peter was at home in Jerusalem, then he was dealing with the practical matters of church administration.
The "5 fold ministry" is related to God's spiritual work and the elders is related to the church administration. It is possible for a person to be involved in both, it is possible for an elder to function as a teacher "from the pulpit".
This distinction is also seen in the churhces which have both pastors adn elders - like presbyterians/baptists. Normally the elders perform church administration roles, and the pastor will perform God's Work by conducting church services, teaching, evangelism, etc. The pastor may also be an elder. Elders are normally spiritually mature and well-regarded members of the congregation, who may not have a pastoral degree or theological qualification. A pastor however must normally have a degree and qualification of some kind.
In the local churches, like the Brethren churches, we do not have pastors or pulpits, so we just have elders. If an elder teaches God's Word in the meeting, then they are functioning as teachers. If they travel and spread the gospel, they are functioning as evangelists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by countmeworthy
Next.
If the Holy city New Jerusalem is simply a metaphor, then God sitting on a throne, a physical Kingly chair is also a metaphor. Streets of Gold is also then a metaphor. Fruit that people eat as seen in the book of Revelation are also a metaphor. The Tree of Life, the River of Life is also a metaphor by your definition. Is this correct?
On the one hand the Holy City New Jerusalem is a city with streets of gold (Revelation 21:21) and on the other hand she is the Bride of Christ.
Again.. simply food for thought.
|
I believe that the New Jerusalem is symbolic for the church. The bible refers to the church as the Bride of Christ (in preparation), and it says New Jerusalem comes down like a bride prepared for her husband. So if we put two and two together, we, the church, are the New Jerusalem. The alternative viewpoint is that God has prepared a very nice physical city for His people to live in, but I consider this unlikely.
I think it is unlikely to be a physical building when considering that God did not create a house for Adam and Eve or tell Adam and Eve to build houses and cities. The description of the New Earth parallels that of the old - with the tree of life, the river, etc. In the future, when there is no more death, sin, or violence, then houses or cities for comfort and protection will not be necessary. Wherever all the people of God are gathered together in the open air, that will be the New Jerusalem. Jesus feeding the crowd of 5000 people in the open air, paints a similar picture. Jesus himself also spent a lot of time in open air spaces, with his disciples. In the Old Testament, God himself preferred to dwell in a simple tent among his people rather than a grand building. In the future New Earth there will also be no need for privacy and security, so buildings will not be necessary.