Subject: Re: Ecclesiastical governance (was Re: No more miracles ...) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 02:35:55 GMT From: Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian In article <383e50fd.26470>, (St.Athanasius) wrote: > > > Hi Peter, > > Just one question if I may. > You said: > >I agree with this part of what you say [and have deliberately > >cut the bit I disagree with to prevent needless argument]. > >Episkopos (bishop/overseer) and presbuteros (elder) are used > >interchangably in the pastoral epistles. So you are right > >in that the New Testament references of episkopos > >(or the related word episkope in Acts 1:20) need not > >(and probably do not) refer to the modern office of "bishop". > > I have heard this claim a thousand times and as yet seen no proof. So > sorry I am going to call your bluff. Please provide the references in > the Pastoral epistles that -prove- that the office of Episcopos and > Presbuteros were interchangeable? G'day Greg, All uses of the words episkopos (overseer (NIV) or Bishop) and presbuteros (elder) in the pastorals are: elder: 1 Tim 4:14, 5:17, 5:19, Titus 1:5, 1:6 bishop/overseer: 1 Tim 3:1, 3:2, Titus 1:7 In 1 Timothy, Paul gives the qualifications of bishops and deacons. Isn't it curious that he doesn't give qualifications of elders if that's a separate office from bishop? In Titus 1:5, Titus is told to "appoint elders in every town". He begins by giving the elders' qualifications (1:6) and then in 1:7 he switches to giving bishops' qualifications. I think it is more likely that he is using the two terms interchangably and that all of 1:6-9 gives the qualification of the one office (called either elder or bishop). It is possible that he gives the qualifications for elder in 1:6 and for bishop in 1:7-9, but this is contextually unlikely because, if the offices are distinct, why does 1:5 only tell Titus to appoint elders? Maybe not watertight proof, but I think the balance of probabality is no my side. Especially when we look through the rest of the New Testament: Paul's speech in Acts 20: Paul sent for the elders (20:17) yet addresses them as bishops (20:28). Philippians 1:1 addresses the "overseers [bishops] and deacons" in the church in Philippi. Again, rather curious to omit the elders if they are an intermediate rank between the two. 1 Peter 5:1-2. Peter addresses the elders (5:1), then in 5:2 says they "serve as overseers". That one just about clinches it for me. Finally, if Timothy and Titus were filling a role akin to Bishop, why were they to appoint bishops? So it seems to me that, at the time of writing the New Testament, while Timothy [probably] and Titus [certainly] were overseers of more than one church, the word "epikopos" had not yet come to be applied to that office. Peter Ballard
Related Articles:
- Leadership Skills: Tools for Policy Impact (brilliant!)
- Pastor Burnout Statistics
- Stress and Burnout in Pastoral Ministry: A Prologue
- Leadership for success
- Tribes: we need you to lead us

This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License.











Discussion
No comments for “Bishops And Elders”