Quote:
Originally Posted by YP0534
I'm just not familiar with the Lord being very concerned in the gospels with things along the lines of the appointment of "deacons" and "elders" and such and I'd have to believe that if He had said things touching these topics it surely would be preserved. We know that it was an important thing to Paul to set up "elders" in every assembly. And all I'm saying,at the end of the day, is that maybe I'm not completely sold on the concept of such formal designations under at least one possible reading of the teachings of Jesus in the gospels.
Maybe there's something instructive I'm missing where Paul commends us to a formal designation that wasn't set up by himself (other than "apostle" which he claimed). "The elders designated by James" or something like that? What about the other NT authors? Does Peter or John ever suggest that we need to have the "elders" that Paul describes with such deliberateness? How about similar formal designations, even?
|
John has discussions about elders, I believe. John's criteria for being an elder is to "know Him who was from the beginning" (1 John 2:13). The young ones are strong and fresh, and the older ones have wisdom. Pretty good, I think. Why make it more than that?
Here's John later, in chapter 3: "And this is His commandment, that we believe into the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, even as He gave commandment to us." Believe into Jesus and love one another. This, to me, is the viable organizing principle. Do this, and resist the tendency to add nameplates on doors, and who knows what might happen?