I don't think this is a good approach to the science (if you could call it that) of etymology.
I think you're missing my point, my friend. Etymology isn't the only thing at hand here. A doctor is a doctor anywhere he goes - hence the role became a title. The same cannot be said about an Av Beit Din, a Nasi, a Zaken, or a Shamash. They are only applied to that specific function. Also, I may know that Yitschak is a Zaken at a place I go to, but I will not call him "Zaken Yitschak".
This is very different from the approach we see in Christianity these days. When someone signs an e-mail as "Bishop John", then the title is far more than simply a role. You wouldn't see a secretary sign a personal e-mail as "Secretary Mary" or something of that kind. So the two are indeed different things.
Therefore, my question is a valid one: It seems to me that with regards to this aspect, Christian practice seems to differ from what it may have once been, or what Jesus may have taught. Why differenciate between layman and leadership, when Jesus taught they were all on the same level?
Kol tov,
Fremen
__________________ Jewish, Zionist, and Free Thinker.
Therefore, my question is a valid one: It seems to me that with regards to this aspect, Christian practice seems to differ from what it may have once been, or what Jesus may have taught. Why differenciate between layman and leadership, when Jesus taught they were all on the same level?
Kol tov,
Fremen
I understand your point- the vast majority of Christians for almost 2000 years just don't agree with your personal interpretation of the text, nor do I. The context does not lead to the same conclusion you have arrived at. I'm sorry fremen, it's not a supportable premise from our perspective. But then again, if you agreed with the orthodox interpretation of the NT, you'd be a Christian- but you're not so it's ok by me for us to disagree on any given passage in the NT and we can still talk freely.
__________________
"Here lies an atheist; all dressed up and no place to go." Epitaph in Maryland cemetery
Last edited by ContraMundum; 2nd November 2009 at 01:03 PM.
I think you're missing my point, my friend. Etymology isn't the only thing at hand here. A doctor is a doctor anywhere he goes - hence the role became a title. The same cannot be said about an Av Beit Din, a Nasi, a Zaken, or a Shamash. They are only applied to that specific function. Also, I may know that Yitschak is a Zaken at a place I go to, but I will not call him "Zaken Yitschak".
This is very different from the approach we see in Christianity these days. When someone signs an e-mail as "Bishop John", then the title is far more than simply a role. You wouldn't see a secretary sign a personal e-mail as "Secretary Mary" or something of that kind. So the two are indeed different things.
Therefore, my question is a valid one: It seems to me that with regards to this aspect, Christian practice seems to differ from what it may have once been, or what Jesus may have taught. Why differenciate between layman and leadership, when Jesus taught they were all on the same level?
Kol tov,
Fremen
I would be astounded to see any Church official use a title in that way. Most bishops I know (and that is a fair few) merely sign using their first name ONLY!
It would be exceedingly pompous to do otherwise.
__________________
E & O E. Caveats may apply to this post. Terms and conditions may apply to this post. Your legal rights are not affected. Written apologies may be offered to anyone who may be even slightly offended by this post. Complaints and suggestions regarding this post, its accuracy, wording, intention, relevance to any other matter, the time of day or the colour of my socks should be referred to the author in the first instance. In the unlikely event that a Report needs to be made, pray first, and if the problem will not go away, use the Report Button which is the red one at the top right of this text box; click on it once and follow the prompts on the screen.
Kernow - land of my ancestors To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Y'israel - land of my heart
I thought it was clear given the context. Oh well.
I don't think this is a good approach to the science (if you could call it that) of etymology. Titles almost always come from role/function. Take for example a "doctor". The word "doctor" comes from the Latin word docere which means to "teach". So, "doctor" means teacher. As far as I know the first people given the formal title of doctor were all church theologians- people who taught got the official role and thus the title. Now, of course someone can say that they want to be a doctor when they grow up- and we tend to think of the medical profession although teacher still applies too.
We know that Jesus wasn't opposed to the use of titles as pointed out earlier in His conversation with Nicodemus. He even allowed Caesar his title. Likewise, His followers used terms like "the Twelve" or "The Apostles" as titles for the apostolic group.
So, words like epsicopos mean "overseer", but the overseer of a group of churches does more than just "look over" them, right? He ordains (as shown in the Book of Titus), baptises, celebrates the eucharist etc. Thus, the word episcopos in scripture (and thus tradition follows) means more than just overseer, and therefore it is not merely a role description but clearly a synecdoche-one of those words where the part describes the whole. Being that kind of word, it is a title. It certainly is regarded as one now.
