From: Carlton Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Date: Tue Dec 30 1997 - 00:39:56 EST
Dr. Theodore "Ted" H. Mann wrote;
>When Paul, Peter, John, etc. were referred to (or referred to
>themselves) as apostles, was the term used as a title in the same way we
>use it today, or was the emphasis on the function the term implies (or
>perhaps both)? In other words, was Paul thought of as the "Apostle
>Paul," or "Paul the Delegate" (or "Sent One")? This same question applies
>to angels and deacons.
>
The answer to these questions is complicated, because these functional
terms were used over a span of time in which what was at first charismatic
services eventually developed into offices with qualifications that could
be sought.
The best place to start with APOSTOLOS is I Cor 9:1-12. Surely Paul there
considers that his "office" of apostleship has some privileges (EXOUSIAI,
power, authority, rights). It is a moving target that you are shooting at.
You need to consider such "offices" in 1st century Judaism (also a
difficult task) as well.
There is a good collections of essays in a book dedicated to Barclay on
Ministry in the Chruch. The exact title and the editors escapes me now. I
can find it when I get back to my office. It has some thorough articles on
the subject of ministry (diakonia) in the NT and early Church. Also check
the articles in TDNT.
Carlton L. Winbery
Fogleman Professor of Religion
Louisiana College
Pineville, LA 71359
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:42 EDT