Chief Shepherd

[Cjwinnit]

Actually all bishops are cheif sheperds, hence the pastoral staff.

 

[King of the Nations]

Hi Bill,

The exclusivity of the phase "Chief Shepherd" is inhert to the term, with in the context it was used.

So, you're saying because the term was used in one way in one text means it can't ever be used another way in a different (con)text?

There is only one chief of any given flock there many be many tending shepherds....

To assign this title other then to the one it belongs is an error IMO for there is only one Chief and we call his name Jesus.

Question: Do you find the term "Chief of Medicine" objectionable (when it's used for men or women) as well? Or "chief" of a given tribe of people? Or "chief" of staff? Or chief anything beyond "chief shepherd"?



Greg

 

[BBAS 64]

Hi Bill,





So, you're saying because the term was used in one way in one text means it can't ever be used another way in a different (con)text?



Question: Do you find the term "Chief of Medicine" objectionable (when it's used for men or women) as well? Or "chief" of a given tribe of people? Or "chief" of staff? Or chief anything beyond "chief shepherd"?



Greg

Good Day, KON



Umm yes.
If in the context of the flock and the sheep there is only 1 Chief Shepherd, that is all. The writters and the readers of the written word would have clearly understood that.

If I am the Chief of Medicine at the Hospital then I am the Chief "singular" of Medicine for that hospital.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[King of the Nations]

Hi Bill,



I usually don't like to "knitpick", but we're so darn close to agreement on this issue, I'm thinking it might be worth it. Let's try...

Umm yes.
If in the context of the flock and the sheep there is only 1 Chief Shepherd, that is all. The writters and the readers of the written word would have clearly understood that.

No argument that Peter is referencing Jesus in the verse being debated, and no argument even as far as Jesus being the Chief (and only Chief) Shepherd of the Church. Both correct. In their proper sense.

There is only one "chief shepherd" of the Church....in one sense. The problem is that you seem to be forcing the entirety of Christian revelation to fit inside the context of one single verse: "...when the Chief Shepherd appears..." Because this verse implies Jesus and that there can be only one Chief, there is only one chief anywhere in existence and that's Jesus and therefore, the Pope cannot be known by the same title...goes the argument. Right?

See below.

If I am the Chief of Medicine at the Hospital then I am the Chief "singular" of Medicine for that hospital.

Wouldn't Jesus be the Chief of Medicine at any and every hospital? He is, afterall, the Divine Physician. Sure, people could call themselves doctors, nurses, physician assistants, etc. I suppose, but "Chief of Medicine"...that would refer to Jesus alone, wouldn't it??



Peace to you,

Greg

 

[JohnJones]

The only way I can see reconciling Jesus and the 'pope' both being Chief Shepherds is to ditinguish the Roman Catholic Church from the Church of Christ and say that the 'pope' is the Chief Shepherd of the Roman Catholic Church and that the Christ is the Chief Shepherd of the Church of Christ. Certainly that is true. There is only room for one Chief Shepherd per Church. If the 'pope' is Chief Shepherd of the RCC, there's no room for Jesus in the RCC--and since Jesus is the Chief Shepherd of the Church of Christ, there is no room for the 'pope' in the Church of Christ.

 

[King of the Nations]

If the 'pope' is Chief Shepherd of the RCC, there's no room for Jesus in the RCC--and since Jesus is the Chief Shepherd of the Church of Christ, there is no room for the 'pope' in the Church of Christ.

In the same way that if "John Smith" is Chief of Medicine at Whoosywhatsit Hospital, then there is no room for Jesus at Whoosywhatsit Hospital-- and since Jesus is the Chief of Medicine at Whoosywhatsit Hospital then there is no room for John Smith at Whoosywhatsit?

Just wondering...

Greg

 

[JohnJones]

James 1:27 "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

What's that all aboot?

 

[JohnJones]

OOPS! that last post on James 1:27 was meant for a different thread.