The same principle is even more clear in the word presbyteros. It literally means elder in terms of age. Obviously this is title, not a role. The church doesn't ordain men to be "old of age", but to do the job of a presbyter. The church recognises their maturity in the faith to do the job, not their length of years.
So- here's the bottom line from the Christian perspective on the Christian text: Jesus doesn't forbid the use of titles. Titles are used in scripture for certain roles.
Hogwash..
euchrist is not in scripture...That is the kind of thing that happens when man is too full of himself, .. he comes up with his own version of truth..probably a good reason why Yeshua was recorded...
2Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. 5But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, 6And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
__________________ Since the Torah is a finite book expressing the will of an infinite God, many lessons must be derivable from each passage from all the infinite angles.
I would be astounded to see any Church official use a title in that way. Most bishops I know (and that is a fair few) merely sign using their first name ONLY!
It would be exceedingly pompous to do otherwise.
Strangely, the exact opposite happens in South America. Bishops and pastors always present themselves as such. Granted, so do rabbis - but it is the NT that seems to be against this behavior.
I still have the feeling that Jesus wanted to emphasize the equality of men in his religious movement. And yet titles do create a gap. Am I wrong in such a conclusion?
__________________ Jewish, Zionist, and Free Thinker.
There are only two gospels that pay heed to title "Rabbi" ..
But very few actual texts... at least as far as KJV is concerned.
Matthew 23:7
And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
Matthew 23:8
But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
John 1:38
Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?
John 1:49
Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
John 3:2
The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
John 3:26
And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.
John 6:25
And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
As seen it was only in reference to what people called Yeshua. I do believe that the early apostles were more apt to call each other "brethren". James was the only one to be head of the early church and even he was known as "elder" out of respect.
__________________ Since the Torah is a finite book expressing the will of an infinite God, many lessons must be derivable from each passage from all the infinite angles.
Strangely, the exact opposite happens in South America. Bishops and pastors always present themselves as such. Granted, so do rabbis - but it is the NT that seems to be against this behavior.
It's about attitude. The verses preceeding v.8 speak of religious men using their authority (eg. Moses's seat) for self-engrandiosement and personal gain etc. It does not rule out their authority, but it points out their hypocrisy. The verses after v. 12 continue in this vein.
If any rabbi, bishop, or whoever behaves even today in such a manner then he too is guilty of this hypocrisy
I still have the feeling that Jesus wanted to emphasize the equality of men in his religious movement. And yet titles do create a gap. Am I wrong in such a conclusion?
The NT testifies to the equality of all before God, yet we all have different roles. Equal, but not the same. Just like ancient Israel.
__________________
"Here lies an atheist; all dressed up and no place to go." Epitaph in Maryland cemetery
But יהושע called them near and said, "You know that the rulers of the gentiles are masters over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. "But it shall not be so among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you, let him be your servant. "And whoever wishes to be first among you, let him be your servant, even as the Son of Aḏam did not come to be served, but to serve, 1and to give His life as a ransom for many." Footnote:1 See Mark 10:45 and Isa. 49:1-7.(Mat 20:25-28 The Scriptures 1998+)
And they came to Kephar Naḥum, and having come in the house He asked them, "What was it you disputed among yourselves on the way?" And they were silent, for on the way they had disputed with one another who was the greatest. And sitting down, He called the twelve and said to them, "If anyone wishes to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all." And He took a little child and set him in their midst, and taking him in His arms, He said to them, "Whoever receives one of such little children in My Name receives Me. And whoever receives Me, receives not Me, but the One who sent Me." (Mar 9:33-37 The Scriptures 1998+)
__________________ But in a large house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay, some unto value and some unto no value. If, then, anyone cleanses himself from these matters, he shall be a vessel unto value, having been set apart, of good use to the Master, having been prepared for every good work. And flee from the lusts of youth, but pursue righteousness, belief, love, peace with those calling on the Master out of a clean heart. But refuse foolish and stupid questions, knowing that they breed quarrels. And a servant of the Master should not quarrel but be gentle towards all, able to teach, patient when wronged, in meekness instructing those who are in opposition, lest somehow Elohim gives them repentance unto a thorough knowledge of the truth, and they come to their senses, out of the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his desire. (2Ti 2:20-26 The Scriptures 1998+)
Excellent point... the servant position preached and held up as the way to lead is most humble and hard for those who wish to lead to take.
__________________ Since the Torah is a finite book expressing the will of an infinite God, many lessons must be derivable from each passage from all the infinite angles.
Linear Mode
